You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #16: Contents and Introduction to the FAQ response [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
caruso Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Contents and Introduction to the FAQ response
Edited on Tue Feb-06-07 10:17 PM by caruso
TIA: Response to the TruthIsAll FAQ
Updated: Feb. 6, 2007

http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/TruthIsAllFAQRes...

Part I: Analytic Summary

Introduction
Smoking Gun: The Final National Exit Poll
The Democratic Underground Game thread
National Pre-election Polls
Monte Carlo Electoral Vote Simulation
Pre-Election State Polls vs. Exit Polls Vs. Actual Vote
The National Exit Poll Timeline
National Exit Poll Sensitivity Analysis
Uncounted and Switched Votes
The 2004 True Vote Model
Where did Bush find 16 million new voters?
Exit Poll Response Optimization

The 2006 Mid-terms
Generic 120-Poll Trend vs. the 7:07pm and Final Exit Poll
Uncounted and Switched Votes
Generic 120-Poll Trend vs Final 10 Poll Average

Election Models

Part II: Response to the TruthIsAll FAQ
A Introduction to the TruthIsAll (TIA) FAQ
The Pre-Election Polls
The "Rules": Did They Favor Kerry?
Explaining the Exit Poll Discrepancies
Comparing 2004 to 2000
Miscellaneous
_______________________________________________________________

Introduction
There has been an ongoing controversy regarding the 2004 election. Those who still believe that Bush won maintain that the early state exit polls and the 12:22am National Exit Poll (NEP), which Kerry won by 51-47%, are not convincing evidence of fraud. They provide no statistical evidence to back up there claim. The media-controlled exit pollsters will not release raw precinct-level data.

On the other hand, they invent hypothetical theories to explain why the polls are wrong. Debunk one theory and they quickly come up with another. Tortured explanations for exit poll discrepancies include but are not limited to the following: Kerry voters were more likely to respond to exit pollsters; exit poll interviewers sought out Kerry voters; Bush voters lied or forgot who they voted for in 2000; polls are not true random samples; exit polls are not designed to expose fraud in the U.S. They point out that Democrats always do better in the polls than in the vote count because of this endemic bias.

They never consider that in every election, a significant percentage of total votes cast are never counted and overwhelmingly Democratic. They never consider that the discrepancies could be due to fraud. They dismiss the pre-election and early exit polls. They disregard the fact that the 2004 pre-election polls matched exit polls. They ignore the experience of world-class pollsters who claim that undecided voters break for the challenger, especially when the incumbent is unpopular. They dismiss Bushs election-day 48.5% approval rating as not relevant.

They never consider that the final exit polls (both State and National) are always forced to match the recorded vote. They never consider the possibility of a fraudulent vote count. If they did, they would be forced to admit that the early polls were closer to the true vote.

Mark would have us believe that the Final National Exit Poll (NEP) weightings were due to false recall on the part of Gore voters. He constantly refers to an NES post-election survey as evidence that 7% of former Gore voters lied or forgot when they told exit pollsters that they voted for Bush in 2000 and that voters tend say they voted for the winner of the prior election. But 2000 was different; Gore won by over 540,000. Why would Gore (or Bush) voters lie in a confidential survey? Why would Gore voters forget who they voted for just four years later? Why would they claim to have voted for Bush, when they knew he stole the election?

In fact, Gores margin had to be much higher than 540k. Its well-known that approximately 3% of total votes cast are uncounted in every presidential election - and that the vast majority of them are Democratic. Therefore Gores winning margin probably exceeded two million votes. In Florida alone there were 180,000 spoiled (over/under-punched) ballots and other missing and absentee ballots. About 65% of the spoiled ballots were Gore votes, so he probably won Florida by over 60,000 votes.

In 2004, documented EIRS evidence indicated that over 90% of electronic vote switching incidents were from Kerry to Bush. In the 2006 mid-terms, the great majority of recorded vote switches were from the Democrats to Republicans. Therefore, its reasonable to assume that in addition to the 3 million uncounted votes in 2000, an unknown number were switched from Gore to Bush. Dec.12, 2000 is a day that will live in infamy: Bush needed the help of five right-wing Republicans on the Supreme Court to stop the recount and help him steal the election. The issue in 2004 is whether pre and post-election polls prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Bush stole the election.

In the Nov.1 Election Model, the final pre-election state poll weighted average closely matched the average of 18 national polls. Kerry had a slight lead in both of these independent poll sets. The state and national Kerry/Bush poll averages were 47.1746.89% and 47.88-46.89%, respectively. After allocation of undecided voters, the state and national models both projected a 51-48% Kerry victory. The state and national exit polls confirmed the pre-election polls.

But when the 12:22am How Voted in 2000 weights were changed to realistic, plausible values based on the factual 2000 and 2004 recorded vote, the factual 0.87% annual mortality rate, Kerry was a 52.6-46.4% winner. The margin was at least 7 million votes. The only assumptions: a 95% turnout of 2000 election voters and 12:22am NEP vote shares. The Final National Exit poll overstated the Bush vote by more than 4 million through the use of impossible weights and implausible vote shares!

Mark does not agree that the pre-election state and national polls projected a Kerry win or that the pre-election polls matched the exits. He cites discrepancies between individual state pre-election and exit polls. He often refers to the New York State polls. Kerry officially won the state by 58.4-40.2%. The final NY pre-election poll favored Kerry by 57-39%. After allocation of undecided voters, he was projected to win by 59-40%, closely matching the recorded vote. Kerry won the exit poll by 63-36%. To Mark, this was proof that the exit polls did not match the pre-election polls. But he fails to consider several facts.

In 2000, Gore won NY by 60-35% (with 5% to Nader). In 2004, Kerry won over 70% of returning Nader voters. Allocating the Nader vote, the true vote should have been close to the 63-36% exit poll result. So why was there a 4% exit poll discrepancy from the recorded vote? In 2004, as in all prior elections, approximately 3% of total votes cast (mostly Kerry) were uncounted. A recent analysis of the Ohio election indicated that 6.15% of Kerry votes were switched to Bush. Assuming a) 1.5% net Kerry loss due to uncounted votes, and that b) 4% of Kerry votes were switched to Bush, the true vote matched the exit poll. He may have done even better than that.

Mark also ignores the fact that the typical state pre-election poll (600 sample-size) had a 4% margin of error. The corresponding state exit poll MoE was 2-3%, depending on the number of respondents. Therefore, in any given state, a 2-4% discrepancy between the pre-election and exit poll could very well occur. But in the aggregate, the weighted average state pre-election poll (i.e. the national vote), adjusted for undecided voters, should (and did) match the state exit poll weighted national average.

The Law of Large Numbers (applied to the weighted average) overcame the individual state pre-election/exit poll deviations. The pre-election polls matched the exit polls to within 1%.

Given the 0.87% annual mortality rate and assuming a 95% turnout of Bush 2000 voters in 2004: where did Bush find 16 million (62-46) new voters? That was quite a feat considering that his job rating was in a steady decline from 90% on Sept.11, 2001 to 48.5% on Election Day 2004.

The 2006 Final NEP How Voted in 2004 demographic weights were manipulated just like they were in the 2004 Final NEP. In 2004, the 12:22am How Voted in 2000 41 Bush/ 39 Gore weights were changed to 43/37 in the 2pm Final - and the 51-47% Kerry win magically turned into a 51-48% loss.

In 2006, it was dj vu. The 7:07 Election Day NEP weights were changed from 47 Bush / 45 Kerry to 49/43 in the 1pm Final the next day! The net result was to cut the 12% Democratic margin in half - from 55-43% to 52-46%. Once again, applying realistic, feasible weights to the 7pm 2006 NEP, the true Democratic margin was 56.7-42.1%, exactly matching the 120 Generic poll projection trend.

Was it just a coincidence or confirmation? You decide.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC