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

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

Part I: Analytic Summary

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

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
  -Up-to-date compendium of TIA's work on 2004 election fraud. bleever  Jan-28-07 06:54 PM   #0 
  - Thanks Bro...  ClassWarrior   Jan-28-07 06:59 PM   #1 
  - Hey Wally?  bleever   Jan-28-07 08:48 PM   #4 
  - ..  Kurovski   Jan-29-07 12:00 PM   #8 
  - ..  autorank   Jun-06-07 03:19 AM   #143 
  - NEW Jan. 27, 2007. OHIO 2004: 6.15% Kerry-Bush vote-switch found in probability study  L. Coyote   Feb-11-07 10:27 AM   #78 
  - Latest Update: April 15  glengarry   Apr-17-07 08:49 PM   #140 
  - 4/27 Update: A Recorded State Vote Smoking Gun ? (not a polling analysis)  glengarry   Apr-27-07 11:33 PM   #142 
     - Kick  BeFree   Jun-18-08 11:11 AM   #191 
  - Interesting note - this thread was never recommended, not by even one single person  WillYourVoteBCounted   Apr-26-08 10:25 AM   #187 
     - The post received many recommendations...  tiptoe   Apr-26-08 12:35 PM   #188 
     - actually, TIA is doomed to be more recced than read  OnTheOtherHand   Apr-26-08 12:53 PM   #189 
  - KR...........nt  kster   Jan-28-07 07:11 PM   #2 
  - kick  tiptoe   Jun-06-08 09:24 AM   #190 
  - Highly, highly recommended!  Peace Patriot   Jan-28-07 08:01 PM   #3 
  - Remembered Conversation - Susan Truitt, Andy Stephenson  truedelphi   Jan-29-07 07:48 PM   #11 
     - That's a memory  bleever   Jan-29-07 10:10 PM   #14 
     - type of nonsense = "...officials, under color of law, depriving citizens of consitutional rights..."  tiptoe   Sep-14-07 05:10 PM   #163 
  - TIA-a true patriot!  mod mom   Jan-28-07 08:51 PM   #5 
  - Who is this person?  troubleinwinter   Jan-28-07 09:36 PM   #6 
  - he was banned from DU n/t  WillYourVoteBCounted   Feb-11-07 12:56 AM   #65 
  - His name is "Truth" !! Do you need more than that?  galloglas   Feb-17-07 08:05 PM   #101 
     - Not only was TIA tombstoned, so was his sockpuppet, "caruso". How's that for truth?  troubleinwinter   Feb-18-07 03:32 PM   #103 
        - Your point is??  galloglas   Feb-18-07 07:34 PM   #104 
        - The point is that a sockpuppet- pretending to be someone other than who you are-  troubleinwinter   Feb-19-07 06:23 AM   #107 
        - That fails to answer  galloglas   Feb-19-07 12:00 PM   #111 
           - You have lost me.  troubleinwinter   Feb-19-07 12:18 PM   #112 
              - You once were lost, but now you're found.  galloglas   Feb-19-07 01:00 PM   #113 
                 - Nope.  troubleinwinter   Feb-19-07 01:12 PM   #114 
                    - Nope is correct.  galloglas   Feb-19-07 01:35 PM   #116 
                       - Deleted message  Name removed   Feb-19-07 01:44 PM   #118 
                          - he is confused about "ad hominem," too  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-19-07 03:08 PM   #120 
        - what a remarkably inapposite analogy  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-19-07 08:16 AM   #109 
        - Moved to proper spot  galloglas   Feb-19-07 11:58 AM   #110 
        - what about these new sock puppets?  WillYourVoteBCounted   Feb-19-07 01:30 AM   #106 
  - A big K&R...That's quite a recource...and it's free!  autorank   Jan-29-07 04:29 AM   #7 
  - Too bad there's more money in stealing elections  bleever   Feb-17-07 05:32 PM   #100 
  - Also a section on the 2006  bleever   Jan-29-07 02:44 PM   #9 
  - kick.nt  kster   Jan-29-07 07:37 PM   #10 
  - Thanks Bleever! TIA Rocks and so do you! K&R! n/t  Melissa G   Jan-29-07 08:32 PM   #12 
  - Takes one to know one!  bleever   Jan-29-07 10:01 PM   #13 
  - KICK FOR FEB 4 UPDATE  caruso   Feb-04-07 02:46 PM   #15 
  - Contents and Introduction to the FAQ response  caruso   Feb-06-07 10:13 PM   #16 
     - fact check  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-07-07 08:01 AM   #17 
     - Deleted message  Name removed   Feb-07-07 11:02 AM   #19 
     - this ad hominem rant doesn't respond to the content of my post  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-07-07 11:35 AM   #20 
     - soon they will be able to do this same thing over 2008 election  WillYourVoteBCounted   Feb-19-07 01:29 PM   #115 
        - or even if it isn't -- unverified voting is a no-win  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-19-07 02:50 PM   #119 
     - Well...  Febble   Feb-07-07 08:57 AM   #18 
     - TIA: A response  caruso   Feb-08-07 12:45 PM   #21 
        - Well, I already addressed these, prolifically, but....  Febble   Feb-08-07 01:47 PM   #22 
           - the Harris link worked for me, but it isn't Lou Harris  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-08-07 02:08 PM   #23 
           - TIA: Many words, no numbers....  caruso   Feb-08-07 04:58 PM   #24 
              - Clearly  Febble   Feb-09-07 03:09 AM   #25 
                 - ah, the wit and wisdom of TIA  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 06:30 AM   #26 
                 - Well, I didn't exactly miss it  Febble   Feb-09-07 07:16 AM   #27 
                    - sure, I'm just trying to skip the step where  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 07:46 AM   #28 
                       - Hardly likely  BeFree   Feb-09-07 02:11 PM   #31 
                          - well...  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 02:34 PM   #32 
                             - TIA: Not 10%, it was 8% Check the NEP time line  caruso   Feb-09-07 03:50 PM   #33 
                             - Here's an interesting analysis,  Febble   Feb-09-07 04:00 PM   #34 
                             - well, I think they are both wrong  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 04:27 PM   #35 
                                - Bad numbers?  BeFree   Feb-09-07 05:34 PM   #38 
                                   - you might try actually reading the paper  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 05:42 PM   #40 
                                      - But your evidence  BeFree   Feb-09-07 05:54 PM   #41 
                                         - as I said, you might try reading the paper  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 05:57 PM   #42 
                                            - Your paper?  BeFree   Feb-09-07 06:31 PM   #45 
                                            - you can't intelligently criticize an argument you won't read  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 07:00 PM   #46 
                             - Faith based?That's a laugh.  BeFree   Feb-09-07 05:08 PM   #36 
                                - actually not  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 05:23 PM   #37 
                                   - I edited that post  BeFree   Feb-09-07 05:41 PM   #39 
                                      - why?  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 06:05 PM   #43 
                                         - My basis is as good as your's, even better  BeFree   Feb-09-07 06:27 PM   #44 
                                            - of course I will "quibble" about that  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-09-07 07:01 PM   #47 
                 - TIA: Historical NEP data you are probably unaware of  caruso   Feb-09-07 09:55 AM   #29 
                    - OK  Febble   Feb-09-07 12:46 PM   #30 
                       - TIA Fact Refresher: 1) 2000/2004 recorded vote, 2) mortality, 3) 2000 voter turnout in 2004  caruso   Feb-09-07 10:58 PM   #48 
                          - Weights....  Febble   Feb-10-07 04:18 AM   #49 
                          - TIA: Still not clear to you? OK, let's try again.  caruso   Feb-10-07 07:52 AM   #51 
                             - OK  Febble   Feb-10-07 09:27 AM   #53 
                             - one thing back on point 8  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-10-07 11:03 AM   #57 
                             - Ah, thanks  Febble   Feb-10-07 11:21 AM   #58 
                             - TIA: The "false recall" explanation for Voted2k weights is moot; focus on the vote share scenarios  caruso   Feb-10-07 03:29 PM   #59 
                                - bullshit, TIA, I call bullshit  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-10-07 04:04 PM   #60 
                                - TIA: So you believe that Bush's 48.5% rating is consonant with a 14.6% Gore defection to Bush?  caruso   Feb-10-07 06:10 PM   #62 
                                - oh, brother  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-10-07 09:14 PM   #63 
                                   - TIA: So if its not a mathematical impossibility, that makes it plausible?  caruso   Feb-10-07 11:04 PM   #64 
                                      - Caruso, one question  kster   Feb-11-07 01:46 AM   #70 
                                      - As you never consider a single point  Febble   Feb-11-07 02:31 AM   #71 
                                      - You. Have. Nothing.  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-11-07 08:06 AM   #74 
                                      - TIA: Is this your rationale of why 15% of Gore voters defected?  caruso   Feb-11-07 08:23 AM   #75 
                                      - In other words  Febble   Feb-11-07 09:04 AM   #76 
                                      - TIA: You have it exactly back-wards  caruso   Feb-11-07 10:13 AM   #77 
                                      - TIA:  Febble   Feb-11-07 12:08 PM   #79 
                                      - TIA: I never said "no Gore voter would have voted for Bush"  caruso   Feb-11-07 12:18 PM   #80 
                                      - OK, rephrase  Febble   Feb-11-07 12:32 PM   #81 
                                      - your actual argument is even worse  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-11-07 01:06 PM   #85 
                                      - as usual, you did not respond to the substance of my post  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-11-07 12:43 PM   #82 
                                - while arguing with a banned DU'er, a crises is ignored  WillYourVoteBCounted   Feb-11-07 12:58 AM   #66 
                                   - in self-defense  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-11-07 12:52 PM   #83 
                                   - Let me put in a good word for my friend too  Febble   Feb-11-07 01:02 PM   #84 
                                - sigh....  Febble   Feb-10-07 04:21 PM   #61 
                             - And just so's you don't miss it....  Febble   Feb-10-07 10:08 AM   #55 
                          - TIA, you are still multiplying irrelevancies  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-10-07 05:13 AM   #50 
                             - why misreporting of past votes matters  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-10-07 09:08 AM   #52 
                                - Thanks - another possibility  Febble   Feb-10-07 09:48 AM   #54 
                                - certainly -- I was just trying to make it as simple as possible  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-10-07 10:58 AM   #56 
                                - TIA: That's a very weak example. Unrealistic.  caruso   Feb-11-07 06:18 PM   #86 
                                - you sure are predictable, TIA  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-11-07 07:00 PM   #87 
                                - TIA: Where did Bush find 20 million new votes?  caruso   Feb-12-07 09:50 AM   #90 
                                   - caruso:  Febble   Feb-12-07 10:16 AM   #91 
                                   - he did not need "major voter blocs"  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-12-07 11:07 AM   #93 
                                - Here's a toy model for TIA to play with  Febble   Feb-12-07 05:27 PM   #96 
                                   - And if you want to respond....  Febble   Feb-13-07 11:42 AM   #98 
                                - TIA: If you can say 15% Gore voters defected to Bush, I can say 15% of Bush voters defected to Kerry  caruso   Feb-12-07 08:25 AM   #88 
                                   - OK, your sensitivity analysis finally acknowledges  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-12-07 11:10 AM   #94 
     - "Cooliers caught the networks simply making up the exit poll numbers"  WillYourVoteBCounted   Feb-11-07 01:15 AM   #69 
        - Well, for a start  Febble   Feb-11-07 02:45 AM   #72 
        - Yes!  BeFree   Feb-18-07 10:36 AM   #102 
  - Lynn Landes: Exit Poll Madness  WillYourVoteBCounted   Feb-11-07 01:04 AM   #67 
  - No mention of 'secret' (unaired) preliminary polls & publicized ('forced') Final "poll" -- useless.  tiptoe   Aug-30-07 11:55 PM   #162 
  - "belief in exit polls is a trap that's had tragic consequences ....."  WillYourVoteBCounted   Feb-11-07 01:11 AM   #68 
  - TIA: Landes is saying your vote will NOT be counted; Zogby pre-election state polls  caruso   Feb-11-07 07:26 AM   #73 
  - Descriptive statistics vs. inferential statistics = NO MOE vs. MOE  L. Coyote   Feb-12-07 09:19 AM   #89 
  - TIA: The inferential national 7.3% vote-switch rate confirms your descriptive Ohio 6.15% rate.  caruso   Feb-12-07 10:56 AM   #92 
     - If only it were that simple OR since every vote counts  L. Coyote   Feb-12-07 04:36 PM   #95 
  - Hand Counted Paper Ballots NOW! Nothing more and Nothing less!  In Truth We Trust   Feb-13-07 10:15 AM   #97 
  - Thank you for your persistence.  bleever   Feb-24-07 05:37 PM   #121 
  - I haven't seen that.  troubleinwinter   Feb-25-07 09:36 PM   #122 
     - It's Land Shark's poll  Febble   Feb-26-07 02:39 AM   #123 
        - well, maybe -- maybe it's something else? on a substantive note...  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-26-07 07:38 AM   #124 
        - No,  troubleinwinter   Feb-26-07 10:25 AM   #126 
           - factual inaccuracy on a TIA thread?!  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-26-07 11:09 AM   #127 
              - "spinning the dickens out of public opinion"  troubleinwinter   Feb-26-07 12:11 PM   #128 
                 - Well it's very difficult to interpret the poll at all  Febble   Feb-26-07 12:15 PM   #129 
                    - That's the problem.  troubleinwinter   Feb-26-07 01:42 PM   #130 
                       - I couldn't agree more.  Febble   Feb-26-07 03:00 PM   #131 
        - Egads  troubleinwinter   Feb-26-07 08:59 AM   #125 
  - KICK.nt  kster   Jul-17-08 11:13 PM   #193 
  - The dynamic changes from cycle to cycle  Awsi Dooger   Feb-13-07 06:45 PM   #99 
  - Why WAS TIA banned? Why is TIA allowed to use Sock Puppets?  WillYourVoteBCounted   Feb-19-07 01:28 AM   #105 
  - I think it's a tough call for the mods  OnTheOtherHand   Feb-19-07 07:12 AM   #108 
     - I agree  troubleinwinter   Feb-19-07 01:41 PM   #117 
  - Kickin 'cuz I heard rumors of a March 14th update  Melissa G   Mar-14-07 09:35 PM   #132 
  - This is a graduate course in Election Fraud Analytics  glengarry   Apr-12-07 12:00 AM   #133 
  - Ahh...memories.  Kurovski   Apr-12-07 04:03 AM   #134 
     - Hi Kurovski, Always nice to see your lovely sig  Melissa G   Apr-12-07 10:14 AM   #135 
        - Your sig is even better!  Kurovski   Apr-12-07 12:15 PM   #137 
  - Thanks  TEDIUM   Apr-12-07 11:09 AM   #136 
  - Kick. (nt)  Kurovski   Apr-13-07 10:23 AM   #138 
  - So here you are! Kick  autorank   Apr-14-07 11:12 PM   #139 
  - Thanks for keeping this out there bleever.  Stevepol   Apr-21-07 04:39 PM   #141 
  - Kick.  Kurovski   Jun-06-07 08:22 PM   #144 
  - Kick. (nt)  Kurovski   Jun-07-07 02:37 AM   #145 
  - It's interesting to note individuals who decry others publicly interpreting  Kurovski   Jun-07-07 05:34 PM   #146 
  - Hi to Bleever and those that follow this work...  Melissa G   Jun-25-07 11:21 AM   #147 
  - There has been an update posted to the TIA FAQ  Melissa G   Jul-16-07 10:00 AM   #148 
  - "The Democrats actually won all FIVE elections by an average 8.9 M...Run the numbers yourself..."  tiptoe   Jul-16-07 03:46 PM   #149 
  - Wow 9080 views! and there has been a recent update also.  Melissa G   Aug-05-07 09:16 PM   #150 
  - There has been an update posted with Urban Legend discussion impact  Melissa G   Aug-23-07 04:07 PM   #151 
  - well, I do appreciate the repeated promotion  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-07 04:50 PM   #152 
  - Refute this.  althecat   Aug-24-07 01:56 AM   #155 
     - so you never read the FAQ either  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-07 08:13 AM   #157 
        - I trust expressing yourself on the subject has made you feel better.....  althecat   Aug-25-07 09:24 PM   #158 
           - I accept your concession n/t  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-25-07 09:36 PM   #159 
  - Here is althecat's research thread post that addresses this  Melissa G   Aug-23-07 09:35 PM   #153 
  - Aha... 10,000 views not far away now...  althecat   Aug-24-07 01:41 AM   #154 
  - 17 more views....  althecat   Aug-24-07 04:53 AM   #156 
  - Nice to see this drop around again  galloglas   Aug-25-07 10:15 PM   #160 
  - kick for Gonzo resignation!  tiptoe   Aug-28-07 12:56 AM   #161 
  - k  tiptoe   Nov-25-07 04:36 PM   #172 
  - Significant correlation between the state exit polls and the 5m late recorded votes:  tiptoe   Oct-09-07 06:48 PM   #164 
  - TIA always did have a way with plots  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-09-07 08:02 PM   #165 
  - Updated Oct 26: The 2000 Election...  tiptoe   Oct-27-07 08:54 AM   #166 
  - Updated Nov 2: Election Fraud Analysis: Bush Approval Ratings  tiptoe   Nov-03-07 12:32 PM   #167 
  - nope  OnTheOtherHand   Nov-03-07 02:28 PM   #168 
     - chart  tiptoe   Nov-04-07 11:00 AM   #169 
        - Doesn't help  Febble   Nov-04-07 06:35 PM   #170 
  - Updated  tiptoe   Nov-22-07 03:15 AM   #171 
  - Corrections for section "State Exit Polls: Average Within Precinct Error..."  tiptoe   Nov-26-07 02:04 AM   #173 
     - What the hell took so long!?!  Wilms   Nov-26-07 09:47 AM   #174 
        - Tell us what matters, Mr. Wilms  tiptoe   Nov-29-07 04:48 AM   #175 
           - For one, audits, as I mentioned.  Wilms   Nov-29-07 05:25 AM   #176 
              - Alright, just one...  tiptoe   Nov-30-07 04:18 AM   #177 
                 - Thanks for taking the time to post all of that.  Wilms   Nov-30-07 10:51 PM   #178 
                 - really?  OnTheOtherHand   Dec-01-07 09:42 AM   #179 
  - When Decided: Further confirmation of a Kerry landslide  tiptoe   Dec-12-07 04:58 AM   #180 
  - I wish he would get the facts right  OnTheOtherHand   Dec-12-07 06:36 AM   #181 
  - Updated: Conservative Scenarios Analysis  tiptoe   Jan-06-08 01:27 PM   #182 
  - Final Exit Polls: Adjusted to Match the Recorded Vote  tiptoe   Jan-18-08 12:57 AM   #183 
  - k.  tiptoe   Apr-26-08 08:47 AM   #186 
  - Since Corporate Media is Sitting on Election Fraud . . . HOW DO WE GET IT OUT THERE!!??  BillDouglas   Jan-18-08 04:14 PM   #184 
  - Gallup assigned 90% of the undecided vote to Kerry.  tiptoe   Mar-07-08 04:54 PM   #185 
  - 2004 Election Model: Summary, Polling Analysis, National & State Model Tables -- TruthIsAll  tiptoe   Jul-16-08 10:29 PM   #192 
     - kick!  tiptoe   Oct-12-10 08:07 AM   #194 

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

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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