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 #48: TIA Fact Refresher: 1) 2000/2004 recorded vote, 2) mortality, 3) 2000 voter turnout in 2004 [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 Fri Feb-09-07 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #30
48. TIA Fact Refresher: 1) 2000/2004 recorded vote, 2) mortality, 3) 2000 voter turnout in 2004
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 12:38 AM by caruso
FEBBLE
TIA, all your analysis assume that exit poll sampling is unbiased, and that people correctly report what they did four years ago (e.g. whether they voted; who they voted for). While it is possible that these two assumptions are correct, there is no reason to believe that there are, and a fair bit of reason to believe they are not.

TIA
Once again, you avoid the FACTS about the 2000 and 2004 elections.

I have stated the following over and over again. We already know the MAXIMUM "How voted in 2000" weights because we KNOW how many Bush and Gore voters were still alive and could vote in 2004.

Yet you still assume that the weightings are the result of a flawed sample. That is flawed reasoning. WE ALREADY KNOW THE WEIGHTS SINCE WE KNOW THAT ALL MEN ARE MORTAL.

THEREFORE, it is IRRELEVANT whether Gore 2000 voters forgot or lied to the exit pollsters IF they said they voted for Bush. What IS RELEVANT IS WHO THEY VOTED FOR FIVE MINUTES BEFORE THEY WERE EXIT POLLED - and 91% said it was Kerry.

The 2000 and 2004 recorded votes and the annual MORTALITY rate are historic and documented FACTS. They are both NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT to determine the MAXIMUM number of Bush and Gore voters who COULD HAVE VOTED in 2004.

Only Bush and Gore 2000 VOTER TURNOUT in 2004 is UNKNOWN. But turnout can be ESTIMATED in order to determine PLAUSIBLE WEIGHTS (95% is the base case used in the True Vote Model). The model indicates that Kerry won by 66-58 million votes, a 52.56-46.43% vote share.

TIA True Vote Model
Weight Kerry Bush Other
DNV 21.49% 57% 41% 2%
Gore 38.23% 91% 8% 1%
Bush 37.83% 10% 90% 0%
Other 2.45% 71% 21% 8%

Share 100% 52.56% 46.43% 1.01%
Votes 125.7 66.09 58.38 1.27

The assumptions were BOTH plausible (believable) AND feasible (mathematically possible):

1) only Gore, Bush and Nader 2000 voters still living could vote in 2004.
THAT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS, BUT APPARENTLY IT IS NOT. IT IS A FACT, NOT AN ASSUMPTION. AND IT BLOWS ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS RIGHT OUT OF THE WATER.

2) 0.87% annual mortality rate (FACT)

4) 95% turnout of Gore, Bush and other 2000 voters
Regardless of the turnout ASSUMPTION, Kerry wins.

5) 125.7mm total votes cast (2004 Census). You can call it an assumption.
There are still those who claim the Census is inaccurate; it never matches the vote count. Of course it doesn't - millions of votes cast in every election (mostly Democratic) are never counted. And that's a FACT. For you to claim otherwise is pure propaganda.

But the Census total is NOT required for the analysis; the TRUE VOTE SHARES remain the same if we assume the 122.3mm RECORDED vote. Total votes CAST is used to determine a more accurate TRUE VOTE COUNT.

6) I assume the 12:22am NEP vote shares as the BEST EVIDENCE of who the voters ACTUALLY voted for FIVE MINUTES BEFORE THEY TOLD THE EXIT POLLSTER. If you disagree with the base case 12:22am vote shares, then consider this.

The following unlikely scenarios are further evidence that Kerry won, even when the base case assumptions (shown in parenthesis) are changed to favor Bush .

Scenario 1:
10% advantage in turnout of Bush 2000 voters over Gore voters.
Gore turnout: 90% (95%)
Bush turnout: 100% (95%)
Kerry wins by 3.62mm votes (51.0-48%).

Scenario 2:
Reduce Kerry share of DNV by 6% and Gore 2000 voter turnout by 4%.
DNV share: 51% (57%)
Gore turnout: 91% (95%)
Bush turnout: 95% (95%)
Kerry wins by 2.88mm votes (50.6%-48.4%).

Scenario 3:
Reduce Kerry share of Gore voters by 4% and Bush voters by 2%.
Assume: 95% turnout of Gore and Bush voters
Gore share: 87% (91%)
Bush share: 8% (10%)
Kerry wins by 1.97mm votes (50.3%-48.7%).

_________________________________________________________________

Sensitivity Analysis

DNV2k: first-time and other voters who did not vote in 2000
Base case assumptions and Kerry vote share are shown in bold print.

How does Gore/Bush 2000 voter turnout effect Kerry's national vote?
Assume:
100% Bush 2000 voter turnout
95% Gore voter turnout
Kerry wins by 51.6 - 47.4%, a 5.32 million vote margin.


KERRY VOTE SHARE
(sensitivity to Gore and Bush 2000 voter turnout)

Bush Gore Turnout
Turnout 95% 96% 97% 98% 99% 100%

95% 52.6% 52.7% 52.8% 53.0% 53.1% 53.2%
96% 52.4% 52.5% 52.7% 52.8% 52.9% 53.1%
97% 52.2% 52.3% 52.5% 52.6% 52.7% 52.9%
98% 52.0% 52.1% 52.3% 52.4% 52.6% 52.7%
99% 51.8% 52.0% 52.1% 52.2% 52.4% 52.5%
100% 51.6% 51.8% 51.9% 52.0% 52.2% 52.3%

KERRY VOTE MARGIN (millions)

95% 7.72 8.06 8.40 8.74 9.08 9.42
96% 7.24 7.58 7.92 8.26 8.60 8.93
97% 6.76 7.10 7.44 7.78 8.12 8.45
98% 6.28 6.62 6.96 7.30 7.63 7.97
99% 5.80 6.14 6.48 6.81 7.15 7.49
100% 5.32 5.66 5.99 6.33 6.67 7.01
________________________________________________________

How do changes in Gore voter turnout and Kerry's share of DNV2k impact his national vote?
DNV2k are first-time voters and others who did not vote in 2000.

Assume:
Gore 2000 voter turnout: 91%
Bush 2000 voter turnout: 95%
Kerry share of DNV2k: 54%

Kerry's wins by 51.3 - 47.7%, a 4.62 million vote margin.

KERRY VOTE SHARE
(sensitivity to Gore 2000 voter turnout and share of DNV2k)

Gore Kerry Share of DNV2k
Turnout 54% 55% 56% 57% 58% 59%

100% 52.7% 52.9% 53.1% 53.2% 53.4% 53.6%
99% 52.5% 52.7% 52.9% 53.1% 53.3% 53.5%
98% 52.4% 52.6% 52.8% 53.0% 53.2% 53.4%
97% 52.2% 52.4% 52.6% 52.8% 53.0% 53.3%
96% 52.1% 52.3% 52.5% 52.7% 52.9% 53.1%

95% 51.9% 52.1% 52.4% 52.6% 52.8% 53.0%
94% 51.8% 52.0% 52.2% 52.4% 52.6% 52.9%
93% 51.6% 51.8% 52.1% 52.3% 52.5% 52.7%
92% 51.5% 51.7% 51.9% 52.2% 52.4% 52.6%
91% 51.3% 51.6% 51.8% 52.0% 52.2% 52.5%

KERRY VOTE MARGIN (millions)

100% 7.95 8.44 8.93 9.42 9.91 10.40
99% 7.58 8.08 8.58 9.08 9.58 10.08
98% 7.21 7.72 8.23 8.74 9.25 9.76
97% 6.84 7.36 7.88 8.40 8.92 9.44
96% 6.47 7.00 7.53 8.06 8.59 9.12

95% 6.10 6.64 7.18 7.72 8.26 8.80
94% 5.73 6.28 6.83 7.38 7.93 8.48
93% 5.36 5.92 6.48 7.04 7.60 8.16
92% 4.99 5.56 6.13 6.70 7.27 7.84
91% 4.62 5.20 5.78 6.36 6.94 7.53
________________________________________________________________________
How does Kerry's share of returning Gore and Bush voters impact his national vote?

Assume (per the Final Exit Poll):
Kerry won 89% of Gore voters
Kerry won 9% of Bush voters

Kerry wins by 51.4 - 47.6%, a 4.85 million margin.

KERRY VOTE SHARE
(sensitivity to Kerry share of returning Gore and Bush voters)

Assume 2000 Voter Turnout: 95% Gore; 95% Bush

Bush Gore Voter Share
Voter 89% 90% 91% 92% 93% 94%
Share
10% 51.8% 52.2% 52.6% 52.9% 53.3% 53.7%
9% 51.4% 51.8% 52.2% 52.6% 53.0% 53.3%
8% 51.0% 51.4% 51.8% 52.2% 52.6% 53.0%
7% 50.7% 51.0% 51.4% 51.8% 52.2% 52.6%

6% 50.3% 50.7% 51.1% 51.4% 51.8% 52.2%
5% 49.9% 50.3% 50.7% 51.1% 51.4% 51.8%
4% 49.5% 49.9% 50.3% 50.7% 51.1% 51.4%
3% 49.2% 49.5% 49.9% 50.3% 50.7% 51.1%

KERRY VOTE MARGIN (millions)

10% 5.80 6.76 7.72 8.68 9.64 10.60
9% 4.85 5.81 6.77 7.73 8.69 9.65
8% 3.89 4.86 5.82 6.78 7.74 8.70
7% 2.94 3.90 4.87 5.83 6.79 7.75

6% 1.99 2.95 3.91 4.88 5.84 6.80
5% 1.04 2.00 2.96 3.93 4.89 5.85
4% 0.09 1.05 2.01 2.97 3.94 4.90
3% -0.86 0.10 1.06 2.02 2.98 3.95


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

To repeat, we already KNOW the weights; they are based on the 2000 and 2004 recorded votes, with 2000 voters reduced by voter mortality and voter turnout in 2004.

Since we have determined FEASIBLE (mathematically possible) weights, we just need the response to ONE question in order to calculate the national vote share. That's why the ONLY exit poll response which MATTERS is the answer to THIS question: "Who did you JUST VOTE FOR 5 MINUTES AGO"?

It follows that "false recall" of the 2000 vote, even IF it exists, is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. On the contrary, we ARE justified in believing that voters DID NOT not falsely recall who they voted for JUST FIVE MINUTES earlier. What would be their MOTIVATION to lie? Survey responses are CONFIDENTIAL - AS YOU KEEP REMINDING US.

I strongly suggest that you look over this extensive NEP sensitivity analysis for all essential demographics. KERRY EMERGES AS THE WINNER, REGARDLESS OF THE COMBINATION PAIR OF PLAUSIBLE VOTE SHARE ASSUMPTIONS.

THE REASON KERRY COMES OUT A WINNER IS THAT WE HAVE CALCULATED FEASIBLE WEIGHTS WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: WHO DID YOU VOTE FOR IN 2000?

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

ONCE AGAIN, FROM THE PEAK OF TRUTH MOUNTAIN SO THAT YOU DON'T FORGET IT:

***********************************************************************
THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF GORE, BUSH AND NADER 2000 VOTERS WHO COULD HAVE VOTED IN 2004 (I.E. THE WEIGHTS) IS A FUNCTION OF 1) (F)ACTUAL 2000/2004 RECORDED VOTE DATA, 2) THE ANNUAL 0.87% MORTALITY RATE AND 3) AN ESTIMATED 2000 VOTER PERCENTAGE TURNOUT IN 2004. THAT'S IT.
***********************************************************************

Do us all a favor and accept the reality of the above statement. Your avoidance of this COMPELLING evidence for almost two years is truly astounding,being that you are an extremely intelligent individual.

So why do you do keep doing it?

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