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 #140: Latest Update: April 15 [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
glengarry Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-17-07 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
140. Latest Update: April 15
Part I: Analytic Summary

Introduction

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 in Florida and enable him to steal the election. There has been an ongoing controversy regarding the 2004 election. State and national pre-election and exit polls pointed to a Kerry victory. Those who claim that Bush won fair and square are relentless in their attempts to thrash polling analyses which suggest that fraud occurred. Since the media will not release tell-tale precinct-level data, analysts must rely on publicly available polling data. And they have determined that the polls provide powerful statistical evidence of fraud. Voter fraud has been shown to be a non-existent distraction from the evidence of massive election fraud. Voters dont fix elections, election officials do. The corporate media was quick to dismiss claims of election fraud as a left-wing conspiracy theory and the statistical polling analyses of spreadsheet-wielding Internet bloggers.

This is what Richard Morin , a Washington Post Staff Writer, wrote on Thursday, November 4, 2004:
An Election Day filled with unexpected twists ended with a familiar question: What went wrong with the network exit polls?... In two previous national elections, the exit polls had behaved badly. Premature calls by the networks in Florida led to a congressional investigation in 2000. Two years later, a computer meltdown resulted in no release of data on Election Day. Results based on the first few rounds of interviewing are usually only approximations of the final vote. Printouts warn that estimates of each candidate's support are unreliable and not for on-air use..That is why the early leaks anger Joe Lenski of Edison Media Research, which conducted Tuesday's exit poll with Mitofsky International for the National Election Pool, a consortium of the major television networks and the Associated Press. After the survey is completed and the votes are counted, the exit poll results are adjusted to reflect the actual vote, which in theory improves the accuracy of all the exit poll results, including the breakdown of the vote by age, gender and other characteristics.

The media never considered the possibility that the votes may have been miscounted and that the exit polls were essentially correct. They just took it for granted that the vote count was accurate (i.e. the election was fraud-free). After all, isnt that why the exit poll results are always adjusted to match the vote count? But they never asked why the National Exit Poll had Kerry leading by a steady 51-48% at 4pm (8649 respondents), at 7:30pm (1107 respondents) and 12:22am (13047 respondents) only to see Bush win the 2pm Final (13660 respondents) by 51-48%. Of course, they never did an analysis which would have shown that the adjusted Final NEP weights were impossible and that the adjusted vote shares were implausible. And they would have come to the same conclusion as the spreadsheet-wielding bloggers: the election was stolen.

A dwindling number of naysayers continue to maintain that the comprehensive statistical analysis of 2004 pre-election/exit polls by a number of independent researchers does not provide convincing evidence that the election was stolen. To debunk the analysis, they have resorted to tortured explanations: Kerry voters were more likely to respond to exit pollsters; exit poll interviewers sought out Kerry voters; returning Gore voters lied or forgot when they told the exit pollsters that they voted for Bush in 2000; pre-election and exit polls are not pure random samples; exit polls are not designed to detect fraud in the United States; early exit poll results were misleading because women voted early and Republicans voted late; Gore voters defected to Bush at twice the rate that Bush voters defected to Kerry; the GOTV campaign headed by Karl Rove mobilized millions of Christian fundamentalists for Bush, etc. None of these explanations are supported by factual data and they have been thoroughly debunked.

They cited a post-election retrospective NES 600-sample survey in order to explain the impossible Bush/Gore 43/37% weights used in the 13047 sample Final 2004 National Exit Poll. Bush 2000 voters could not have comprised 43% of the 122.3mm votes recorded in 2004 since 43% of 122.3 is 52.6mm and Bush only had 50.5mm votes in 2000. They claimed that the NES survey was evidence that 7% of former Gore voters lied in the Final 2004 NEP when they said they voted for Bush in 2000 -because Gore voters wanted to be associated with the previous winner. But Gore was the winner by 540,000 votes and Bush had a 48.5% approval rating on Election Day 2004. In the 12:22am NEP, Kerry captured 91% of those who voted for Gore in 2000 and 10% of those who voted for Bush. Bush won just 8% of Gore voters.

They noted a built-in Democratic bias in the exit polls. But in every election, approximately 3% of total votes cast are uncounted; the majority of them are in heavily Democratic minority districts. For example, in 2000 Bush won Florida by 537 official votes. The recount was aborted and approximately 180,000 spoiled (under and over-punched) ballots were never counted. Approximately 65% of them were intended for Gore, so he must have won the state by at least 60,000 votes. Assuming that 3 million votes were uncounted, Gores national margin was two million. In addition to the uncounted votes, its likely that Gore votes were switched to Bush. The 2000 election was not even close, unlike the 5-4 Supreme Court decision. In 2004, more than 90% of reported (EIRS) incidents of touch screen vote switching were from Kerry to Bush. An exhaustive statistical study of actual ballots in Ohios Cuyahoga County indicated that 6.15% of Kerrys votes were switched.

They claimed that the vaunted 2004 Republican GOTV campaign brought Bush millions of new Christian fundamentalist votes. But they fail to note that according to the National Exit Poll, the Democrats have won first-time voters in the last four elections by an average 14% margin. Ruy Teixeira wrote about it in The Emerging Democratic Majority.

They rejected the assumption that late undecided voters would break for Kerry. But pollsters Zogby and Harris, who have a combined 60 years of polling experience, indicated they voted 67-75% for Kerry. The National Exit poll also reported that Kerry won a clear majority of undecided voters. But this was not unusual; historical evidence indicates that undecided voters break for the challenger over 80% of the time, especially when the incumbent is unpopular. Bush had a 48.5% average approval rating on Election Day.

They dismissed the significance of the Bush 48.5% approval rating on Election Day. But all presidential incumbents with approval below 50% lost re-election (Ford, Carter, Bush I) while all incumbents over 50% won (Eisenhower, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan and Clinton). The near-perfect 0.87 correlation between Bushs monthly approval rating and national poll average share is further evidence. The correlation was confirmed by the 12:22am National Exit Poll which Kerry won by 51-48%.

They insisted that Bush led the pre-election polls. But they failed to consider undecided voters. Final Zogby polls had Kerry leading by 50-45% in nine battleground states. Assuming that he would capture 75% of the undecided vote, Kerry was projected to win all 9 states by 53-46%. He won just 5 and his average margin was only 50-49%. The margin of error was exceeded in six states - a 1 in 52 million probability.

They also failed to use weighted averages in calculating national vote share based on state polling, claiming that Bush led the weekly state poll (unweighted) average. But except for the first two weeks in September, Kerry led the national weighted average based on state voting population from July to Election Day. Kerry also led the monthly unweighted national pre-election polls all year. The final weighted average of 51 state polls (Kerry 47.88-46.89%) was confirmed by the unweighted average of 18 national polls (Kerry 47.17- Bush 46.89%).

They refused to accept the fact that both state and national projections in the Nov.1, 2004 Election Model had Kerry winning the popular vote by 51-48%. But the projections were confirmed by the 12:22am National Exit Poll which Kerry won by 51-48%. A Monte Carlo Simulation (5000 election trials) forecast that Kerry would win 320-337 electoral votes with 60-75% of the undecided vote - which he did if you believe the National Exit Poll and pollsters Zogby and Harris. The pre-election projections were confirmed in the Interactive Election Simulation Model by the state and national exit polls.

They overlooked the fact that 41 states switched to Bush from the final pre-election polls to the recorded vote. But none of the 10 which switched to Kerry was a battleground state. Forty-three states red-shifted to Bush from the 12:22am exit polls. Oregon was the only battleground state which blue-shifted to Kerry by less than one percent. Its also the only state in which voting is done by mail. Was this all just a coincidence, a case of bad polling or an indication that fraud occurred? You decide.

They cited false recall and non-response bias as explanations for the exit poll discrepancies. But they failed to account for the deviations between final pre-election state and national polls and the recorded vote. Exit poll non-response and false recall are not applicable to pre-election polls and yet the pre-election polls matched the exits. The best evidence indicates that the pristine state and national exit polls were close to the true vote, unlike the final exit polls which were forced to match a corrupt vote count. All they can say is that the polls were wrong.

They hypothesized that the Final NEP 43 Bush / 37 Gore weights were due to false recall on the part of Gore 2000 voters who claimed to have voted for Bush 4 years earlier. But the weights were irrelevant and misleading since they were mathematically impossible. What is relevant is who the 2004 exit poll respondents said they voted for just minutes before. And 91% of Gore voters said they voted for Kerry.

They claimed that exit poll non-responders were Bush voters. But a linear regression analysis showed that exit poll non-response increased going from the strongest Bush states to the strongest Kerry states, indicating that non-responders were most likely Kerry voters.

They said that the margin of error used in calculating probabilities of the exit poll discrepancies was too low. But even assuming a 50% cluster effect, the probabilities were still near zero. The exit poll discrepancy exceeded the margin of error in 16 states - all in favor of Bush. The probability: 1 in 19 trillion. Not a single state deviated beyond the MoE for Kerry.

They ridiculed the near 100% probability of a Kerry popular vote victory, claiming that the exit poll cluster effect and response bias invalidates the theoretical 1.0% margin of error. But a probability sensitivity analysis showed that even assuming a 50% increase in MoE, Kerry still had a 98% probability of winning a majority of the popular vote.

They maintained that exit polls are not accurate indicators since they are not perfect random samples. But pollsters Edison-Mitofsky state in the National Exit Poll notes that respondents were randomly-selected and that the overall margin of error was 1%. This was confirmed in the NEP Methods Statement.

They claimed that the early exit polls were off and imply that the Final National Exit Poll was accurate. But the Final was forced to match the recorded vote with impossible weights and implausible vote shares. This implies that the recorded vote was fraud-free not exactly a reality-based assumption.

They find nothing unusual about the fact that Kerry led the National Exit Poll by 51-48% at 4pm (8649 respondents), 7:30pm (11027) and 12:22am (13047). But Bush won the 2pm Final NEP (13660) by 51-48% through the use of impossible weights and implausible vote shares which were required in order to match the recorded vote. Is the Law of Large Numbers no longer operative?

They ignored the astounding fact that all 22 Eastern Time Zone states red-shifted from the exit poll to Bush and 12 deviated beyond the exit poll margin of error! But the East is a vote-rich Democratic region and is the most fertile ground vote stealing. The probability is 1 in 32 trillion that the exit poll margin of error would be exceeded in at least 12 of 22 states. Of the 28 states outside the Eastern Time Zone, only 20 deviated to Bush while the margin of error was exceeded in just 4 states.

They claimed that twice as many Gore voters (14.6%) defected to Bush than Bush voters (7.2%) to Kerry. But the 12:22am NEP timeline (13047 respondents) indicates that only 8% of Gore voters defected to Bush in 2004 while 10% of Bush 2000 voters defected to Kerry. There was a near-ZERO probability of a 6.6% deviation in Gore defection. It was a feeble, last-ditch Hail Mary pass to justify the Bush mandate. And it means that they lost the Game.

They failed to explain how Bush found 16mm new voters (DNV2k) to reach 62mm in 2004. He had 50.5mm votes in 2000. But only about 46mm returned to vote in 2004. The decrease was due to two factors: 1) approximately 1.7mm Bush voters died (0.87% annual mortality rate) and 2) an estimated 2.5mm did not vote (95% turnout). According to the 12:22am National Exit Poll, Bush won 41% or 10.8 of 26.3mm new voters. He needed 60% or 15.8mm to reach 62. The 19% discrepancy was 11 times the 1.72% margin of error. The probability of the discrepancy is ZERO. Its important to note that a solid majority of new voters were Democrats and Independents who gave Bush an approval rating much lower than his total 48.5% average on Election Day 2004, a 1% monthly decline from Sept. 2001.

They need to explain how Kerry lost the popular vote in 2004, while winning a solid 57-41% share of new (DNV2k) voters. Of the DNV2k voters, Kerry won first-timer voters by 55-43% and other new voters by 61-37%. But Gore won the popular vote in 2000 even though Bush captured new (DNV96) voters by 52-44%. Quite strange, especially since Gore won first-timers (52-43%) and Bush won others (71-26%). How could there have been such a wide discrepancy in vote share?

They claimed that a long-term bandwagon effect was the reason why 7% of returning Gore 2000 voters wanted to associate with the winner (Bush) and told the exit pollsters that they voted for Bush in 2000. But this was just a last-ditch attempt to explain the mathematically impossible Voted in 2000 weights. Even if Gore voters lied, it is irrelevant. What is relevant is who they said they voted for just a few minutes earlier. And 91% said they voted for Kerry.

They claimed that it was standard operating procedure to re-weight the National Exit Poll based on the recorded vote. But the NEP Voted in 2000 weights (Bush 43/Gore 37%) were mathematically impossible. How could 43% (52.6mm) of the 122.3mm who voted in 2004 have been Bush 2000 voters when he only had 50.5mm votes in 2000? Furthermore, since approximately 1.8mm Bush 2000 voters died prior to the 2004 election, the maximum number who could have voted in 2004 was 48.7 million, assuming an impossible 100% turnout. This physical, incontrovertible mathematical fact totally confounded the naysayers. And the longer they tried to refute the facts, the sillier they looked.

They finally had to accept an inconvenient truth: the Final National Exit Poll inflated the Bush tally by at least 4 million votes. The weights were contrived to force the exit poll to match a corrupt recorded vote. And even though the weights were mathematically impossible, the exit-pollsters had no choice but to use them, hoping that no one would notice.

After months of denial, they finally agreed that the Final 2pm NEP How Voted in 2000 weights were impossible and replaced them with feasible weights. But they had to compensate for the change in weights in order to match to the recorded vote by inflating the Final Bush vote shares to implausible levels. This was necessary even though the 12:22am NEP Bush vote shares had already been inflated in the Final in order to match the recorded vote. With feasible weights applied to the pristine 12:22am NEP vote shares, Kerry won by 52.6-46.4% a 7.7 million vote margin! With feasible weights applied to the Final NEP vote shares, Kerry won by 51.2-48.4%, a 3.4 million margin.

They were forced to suggest this implausible Bush win scenario in the Democratic Underground Game thread:
1) 14.6% of Gore 2000 voters defected to Bush. But the 12:22am NEP reported 8%; it was increased to 10% in the Final in order match the vote.
2) Kerry won 52.9% of voters who did not vote in 2000. But the 12:22am NEP reported he won by 57-41%; it was reduced to 54-45% in the Final.
3) 7.2% of Bush 2000 voters defected to Kerry. But the 12:22am NEP reported 10%; it was reduced to 9% in the Final.

They belittled a comprehensive sensitivity analysis which indicated that Kerry won all plausible scenarios of voter turnout and new voter share. But assuming 12:22am NEP vote shares and 100% Bush 2000 voter turnout, Gore voter turnout had to be 73% for Bush to tie Kerry and 64% to match the recorded 62-59mm vote.

They need to explain these implausible changes in Bush NEP vote shares from 2000 to 2004:
-The Bush share of females increased by 4.2% while his share of males decreased by 0.2%
-His share of white females increased by 5.0% while his share of white males decreased by 0.9%
-His share of non-white females increased by 4.0% while his share of non-white males increased by only 0.76%
-His share of female independents increased by 1.8% while his share of male independents decreased by 5.6%
Didnt females vote 54-45% for Kerry? Didnt over 90% of blacks vote for him? Werent independents for Kerry by 52-44%? Why would independent males defect to Kerry at triple the rate that independent females defected to Bush? Didnt Nader voters break 3-1 for Kerry?

They neglected to ask why six of the eight states which deviated to Kerry from the exit polls were strong Bush states: TN (1.63), TX (1.65), SD (1.67), ND (2.51), KS (2.37) and MT (0.22). The exit poll discrepancies (shown in parenthesis) were all within the exit poll margin of error. But only two competitive states deviated to Kerry: OR (0.75) and HI (1.25). Is it just a coincidence that Oregon is the only state which votes exclusively by mail (100% paper ballots), and that any discrepancy in that state would be small and could favor either Bush or Kerry? And is it just a coincidence that Hawaii was not exactly a critical state?

They agreed that the vote-rich battleground states would decide the election. But was it just a coincidence that six deep-red states deviated to Kerry and not a single blue state? Or was it because Bushco did not want to explain how 50 states red-shifted? Did they disregard the six states knowing that Kerry would not come close to winning them? Is that why they focused on thwarting a nationwide blue-shift in competitive states? The beast was in the East, the rest were in the West.

They claimed that the raw exit poll data which have not been made public indicates that there was no tendency for Bush to do better in 2004 relative to 2000 (swing) than he did in the 2004 exit poll (red-shift). They presented their analysis in a swing vs. red-shift scatter chart and concluded from the flat regression line that the exit poll discrepancies had little effect and therefore fraud was unlikely. But they did not considering the following factors: According to the 2004 National Exit Poll, Kerry won 71% of returning Nader voters compared to 21% for Bush. A similar split would have increased Gores margin by 1.4mm. Assuming that 75% of approximately 3 million uncounted votes were for Gore, his margin increases by another 1.5mm. When added to his recorded 540,000 vote majority, Gores adjusted margin becomes 3.4mm. And that does not consider the effects of vote-switching. Thanks to Ohio, we know a lot more about vote-switching than we did in 2000. Its very likely that Gore votes were switched to Bush. If 3% (1.5 million) were switched, then his final adjusted margin is 6.4 million: 3mm switched + 1.5mm uncounted + 1.4mm Nader + 0.54mm recorded.

They never normalized the 2-party state vote shares in calculating swing. But adjusted swing (before vote switching) exceeded red-shift in 24 of the 43 states which deviated to Bush. Adjusted national swing was 3% (51.24-48.24). Based on the NEP Voted in 2000 demographic, red-shift was 3.15% (51.24-48.09); based on Gender, it was 2.53% (51.24-48.71). But the red-shift was just 1.75% (51.24-49.49) based on the weighted average state poll. This clearly indicates that the naysayer swing vs. red-shift argument is just another ruse meant to divert, confuse and mislead. With 3% vote-switching, Bushs adjusted vote swing exceeded red-shift in 34 of the 43 red-shift states. A realistic linear regression analysis of adjusted swing vs. redshift shows that for every 1% increase in swing, red-shift increased by 0.6% as opposed to the flat regression line in the naysayer scatter chart.

They argued that the Ohio exit poll does not indicate fraud. But they ignored the massive documented evidence of uncounted and switched votes, apart from voter disenfranchisement. And two election workers were convicted of rigging the recount. They criticized the 12:22am Ohio exit poll (1963 respondents) which Kerry won by 52-48%, yet believe the 2:06pm Final (2020 respondents) in which demographic category vote shares were changed in favor of Bush to match the miscounted recorded vote. This was just like the final NEP in which vote shares were also changed to match a miscounted national vote. If the original weights were used, it would have been necessary to inflate the Bush vote shares to implausible levels.

They need to explain these Ohio exit poll anomalies:
-When Decided: Of the 14% who were first-time voters, 55% were for Kerry. Are we to believe that he won just 47% of the other 86%? Of the 21% who decided in the month prior to the election, 62% voted for Kerry. Are we to believe that he won just 45% of the other 79% who decided before October 1? Were there any pre-October polls in which Bush led by 10%?
-Party ID: Democrat/ Republican weights changed from 38/35 to 35/40, a 7.9% shift. With the original 38/35 weights, Bush needed 17% of Democrats to match the recorded vote, as opposed to his 8% at 12:22am.
-Ideology: Liberal/Conservative weights changed from 21/32 to 19/34, a 9.5% shift. With the original weights, Bush needed 23% of Liberals to match the recorded vote, as opposed to his 13% at 12:22am.
-Voted for Senate: Democratic/Republican weights changed from 43/57 to 36/64, a 16.3% shift. With the original weights, Bush needed 14% of those who voted for the Democratic candidate, as opposed to his 7% at 12:22am.

They ignored Floridas implausible vote count by machine type and party registration. Bush supposedly won by 52-47%, a 368,000 vote margin. But the Democrats had a 41- 37% registration advantage in Touch Screen (TS) counties and a 42-39% edge in Optical Scan (OS) counties. Kerry won TS counties (3.86mm votes) by 51-47%, but Bush won OS counties (3.43mm votes) by a whopping 57-42%. Florida voter registration by party is consistent across TS and OS counties, so its not comparing apples and oranges. The total TS county vote share matched the 12:22am NEP to within 0.43% for Bush and 0.31% for Kerry. But the Bush OS county share deviated by 9.0% (307,000 votes) while the Kerry discrepancy was 8.1% (278,000). But the low Democratic vote shares in the three most heavily populated TS counties (Palm Beach, Broward, Dade) were also highly suspect. In 2000, Bush supposedly won by 547 official votes. But given Gores 70% share of 180,000 uncounted under/over votes, he would have won by at least 60,000 votes if they had been counted.

Two separate models indicated that Kerry won Florida by 221,000 votes. The first was based on voting machine type (optical scanners and touch screens) and used 2004 NEP How Voted in 2000 vote shares with party registration percentage weights. Kerry won by 221,000 votes. The second was based on uncounted and switched votes assumptions applied to the 2004 recorded vote. Kerry won by. 221,000 votes. Assuming that Kerry won 70,000 of 96,000 Nader 2000 votes (based on his 71% NEP share), he had a built-in 100,000 advantage on Election Day if all the votes were going to be counted. The final Zogby pre-election poll had Kerry winning by 50-47%. Assuming a 1.0% margin of error, the probability is 1 in 12.7 trillion that Kerry's total TS county vote share would exceed his total Florida share by 4.2%.

They cited the final NY pre-election poll which Kerry won by 59-40 (matching the recorded vote) to support their argument that the pre-election polls did not match the exits (the NY exit poll was 64-35). But they failed to mention that the typical pre-election state poll has a 4% margin of error (600 respondents) while the corresponding exit poll has a 2-3% MoE, depending on the number of respondents so a 5% discrepancy between a given state pre-election and the corresponding exit poll is not unusual. In fact, the weighted average vote share of 51 state pre-election polls, adjusted for undecided voters, matched the weighted average exit poll vote share to within 1%.

They implied that the NY pre-election poll was accurate since it matched the recorded vote. But this is not plausible since the 2000 recorded vote was Gore 60-Bush 35-Nader 5 and the 2004 NEP reported that 10% of Bush2000 voters defected to Kerry while just 8% of Gore voters defected to Bush. Assuming conservatively that the Bush/Gore defection rates were equal, the 59-40 recorded vote implies that 100% of returning Nader 2000 voters defected to Bush - an absolute impossibility. The NEP indicated that Kerry won Nader voters by 71-21. Allocating Nader 2000 votes and assuming equal defection rates, the 2004 recorded vote is Kerry 63-Bush 36. Allocating the 3% uncounted votes (75% Kerry/ 25% Bush) widens the vote split to 64-35, matching the exit poll. The True Vote Model determined that 7% of Kerrys national votes were switched to Bush while a comprehensive analysis of total votes cast in Cuyahoga County (Ohio) showed that 6.15% were switched. Assuming that 4% of Kerrys NY votes were switched, he won the state by 66-33%.

They have never explained why the Exit Poll Response Optimizer confirmed the USCV simulation. But both models analyzed summary exit poll data for 1250 precincts supplied by Edison-Mitofsky and independently debunked the reluctant Bush responder (rBr) hypothesis. The Optimizer employed the Excel Solver algorithm to obtain a feasible 2-party vote share solution (Kerry 52.15-Bush 47.85%). The data constraints include the actual recorded vote (Bush 51.24-Kerry 48.76%), along with response rates and within precinct error (WPE) categorized into five partisanship groupings: Strong Bush, Bush, Even, Kerry, Strong Kerry. The vote share solution exactly matched the 12:22am National Exit Poll Voted in 2000 demographic. Two independent mathematical methods applied to two distinct sets of national and precinct summary exit poll data produced the identical result.

They can try to refute the True Vote Model. But the base case scenario determined that Kerry won by 66.1-58.4mm. The model used the 12:22am NEP vote shares with Voted 2000 weights adjusted for 1) the 2000 recorded vote, 2) 3.5% mortality rate and 3) 95% turnout of 2000 voters in 2004. It assumes that 3.4mm (2.74%) votes were uncounted, given that 125.7mm were reported by the 2004 Election Census but only 122.3mm were recorded. The uncounted votes were allocated to Kerry and Bush in each state based on the racial mix. Assuming that Kerry won 2.6mm (75%) of the uncounted votes, then 4.5mm (6.8%) of total votes cast for Kerry must have been switched to Bush since the difference between his 66.1mm true vote and his recorded 59mm vote is 7.1mm (2.6 uncounted + 4.5 switched). The True Vote Model determined that Kerry won 336 electoral votes which matched the EV projected by the Monte Carlo Simulation in the Election Model.

Except for the notorious 2006 FL-13 congressional race in which 18,000 mostly Democratic votes were mysteriously missing, the evidence of massive fraud in the midterm elections is hardly mentioned in the corporate media. But a Pew 2006 Election Analysis describes voting anomalies and computer glitches that occurred in virtually every state. The fraud probably cost the Democrats 10-20 congressional seats.

The 2006 National Exit Poll How Voted in 2004 weights were changed from 47 Bush / 45 Kerry at 7pm on Election Day to 49/43 in the Final NEP at 1pm on the following day. Once again, just like in 2004, the exit pollsters had to match the vote count by expanding the weight spread from 2% to 6%! This had a major effect in cutting the Democratic margin in half - from 55-43% to 52-46%. As noted earlier, the 2004 12:22am NEP How Voted in 2000 Bush/Gore 41/39 weights were changed to 43/37 in the 2pm Final, turning a 51-48% Kerry victory into a 51-48% loss.

If plausible 49 Kerry/ 46 Bush weights (based on the 2004 NEP) are used, the TRUE Democratic margin becomes 56.7-42.1%, exactly matching the 120 pre-election Generic Poll trend line. Was this just a coincidence or another confirmation that the pre-election polls matched the 7pm National Exit Poll? 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