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 #49: More red flags! Average NY WPE: Bush 8.0 (1988,1992,2004); Clinton 0.6 (1996, 2000) [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
WillE Donating Member (150 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. More red flags! Average NY WPE: Bush 8.0 (1988,1992,2004); Clinton 0.6 (1996, 2000)
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 11:14 AM by WillE

You have challenged me to calculate how many machines would be needed to fix the vote but you have not addressed any one of those 13 Red Flags. Your question should be: How many corrupt election officials would it take?

This post will reveal two more very red flags:

a) 1988-2004: smoking guns in the NY exit polls (8.0 average wpe for Bush; 0.6 for Clinton)

b) an impossible 58% Bush share of returning Gore and Bush voters in the largest 15 (highly Democratic) NY counties was required in order to match the recorded vote

Its time to raise another red flag. It may be the reddest one of all. And yes, it also involves the exit polls that you love to hate 5 of them in fact. Lets review the 1988-2004 NY votes cast, recorded and the exit polls for some clues.

Maybe then you will understand why the unadjusted exit polls are indeed smoking guns. And why the final exit polls that are always forced to match the recorded vote are just smoke to hide the fraud.

First the bad news:
The average NY unadjusted exit polls diverged by a whopping 8.0% from the recorded vote (as measured by the WPE) when Bush Sr. or Bush Jr. was the incumbent (1988, 1992, 2004). Check the Edison-Mitofsky 2004 exit poll report.

Now for some good news:
When Clinton was the incumbent (1996, 2000) the average WPE was a minuscule 0.6%. Apparently, he didnt have to cheat. And the Levers matched the exit polls.Was it just a coincidence that the WPE was so divergent between the Democrats and the Republicans?

Apparently the Lever vote counts were quite accurate but NOT when a Bush was running for re-election. Now, why would you want to let good machine counts be compromised by bad people?

How many red flags are swinging in the breeze now?

Why would you not want to be confident that the votes were reported as cast? True, the Lever spoilage rate was a low 0.77% in 2004. But human ethical spoilage will always be quite high and election integrity quite low without true transparency.

Transparency can ONLY be achieved by either HCPB or a robust (99% confidence) audit of optically scanned ballots with results posted at the precinct and uploaded to the Internet for FULL data redundancy using OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE.

The weight of all the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Bush was able to achieve his bogus 3.0 million national mandate by reducing Kerrys NY margin by approximately 750,000 votes. .

Karl Rove must have read about Willie Sutton. NY was a lucrative bank to heist a few hundred thousand big ones. Kerry was headed for a 2.0m landslide by improving on Gores 1.7 million NY margin (60-35%). There were one million new highly motivated voters as well as 244,000 returning Nader voters, most of whom were ready to defect to Kerry.

But no one would notice it if Kerrys NY margin was 400,000 less than Gores? The media focused on the battleground states. NY was a foregone conclusion. Besides, Bush had his mandate.

1988-2008 NY Votes cast

Note: 1996 was the only election in which the Democratic recorded margin exceeded the exit poll (indicated by the positive +2.1 WPE).

1988 1992 1996 2000 2004
WPE -7.2 -4.6 +2.1 -3.3 -12.2

Cast 7174 7613 6830 7001 7618
Recorded 6456 6927 6316 6823 7391
Unct(net) 718 686 514 178 277

Dem Share (%)
ExitPoll 55.2 52.0 58.4 61.4 64.5
Recorded 51.6 49.7 59.5 60.2 58.4
Diff 3.6 2.3 -1.1 1.2 6.1

But there is more. Yes, another very red flag.
- Show quoted text -

An analysis of changes in the recorded vote in the 15 largest NY counties from 2000 to 2004 yields an interesting result that illustrates the implausibility of the Urban Legend.
It is very strong evidence that Bush padded his vote and suppressed Kerrys.

In 2000, there were 4.74 million recorded votes in the 15 counties.
In 2004, there were 5.27 million.

In 2000 Gore won the 15 counties by 64.2 - 31.3%, a 33% recorded margin.
Nader et al had 4.5%.

In 2004, Kerry won the counties by 61.8 36.9%, a 25% recorded margin.
Nader et al had 1.3%.

How did Bush increase his share by 5.6% in the 15 counties from 2000?
He couldnt unless you believe the implausible Urban Legend.

In order to achieve his 2004 recorded vote in the 15 strongly Democratic counties, Bush needed to win returning Bush and Gore voters by a 58.5-41.5% margin. In other words Bush needed a 17% margin among voters who gave Gore a 33% margin in 2000!

Assumptions:
1) 5% voter mortality of 2000 voters.
2) 98% turnout of LIVING 2000 voters in 2004.

3) Kerrys recorded NY share was 58%; he had 48% nationally.
Since he had approximately 57-62% of new voters, we can conservatively assume that he had 67% of NEW voters in the 15 largest NY counties.

4) Nationally, Kerry had a 64-17% margin over Bush among returning Nader voters.
We can conservatively assume he had the same margin in the 15 counties.

Based on the above conservative assumptions, Kerry had a 394k margin among 852k new voters and a 94k margin among 200k returning Nader/other voters.

Therefore Kerry had an estimated 488k margin in the 15 counties among new and returning third-party voters.

But Bush gained 461k total recorded votes over his 2000 total; Kerry just 208k
Therefore, Bush gained 253k net votes in the 15 counties.

Since Kerry led by 488k among new and returning third-party voters, Bush needed a 741k net gain (17% margin) among returning Gore and Bush voters who gave Gore a 33% margin in 2000. How could he have achieved this?

Let T= 4377 returning Bush (B) and Gore (G) voters.
B + K = 4377

Bush led Kerry by 741k in this group.
B = 741 + K

Solve for the required Bush and Kerry shares of returning Bush and Gore voters:
B = 2559 (58.5%)
K = 1818 (41.5%)

Election Day Recorded Vote Analysis (2000/2004)
Top 15 NY Counties Election Day Votes

(votes in thousands)


2000
Precincts Total Gore Bush Nader Gore Bush Nader
Brooklyn 1888 557 445 89 22 79.9% 16.1% 4.0%
Suffolk 1006 536 285 224 27 53.2% 41.8% 5.0%
Nassau 1070 554 319 214 21 57.6% 38.7% 3.7%
Manhattan 1100 522 410 79 33 78.5% 15.1% 6.3%
Queens 1470 512 380 115 17 74.2% 22.5% 3.2%

Erie 1007 384 218 143 22 56.8% 37.4% 5.9%
Westchester 948 306 179 115 13 58.4% 37.4% 4.2%
Monroe 792 300 152 133 15 50.8% 44.1% 5.1%
Bronx 912 279 240 33 6 86.0% 11.9% 2.1%
Onondaga 485 190 102 78 10 53.8% 40.9% 5.3%

Staten Island 333 133 69 60 4 51.8% 45.2% 3.1%
Albany 327 130 78 44 8 59.7% 34.0% 6.3%
Orange 284 118 54 58 5 45.8% 49.6% 4.6%
Rockland 250 117 65 47 5 55.9% 40.2% 3.9%
Dutchess 239 105 49 49 7 46.7% 47.1% 6.2%

Total 12111 4742 3045 1482 215 64.21% 31.26% 4.53%


2004
Total Kerry Bush Nader Kerry Bush Nader
Brooklyn 630 468 157 5.2 74.3% 24.8% 0.8%
Suffolk 618 303 302 13.3 49.1% 48.8% 2.1%
Nassau 597 312 279 6.0 52.3% 46.7% 1.0%
Manhattan 572 469 95 8.0 81.9% 16.7% 1.4%
Queens 559 398 157 4.7 71.2% 28.0% 0.8%

Erie 411 231 171 9.0 56.2% 41.6% 2.2%
Westchester 377 218 153 5.5 57.9% 40.7% 1.5%
Monroe 330 166 159 5.2 50.4% 48.1% 1.6%
Bronx 318 263 53 2.0 82.7% 16.7% 0.6%
Onondaga 199 107 88 3.5 54.1% 44.1% 1.8%

Staten Island 148 63 84 1.2 42.3% 56.9% 0.8%
Albany 136 82 51 2.6 60.2% 37.8% 1.9%
Orange 135 59 74 1.8 43.6% 55.0% 1.3%
Rockland 122 59 61 1.8 48.7% 49.8% 1.5%
Dutchess 114 53 59 1.8 46.5% 51.9% 1.6%

Total 5267 3253 1943 72 61.75% 36.89% 1.36%

Change
Kerry Bush Nader Kerry Bush Nader
Brooklyn 23.3 67.2 -17.1 5.2% 75.2% -76.6%
Suffolk 18.0 77.7 -13.7 6.3% 34.7% -50.8%
Nassau -6.7 64.5 -14.7 -2.1% 30.1% -70.9%
Manhattan 59.1 16.4 -25.1 14.4% 20.8% -75.8%
Queens 18.3 41.3 -11.9 4.8% 35.8% -71.9%

Erie 13.3 27.7 -13.5 6.1% 19.3% -60.0%
Westchester 39.5 38.9 -7.3 22.1% 34.0% -56.9%
Monroe 13.9 26.3 -10.2 9.1% 19.9% -66.3%
Bronx 22.8 19.7 -3.9 9.5% 59.4% -65.8%
Onondaga 5.4 10.1 -6.5 5.3% 13.0% -64.6%

Staten Island -6.2 24.3 -2.9 -9.0% 40.5% -69.8%
Albany 3.8 6.9 -5.6 4.9% 15.6% -68.0%
Orange 5.1 16.0 -3.7 9.5% 27.5% -67.0%
Rockland -6.0 13.7 -2.7 -9.2% 29.1% -59.6%
Dutchess 4.0 9.7 -4.7 8.2% 19.5% -71.7%
Total 207.5 460.6 -143.2 6.4% 23.7% -199.6%



Top 15 NY counties Election Day (Lever) votes

Total Kerry Bush Nader/other
2004 5267 3253 1943 72
61.8% 36.9% 1.4%

2000 Total Gore Bush Nader/other
4742 3045 1482 215
64.2% 31.3% 4.5%

Change 525 208 461 -143
% Chg 100% 39.5% 87.7% -27.3%
% incr 3.9% 8.7% -2.7%
____________________________________________

2004 Turnout of Top 15 NY county voters from 2000

2000 Total 4742 recorded
Died 237 5%
Living 4505 95%

Turnout 4415 98%
____________________________________________

New Voters

2004 Total 5267 recorded
Less 4415 turnout
New 852

To:
Kerry 571 67%
Bush 177 31%
Nader 4 2%

Kerry 394 net gain in new voters
____________________________________________

Nader/other 2000 voter turnout in 2004

2000 215
Died 11 5%
Living 204 95%
Turnout 200 98%

To:
Kerry 128 64%
Bush 34 17%
Other 38 19%

Kerry 94 net gain in Nader/other returning 2000 voters
____________________________________________

Returning Gore and Bush 2000 voters

Total 5267 recorded
Less:
New 852
Nader 38

Total 4377 returning Gore + Bush
____________________________________________

Kerry gain in new and returning Nader voters

New 394
Nader 94

Kerry 488 net gain
____________________________________________

Recorded vote gain from 2000

Kerry 208
Bush 461

Bush 253 net gain

Vote gain Discrepancy: 741
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
  -NY: Computer Tallies Can't be Trusted Wilms  Jul-26-09 09:57 PM   #0 
  - Its not that an accurate reliable machine can't be built....it's just easier to hide the fraud by...  yourout   Jul-26-09 10:17 PM   #1 
  - the risk is more limited with Lever, whereas with computer  WillYourVoteBCounted   Jul-26-09 11:28 PM   #2 
  - Important for NYers  clear eye   Jul-27-09 03:44 AM   #3 
  - New York Anomalies: 19 Levers stuck on Bush, none on Kerry (EIRS)  WillE   Aug-12-09 11:55 AM   #4 
  - So are you saying computer tallies CAN BE TRUSTED then?  Bill Bored   Aug-12-09 02:14 PM   #5 
  - Oh, and maybe you can explain how 19 broken machines out of 7,000 in NYC...  Bill Bored   Aug-12-09 02:46 PM   #6 
     - You have avoided the facts presented in the post and appear quite defensive.  WillE   Aug-13-09 12:22 PM   #7 
        - Damn right I'm defensive! Here's why:  Bill Bored   Aug-13-09 12:57 PM   #8 
        - Define Dem Share  Bill Bored   Aug-13-09 01:22 PM   #9 
        - Do you think that would be a lot of trouble and risk just to pad the popular vote?  Wilms   Aug-13-09 10:46 PM   #10 
        - 580,000 NY late votes; analysis of incidents, county size, Urban Legendand a response  WillE   Aug-14-09 11:57 AM   #11 
        - Everyone knows the problem, at issue is which is worse?  WillYourVoteBCounted   Aug-14-09 01:36 PM   #12 
        - Sorry, but you DO have to explain HOW the machines could have miscounted so many votes.  Bill Bored   Aug-14-09 01:48 PM   #13 
           - Sorry to waste your time with facts  WillE   Aug-14-09 03:52 PM   #15 
              - Are you going to answer my question or not?: How many lever machines had to be hacked...  Bill Bored   Aug-14-09 04:23 PM   #16 
        - A response and some questions for you  WillE   Aug-14-09 03:26 PM   #14 
           - well, there you go: unsupported dogma  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-14-09 04:24 PM   #17 
           - These reports sound like a Primary with separate Dem and Repub machines.  Bill Bored   Aug-14-09 07:44 PM   #18 
           - Thanks for using the word "believe". That's honest. Belief, while limited, is all we have.  Wilms   Aug-14-09 11:30 PM   #19 
              - Your comments indicate some confusion and a touch of desperation  WillE   Aug-15-09 12:17 PM   #20 
                 - Confusion? Projection?  Wilms   Aug-15-09 01:25 PM   #21 
                 - The raw data show that Bush didn't do better compared to 2000 in the precincts with the largest WPE.  Bill Bored   Aug-15-09 01:54 PM   #22 
                 - : Motive, Means, and Opportunity  WillE   Aug-17-09 01:52 PM   #24 
                    - I guess I'll stick to one or two odd claims per post  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-17-09 03:38 PM   #25 
                    - Oooooo!  WillYourVoteBCounted   Aug-20-09 01:57 AM   #41 
                       - the scary thing is, he still hasn't figured it out  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-20-09 05:31 AM   #42 
                    - Who said levers were "fraud proof"? Other than you claiming someone did, that is?  Wilms   Aug-17-09 10:57 PM   #26 
                    - The HNYVA of 1892  WillE   Aug-18-09 12:01 PM   #27 
                       - HCPB zombies don't seem to realize HCPB is not on the menu.  Wilms   Aug-18-09 10:27 PM   #35 
                       - No paper trail? How about NO RECOUNTS?  Bill Bored   Aug-19-09 12:39 AM   #38 
                          - Levers are the gold standard with an 11% WPE?  WillE   Aug-19-09 03:25 PM   #40 
                             - WPE is no standard at all.  Bill Bored   Aug-20-09 11:27 PM   #44 
                    - Too time-consuming to respond to all this but...  Bill Bored   Aug-19-09 12:10 AM   #37 
                       - There can be no stuffing of votes?  WillE   Aug-19-09 02:52 PM   #39 
                          - You think Open Source means Hand Counted or what?  Bill Bored   Aug-20-09 11:02 PM   #43 
                             - : Lets summarize an analysis of the facts. Warning: slow load.  WillE   Aug-21-09 03:28 PM   #46 
                                - "slow load"?! (snark redacted)  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-21-09 07:37 PM   #47 
                                - (crickets) n/t  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-09 03:51 PM   #54 
                                - Finally, something about Voting Systems!  Bill Bored   Aug-21-09 10:35 PM   #48 
                                   - More red flags! Average NY WPE: Bush 8.0 (1988,1992,2004); Clinton 0.6 (1996, 2000)  WillE   Aug-23-09 10:38 AM   #49 
                                      - Bush was running for reelection in 1988?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-09 12:03 PM   #50 
                                         - You need to take an algebra class  WillE   Aug-23-09 01:56 PM   #51 
                                            - oh, brother  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-09 03:46 PM   #52 
                                               - Deleted message  Name removed   Aug-23-09 05:38 PM   #55 
                                               - O RLY?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-09 06:02 PM   #56 
                                               - 1 was wrong. You were right. I know Bush was VP. Address the wpe anomaly  WillE   Aug-23-09 07:59 PM   #57 
                                               - I take that back. Another look at the top 15 NY counties and the Urban Legend.  WillE   Aug-24-09 07:20 AM   #58 
                                               - "I was essentially correct in my prior analysis." You were? And TIA?  Wilms   Aug-24-09 09:09 AM   #59 
                                               - "Hell, lets be honest: its impossible."  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-09 09:37 AM   #60 
                                               - There is much to refute here, but it's very easy to do. Just watch.  WillE   Aug-24-09 12:09 PM   #61 
                                               - it's boring to correct you over, and over, and over again  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-09 12:43 PM   #62 
                                               - That was a truly weak response - as expected  WillE   Aug-24-09 02:32 PM   #63 
                                               - "Kerry won ALL three exit polls"?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-09 02:54 PM   #64 
                                               - Here's a NY 2004 True Vote Sensitivity Analysis. Did you ever do one?  WillE   Aug-24-09 04:17 PM   #65 
                                               - all this is facially silly  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-09 05:00 PM   #66 
                                               - What's incredulous is your faith-based jargon and avoidance of analytical thought.  WillE   Aug-24-09 05:31 PM   #67 
                                               - "Now I know how Galileo felt."  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-09 05:38 PM   #68 
                                               - If you used exit polls in your "analysis " it was to thrash them n/t  WillE   Aug-24-09 10:02 PM   #71 
                                               - spoken like, yes, a fundamentalist  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-25-09 07:59 AM   #74 
                                               - Better things to do? Yes! Tell us how many lever machines would have to be HACKED to account for...  Bill Bored   Aug-24-09 09:35 PM   #69 
                                               - See post #49  WillE   Aug-24-09 09:59 PM   #70 
                                               - This is not about "trusting exit polls" . It's about considering ALL the evidence...  WillE   Aug-24-09 10:16 PM   #72 
                                               - How many machines was that again? nt  Bill Bored   Aug-24-09 11:21 PM   #73 
                                               - for your convenience...  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-25-09 10:12 AM   #75 
                                               - Thanks for bringing all this back in full view again  WillE   Aug-25-09 04:55 PM   #76 
                                               - "Do you have any proof that they weren't?"  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-25-09 06:02 PM   #77 
                                               - I accept your recession  WillE   Aug-25-09 08:26 PM   #78 
                                               - yeah, well  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-25-09 09:03 PM   #79 
                                               - No, I'm still here :)  Febble   Aug-26-09 05:30 PM   #80 
                 - wanna play "Urban Legend"?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-15-09 02:14 PM   #23 
                    - This will not make your day. It will spoil it.  WillE   Aug-18-09 12:19 PM   #28 
                       - you just aren't very good at analysis, apparently  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-18-09 01:51 PM   #29 
                          - Your disinformation campaign rolls on  WillE   Aug-18-09 03:56 PM   #30 
                             - sigh  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-18-09 04:54 PM   #31 
                                - Mr. Other, you have been exposed  WillE   Aug-18-09 05:34 PM   #32 
                                   - uh, no  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-18-09 07:47 PM   #34 
                                      - (crickets) n/t  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-09 03:50 PM   #53 
        - CORRECTION TO LATE NY PAPER VOTES; EXIT POLL COMPARISONS  WillE   Sep-01-09 07:12 PM   #145 
           - 4.5 years and you're still making "corrections". That's inspiring. n/t  Wilms   Sep-01-09 08:51 PM   #146 
              - You never have to correct a thing. Cuz you never do analysis. Very uninspiring.  WillE   Sep-01-09 10:24 PM   #147 
  - ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##  DU GrovelBot   Aug-18-09 05:34 PM   #33 
  - Well, we're gonna let an exit poll define your programming. OK, Grov?  Wilms   Aug-18-09 10:29 PM   #36 
  - The reality is we have had GOP election theft for decades . . . with complicity of corporate press .  defendandprotect   Aug-21-09 02:12 AM   #45 
     - Election Fraud is endemic. These TIA graphs debunk all the Disinfo.  WillE   Aug-27-09 12:17 PM   #81 
        - TIA FAQ: whined about, but never refuted  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-27-09 12:32 PM   #82 
           - You concede when all you can do you is cherry-pick  WillE   Aug-27-09 01:31 PM   #83 
           - I didn't cherrypick  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-27-09 02:15 PM   #85 
           - He refuted it in spades  WillE   Aug-27-09 01:43 PM   #84 
              - nope  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-27-09 02:30 PM   #86 
              - No point in trying to discuss? Of course, because you can't.  WillE   Aug-27-09 03:45 PM   #87 
                 - what point have I not responded to? be specific  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-27-09 04:07 PM   #88 
                    - Once again, you are hoisted on your own petard.  WillE   Aug-27-09 06:45 PM   #89 
                       - trash talk aside, you're wrong again  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-27-09 09:04 PM   #90 
                       - You conveniently ignore the analysis which refutes you  WillE   Aug-28-09 12:05 AM   #92 
                          - And I thought electronic vote counting schema was a pretty iffy way to determine outcomes.  Wilms   Aug-28-09 12:33 AM   #93 
                          - Distracted? Uh, this is a thread about why we should trust computers to count votes in NY, right? nt  Bill Bored   Aug-28-09 07:31 PM   #97 
                          - you're simply misrepresenting the PA exit polls  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-28-09 06:10 AM   #94 
                       - A FREE online book about Kerry's 2004 landslide  WillE   Aug-27-09 10:22 PM   #91 
              - TIA FAQ Response Summary Update - Includes 2008 reference  WillE   Aug-28-09 08:09 AM   #95 
                 - my double dog dare stands n/t  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-28-09 09:26 AM   #96 
                    - The analysis that you won't do proves you dead wrong once again. Your move...  WillE   Aug-29-09 09:19 AM   #98 
                       - sorry, you're still pwned  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-29-09 10:11 AM   #99 
                          - Your myths vs. the facts. Now show us your cherry-picked PA LV polls  WillE   Aug-29-09 11:33 AM   #100 
                             - Hmmm. "true activists are winning" you say.  Wilms   Aug-29-09 11:55 AM   #101 
                             - Show us your numbers and stop whining!  WillE   Aug-29-09 12:07 PM   #102 
                             - I'm whinning.  Wilms   Aug-29-09 12:17 PM   #104 
                                - Take your pick. Column A or Column B? Steak or Pork?  WillE   Aug-29-09 02:20 PM   #105 
                                   - Analysis is anything but black and white.  Wilms   Aug-29-09 02:31 PM   #106 
                                      - HS Litmis test?I have no problem with your having a problem...  WillE   Aug-29-09 03:04 PM   #108 
                             - It's time for you to recognize some facts.....  WillE   Aug-30-09 01:44 AM   #115 
                                - Gimme an example.  Wilms   Aug-30-09 02:07 AM   #116 
                                   - Strawman. You avoid my question and are putting words in my mouth.  WillE   Aug-30-09 02:19 AM   #117 
                                      - Don't be silly! Activism was a result of the radical Bush regime and FL 2000.  Bill Bored   Aug-30-09 03:25 AM   #118 
                                         - Activism was muted in 2001; it became widespread in Nov. 2004  WillE   Aug-30-09 09:58 AM   #119 
                                            - Ah, but most Dems in Congress voted FOR HAVA! They considered themselves to be reformers!  Bill Bored   Aug-30-09 08:46 PM   #120 
                                               - You just don 't get it, do you?  WillE   Aug-30-09 09:41 PM   #121 
                                                  - You're still not listening. And may well never.  Wilms   Aug-30-09 10:12 PM   #122 
                                                  - You avoid the content of the post.  WillE   Aug-30-09 10:34 PM   #125 
                                                  - Human Miscounts?  Wilms   Aug-31-09 01:00 AM   #134 
                                                  - I don't CARE what the polls say. They are just polls -- not voting systems.  Bill Bored   Aug-30-09 10:17 PM   #123 
                                                     - In fact, where are all the true-believers?  Wilms   Aug-30-09 10:28 PM   #124 
                                                     - Now it is clear...  WillE   Aug-30-09 10:45 PM   #127 
                                                     - I have no troops.  Wilms   Aug-31-09 01:03 AM   #135 
                                                     - You really DO have blinders on.  WillE   Aug-30-09 10:42 PM   #126 
                                                     - You wrote: "No one is contesting that the levers are accurate." Good! Then my work here is done.  Bill Bored   Aug-30-09 10:46 PM   #128 
                                                     - No, your work has just started..  WillE   Aug-30-09 11:11 PM   #129 
                                                     - Didn't Bush run in 2000?  yowzayowzayowza   Aug-30-09 11:22 PM   #131 
                                                     - Bush was NOT the incumbent in 2k. He was in '04. He had means, motive and opportunity.  WillE   Aug-30-09 11:35 PM   #132 
                                                     - Welp, at least we agree that it is a ...  yowzayowzayowza   Aug-30-09 11:51 PM   #133 
                                                     - but, WillE,  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-31-09 05:16 AM   #137 
                                                     - You either don't read or you quickly forget: Motive. Means. Opportunity  WillE   Aug-31-09 06:53 AM   #139 
                                                     - projection much?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-31-09 07:36 AM   #141 
                                                     - of course he can "have it both ways" -- think about it  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-31-09 05:06 AM   #136 
                                                     - You want to talk about "blind faith"? OK.  WillE   Aug-31-09 07:29 AM   #140 
                                                     - darling, you're in a panic  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-31-09 07:57 AM   #142 
                                                     - Show us YOUR numbers. Here is the NY True Vote analysis you WON'T DARE do.  WillE   Aug-31-09 08:59 AM   #143 
                                                     - as usual, you have no counter to ANY of my points  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-31-09 09:31 AM   #144 
                                                     - You really *are* an optimist!!! n/t  yowzayowzayowza   Aug-30-09 11:20 PM   #130 
                             - you didn't respond to any of my points  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-29-09 12:16 PM   #103 
                                - As usual, you are a no show  WillE   Aug-29-09 02:53 PM   #107 
                                   - care to try again in English?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-29-09 03:21 PM   #109 
                                      - Now about those LVs and Rvs- you have shown us NADA  WillE   Aug-29-09 03:54 PM   #110 
                                         - JIm Lampley on Bradblog in 2005  WillE   Aug-29-09 04:40 PM   #111 
                                         - Must Listen! Jim Lampley of HBO on Bradblog in May 2005  WillE   Aug-29-09 06:05 PM   #113 
                                            - I recall that interview. Was very happy to hear it.  Wilms   Aug-29-09 06:48 PM   #114 
                                            - here's an interesting part  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-31-09 05:19 AM   #138 
                                         - no, you haven't  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-29-09 04:56 PM   #112 
 

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