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 #2: Yes, the NY late vote indicated a Gore bias. But there was NO Kerry bias in 2004. And 2008 ? [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 Thu Sep-03-09 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yes, the NY late vote indicated a Gore bias. But there was NO Kerry bias in 2004. And 2008 ?
You are right about the 2000 adjustment, it should not have been made.
In 2004, there was ZERO late vote bias.
All the more reason we should have the NY 2008 exit poll, yes?

But it does not take anything away from the full late vote analysis in NY and nationwide. Why anyone would give the post a negative rec? There is plenty of info here which has not been mentioned in the media. It just adds to the accumulated evidence that the election was stolen. Why would anyone on a Democratic forum be critical of evidence which supports their case?

Let's NOT just dismiss the late vote share CORRELATION to the 2004 state exit polls. There was a 0.72 correlation between late state vote shares and the exit polls. For states which had more than 40k late votes, the correlation statistic was a much stronger 0.93, as one would expect (see the OP).

Ok, let's remove the 2000 adjustment:
Gore had 65.4% of NY late votes.
In the NY 2000 unadjusted exit poll, Gore had 61.9%, Bush 33.5, Nader 4.6
Gore's late vote share was 3.5% higher than his exit poll share.
This indicates that NY late 2000 voters were biased in favor of Gore.

In 2004, Kerry won 64.3% of NY late votes.
His GEO exit poll share was 65.1%.
The late voter share matched to within 0.8% of the exit poll.
This indicates that there was NO late vote bias in 2004.

In 2008, Obama won 70.7% of NY late votes.
His recorded Election Day (lever) share was 62.2% and his
His total recorded share was 62.8%.
We don't have the unadjusted exit poll.
There is no 2008 exit poll report.

This is further evidence that the "pristine" exit polls were close to the true vote:
1) the high correlation between state exit polls and late vote shares
2) the small discrepancies between the exit polls and the late vote shares
3) the consistent pattern of a higher Kerry share of late votes compared to initial recorded votes

How does one explain the discrepancies between the initial and late recorded state vote shares? Kerrys late vote share exceeded his initial share in 38 states (15 of 19 battleground states). Corresponding vote discrepancies were significant in the East but near zero in the Far West, strongly suggesting election fraud in early-reporting, vote-rich battleground and BLUE states.

A false early impression was created that Bush was winning the popular vote while the state and national exit polls indicated that Kerry was winning. In the Far Western states there was virtually no difference between the 15.6m initial and 3.3m late recorded vote shares; Kerry was a steady 53% winner. But the Far West average exit poll WPE was 6.4%, indicating a 56% Kerry share. Was vote-padding still in effect?

Not a single media pundit has ever noted the following:
1) Final state exit polls and a mathematically impossible National Exit poll were adjusted to match the recorded vote.
2) Unadjusted pristine state exit polls were close to the True vote.
3) Final 5 million recorded votes were close to the True vote.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
  -Late Vote Smoking Guns: 2000-2008 WillE  Sep-03-09 01:50 PM   #0 
  - the crucial error appears to be here:  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-03-09 04:14 PM   #1 
  - Yes, the NY late vote indicated a Gore bias. But there was NO Kerry bias in 2004. And 2008 ?  WillE   Sep-03-09 06:17 PM   #2 
     - it seems to me that you are simply ruling out an obvious possibility  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-03-09 08:46 PM   #3 
        - It seems to me that you easily dismiss the very strong State Late vote vs. Exit Poll correlation  WillE   Sep-04-09 08:35 AM   #6 
           - it seems to me that you didn't read my post  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-04-09 09:04 AM   #7 
           - You see, the point is: the exit polls were RIGHT in 2004. Kerry really DID win.  WillE   Sep-04-09 12:23 PM   #8 
              - that's a claim, and your own evidence undermines it  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-04-09 04:44 PM   #9 
                 - You still believe that Bush won, "the greatest miracle of all"  WillE   Sep-04-09 07:16 PM   #10 
                    - this is yet another non-responsive post  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-04-09 07:43 PM   #11 
                       - I asked you for YOUR evidence. You resort to whining.  WillE   Sep-04-09 07:54 PM   #12 
                          - umm, is post #9 actually invisible, or what?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-04-09 08:48 PM   #13 
                             - Your obfuscation won't work. Late votes, exit polls and True votes INDEPENDENTLY expose you.  WillE   Sep-05-09 09:26 AM   #14 
                                - "what are you going to do, bleed on me?"  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-05-09 11:52 AM   #15 
                                   - You are in a state of pure panic; you are the one bleeding  WillE   Sep-05-09 08:03 PM   #16 
                                      - hahaha  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-05-09 09:27 PM   #17 
                                         - You are dreaming..  WillE   Sep-05-09 10:02 PM   #18 
                                            - do you have any substantive response to post #9?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-06-09 06:19 AM   #19 
                                               - Give us some names...  WillE   Sep-06-09 07:39 AM   #20 
                                               - do you have a substantive response to post #9?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-06-09 08:37 AM   #22 
                                               - Umm, did you read the reply in post # 14, or what?  WillE   Sep-06-09 08:19 AM   #21 
                                                  - any reader can verify that you simply ignored my points  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-06-09 08:49 AM   #23 
                                                     - Our evidence vs. your evidence  WillE   Sep-06-09 09:16 AM   #24 
                                                     - do you have a substantive response to post #9?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-06-09 09:57 AM   #25 
                                                     - Back in the USSR Quoting two Ruskies? Show us their evidence  WillE   Sep-06-09 12:12 PM   #26 
                                                     - WTF?! "two Ruskies"?! (oh... got anything on post #9?)  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-06-09 06:41 PM   #27 
                                                     - Now I see where TIA, er, Wile E., gets that punch card lever machine.  Wilms   Sep-06-09 06:55 PM   #28 
                                                     - Phillips would NOT have written the article if he knew that the NY exits were off by 12%...  WillE   Sep-06-09 07:28 PM   #30 
                                                     - Wow. Just wow.  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-06-09 07:37 PM   #31 
                                                     - OK. You failed logic. So I won't expect you to make sense of what I'm about to say.  Wilms   Sep-06-09 09:29 PM   #38 
                                                     - YOU speak of science? Your method is faith-based belief...  WillE   Sep-06-09 10:14 PM   #40 
                                                     - When you demonstrate a rudimentery understanding of lever machines  Wilms   Sep-06-09 10:28 PM   #41 
                                                     - Educate us, then, since you are such an expert...  WillE   Sep-06-09 11:14 PM   #42 
                                                     - Round and round you go, TIA.  Wilms   Sep-07-09 12:26 AM   #43 
                                                     - No, keeping the NY facts hidden is distracting...  WillE   Sep-07-09 07:13 AM   #44 
                                                     - What's it like being irrelevant?  Wilms   Sep-07-09 11:15 AM   #48 
                                                     - Love your ability to link and not think .. n/t  WillE   Sep-06-09 08:22 PM   #35 
                                                     - So where is their evidence?  WillE   Sep-06-09 07:17 PM   #29 
                                                     - you're asking for kindness?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-06-09 07:45 PM   #32 
                                                     - You replied just as WE ALL KNEW you would. With NOTHING.  WillE   Sep-06-09 08:06 PM   #34 
                                                     - "WE"? you and your imaginary friend? can he help out with post #9?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-06-09 09:10 PM   #36 
                                                     - So did Myagkov et al actually analyze the U.S. (S)elections? NO!  WillE   Sep-06-09 07:56 PM   #33 
                                                     - OK, this time you actually needed to read your own post  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-06-09 09:13 PM   #37 
                                                     - Hehe. Not good enough. DISPLAY AND EXPLAIN THE RELEVANT ANALYSIS.  WillE   Sep-06-09 09:47 PM   #39 
                                                     - this time you're not even going to admit your blunder?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-07-09 07:22 AM   #45 
                                                     - You just cut yourself off. You read the book? Then show us what you learned.  WillE   Sep-07-09 07:36 AM   #46 
                                                     - do you have a substantive response to post #9?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-07-09 07:44 AM   #47 
                                                     - Uhm, er, pardon. But TIA just used a bunch of all caps.  Wilms   Sep-07-09 11:17 AM   #49 
                                                     - hey, if he does it seven times, my exoskeleton will collapse  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-07-09 12:10 PM   #50 
                                                     - Do you have anything SUBSTANTIVE to say?  WillE   Sep-07-09 12:16 PM   #51 
                                                     - TIA, you are the "one-track agenda". And it's all about you.  Wilms   Sep-07-09 02:15 PM   #52 
  - K&R!!  Stevepol   Sep-04-09 03:52 AM   #4 
  - K&unR.  yowzayowzayowza   Sep-04-09 04:50 AM   #5 
 

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