Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Freeman's Response to the Mitofsky report came out yesterday.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Goldeneye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:05 PM
Original message
Freeman's Response to the Mitofsky report came out yesterday.
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 01:12 PM by Goldeneye
http://www.uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/US/USCountVotes...

Hope this isn't a dupe...I haven't seen it posted here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks! I didn't catch it yesterday. I don't at all mind duplicate...
...posts (especially inportant info like this), because things go by so fast here, and some of us sometimes have to do OTHER THINGS besides blogging at DU (like go to bathroom, eat meals, sleep, work for a living).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mhr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
2. Just Scanned The Report - Seems Mitofsky Has Been Nailed
The official lie totally discredited.

BTW - The report is only 5 pages long. That's short enough for even non-math types to wander through.

I'd like to see TruthIsAll's comments. It validates his analysis.

The election was stolen!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubleinwinter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. !!!! Thanks !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. Man, I just read this! Wow, wow and WOW!!!
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 01:28 PM by Peace Patriot
Count 'em, NINE PH.D'S calling for an investigation of the 2004 Election!

-------

"Summary

"As citizens in a democracy, we have an abiding interest in the integrity of the election process.

"The Edison/Mitofsky report confirms there were large differences between their exit polls and the official results of the 2004 presidential election much more so than in previous elections. The national exit poll indicated a 3 point victory for Kerry; whereas the official election results indicated that he lost by 2.5%, a difference of 5.5%.

"The Edison/Mitofsky report fails to substantiate their hypothesis that the difference between their exit polls and official election results should be explained by problems with the exit polls. They assert without supporting evidence that (p. 4), Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polls than Bush voters. In fact, data included within the report suggest that the opposite might be true.

"Their analysis of the potential correlation of exit poll errors with voting machine type is incomplete and inadequate, and their report ignores the alternative hypothesis that the official election results could have been corrupted.

"The Edison/Mitofsky report states (p.12), We need to do more investigation into the causes of the statistical skew in the exit poll data for the general election. USCountVotes agrees, and we suggest that that investigation extend to the official vote count tallies. In this context, USCountVotes affirms our mission to create and analyze a database containing precinct-level election results for the entire United States in order to do a thorough mathematical analysis of the 2004 election results.

"We invite all those who care about democratic processes in this country to join us in fully investigating and explaining what really happened in the 2004 Presidential election.

Contributors and Supporters include:

Josh Mitteldorf, Ph.D. - Temple University Statistics Department
Kathy Dopp, MS in mathematics - USCountVotes, President
Steven F. Freeman, PhD - Center for Organizational Dynamics, University of Pennsylvania
Brian Joiner, PhD - Prof. of Statistics and Director of Statistical Consulting (ret), University of Wisconsin
Frank Stenger, PhD in mathematics - School of Computing, University of Utah
Richard G. Sheehan, PhD - Department of Finance, University of Notre Dame
Elizabeth Liddle, MA - (UK) PhD candidate at the University of Nottingham Paul F. Velleman, Ph.D. - Department of Statistical Sciences, Cornell University
Victoria Lovegren, Ph.D. - Department of Mathematics, Case Western Reserve University
Campbell B. Read, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Department of Statistical Science, Southern Methodist University

Also Peer Reviewed by USCountVotes core group of statisticians and independent reviewers.

Press Contact: Bruce O'Dell, USCountVotes, Vice President bruce@uscountvotes.org

This document can be found here:
http://uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/US/USCountVotes_Re_...

------

Note to Goldeneye: This report should have a much stronger post title, like: "NINE PH.D'S CALL FOR FULL INVESTIGATION OF 2004 ELECTION!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dlaliberte Donating Member (168 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
23. Proof by contradiction that Kerry won
This is the main conflict:

"The Edison/Mitofsky report fails to substantiate their hypothesis that the difference between their exit polls and official election results should be explained by problems with the exit polls. They assert without supporting evidence that (p. 4), Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polls than Bush voters. In fact, data included within the report suggest that the opposite might be true.


I wonder if we could try in as many ways as we can to prove that Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polls, which is what Edison/Mitofsky should have done, and perhaps they did try and failed. If we could show that all the attempts fail, that would effectively prove the opposite, that in fact Kerry voters were not more likely to participate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #23
28. The main conflict...
The professors said, "They assert without supporting evidence that..".

So, it's not that "...perhaps they did try and failed." It's that they DIDN'T try, because their excuse for the exit polls being "wrong" was so lame to begin with.

"If we could show that all the attempts fail...". Why should WE have to do that? THEY made this ridiculous assertion "without supporting evidence."

And I don't think I agree that "This is the main conflict." It was a MANUFACTURED conflict--a silly attempt to cover their butts, which everybody and their brother then had to spend time debunking. (It reminds so much of BushCon "justifications" for the war on Iraq--they just assert ANYTHING, things with NO BASIS in fact, then everybody has to work FOR A YEAR to get all the evidence together that they LIED, that EVERYTHING THEY SAID was a lie. Meanwhile, 100,000-plus Iraqis are slaughtered by US bombs.)

The real main conflict:

The Exit Polls said KERRY WON.

vs.

The "official" BushCon controlled, secret, proprietary source coded "results" said Bush won.

and

The TV networks with Mitofsky's and AP's collusion ALTERED the Exit Polls on everybody's TV screens to fit the BushCon electronic "results."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #28
32. I see a different problem
You write: "The TV networks with Mitofsky's and AP's collusion ALTERED the Exit Polls on everybody's TV screens to fit the BushCon electronic 'results.' "

I accept that their was a problem with adjusting the polling. Once this is no longer the issue, then the issue becomes the final exit poll numbers.

So, the problem with the Mitofsky report is then framed differently. I see it as a business reporting to its clients, trying to cover their ***ews as best they can with what little they have ot can semi-plausibly conjure. Their motivation is to keep the money they were paid, avoid lawsuits for failure, and stay in business to make more money tomorrow. This is the Occam razor of the current situation.

That said, the Exit Polls still say Kerry won, plain and simple. Let's not obfuscate the central problem with a lot of diversions into 'conspiracy of everyone else' ideas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #32
40. I'm not sure I understand you L. Coyote
You say:

"I see it as a business reporting to its clients, trying to cover their ***ews as best they can with what little they have or can semi-plausibly conjure. Their motivation is to keep the money they were paid, avoid lawsuits for failure, and stay in business to make more money tomorrow."

According to Mitofsky they did fail. The exit polls didn't reflect the actual vote count (until a midnight adjustment to match the actual vote count was made).

If he were covering his *ss, he would say his exit polls were accurate from the beginning. That the vote count is wrong. Though he does admit there are some precincts that need investigation, his "job performance" would be better enhanced by him coming out and saying his polls are accurate from the start and the vote count is wrong.

I've always felt, especially since Faux propaganda was one of the media conglomerates that paid Mitofsky, that Mitofsky was paid to shut up and say he erred on his exit polls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #40
44. What he cannot say and what he can.
I'm inclined to think he wants to steer clear of the election fraud issue entirely, though it is clearly there between the lines.

He is showing the degree to which the vote count can be different than the exit polls due to their methods, etc. he is providing everything needed for the analysts to carry forward, and they obviously have in quick fashion.

Polls are never "accurate." They have margins of error, and we need to aways account for that. The report helps do that, providing a lot of information and data to consider and determine the actual error margin.

He never says that the degree of exit poll error can be entirely attributed to his work!!

They are trying to stay in business and avoid law suits, a delicate balance in a bad situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #32
42. Yes, I agree: Kerry won the exit polls.
He also should have won on a reasonable predictor of the election result (see Freeman's, below) and given Bush's dismal approval rating at the time of the election.

BUT, think about this...

Mitofsky chose to do a demographic poll, rather than a straight exit poll, and the first defense of the Bush election result was just that: it's demographic (soon debunked, because there is no reason in the world why asking someone who they voted for AND noting their sex or religion would yield inaccurate results on who they voted for).

So he handed them their first line of defense. (He later made up--out of whole cloth--the defense that R's were shy of pollsters, which the new US Count report just totally debunked, finding data in the exit polls that points to just the opposite, that the exit polls actually favored R's.)

Mitofsky could have done it differently. For instance...

--the US was testing out a new and highly controversial electronic voting system for the first time nationwide
--criticisms of the new voting system included its secret, proprietary source code running all the electronic voting machines AND the central tabulators, owned by Bush partisans
--Bush partisans in Congress had fought hard to PREVENT any verification and auditing procedures
--a third of the country was thus voting with no paper trail
--Bush had stolen a previous election
--exit polls are used worldwide to verify elections and check for fraud

This situation CRIED OUT FOR a clean, straight, non-doctored exit poll to VERIFY THE ELECTION and to ALLAY SUSPICIONS of this new system. Why didn't he do it? Why, instead, did he muddy it up with demographics, and later basically lie that the poll was skewed to Kerry?

Hm?

----

In Steven Freeman's second paper on the exit polls (which is now off the Internet because it is to be published as a book in May), he does a prediction of the vote, based on the base vote going in (who voted in 2000), the big switch of Nader voters to Kerry, and new voter registration (which greatly favored Kerry), and finds a 4 million vote discrepancy (actually 8 million, if you add the Bush/Kerry discrepancies together). Kerry should have won by something like 4 million to 8 million votes. Since this Freeman paper has been around DU in draft form, I think it's okay to provide just this excerpt. To read Freeman's first report, or to request the second, go to: http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm

Table 2.2. Expected Presidential Votes based on Changes From the 2000 Election

----------Dem (G or K)---------Bush ------------3rd Party--------Tot

2000:----50,999,897 (48%)---50,456,002 (48%)---3,949,201 (4%)---105,405,100
2004:----57,890,314 (48%)---61,194,773 (51%)---1,170,071 (1%)---120,255,158

Increase:---6,890,417--------10,738,771----minus(2,779,130)-----14,850,058 (14%)


(Distributing the votes on a reasonable expectation formula:)

(1) 95%
of 00 vote----48,400,00------47,900,000---------3,800,000------100,000,000

(2) 3rd
Party -----2,300,000 (64%)------600,000 (17%)
-----------------------------------------------New voters: 20,200,000

(3) New
Voters
distrib'ed ----11,500,000 (57%)---8,300,000 (41%)

Expected
Total --------62,200,000-------56,800,000


Discre-
pancy --------(4,300,000)-------4,400.000


Freeman explains this very simply in his section entitled, "The Numbers Dont Add Up." He says that, in 2000, Gore won the popular vote by more than half a million, but in 2004, Bush beat Kerry by 3.3 millionyet there were only two major changes in the voting population: 1) the 3rd party vote declined by 2.8 million, and 2) get-out-the-vote campaigns. 95% of the 2000 electorate voted in the 2004 election. That gives Kerry a base of 48.4 million (Gore voters), and Bush 47.9 million. Election night polls showed that Kerry got 64% of ex-Nader voters (2.5 million) and Bush got only 17% (600,000). In 2004, Dems beat Repubs in new voter registration by 57% to 41%. And when you add these three blocks of voters togetherthe base vote from 2000, the 3rd Party vote, and new voter registration"it looks as though Kerry somehow received 4,300,000 votes less than he should have, and Bush somehow received over 4,400,000 votes more than he should have."

-----

Surely Mitofsky knew this. These stats are public knowledge, and he is a pollster, after all. And surely he knows that his exit polls were right, and the official result was wrong. And surely he knew this on election night, but still, perhaps under the pressure of the war profiteer networks--and who knows what other pressure?--went ahead and ALTERED the onscreen exit polls to fit the official results, or acquiesced in AP and the networks doing so.

I think it was an unforgivable act of irresponsible journalism on all their parts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #42
47. The third call numbers are not accurate
Edited on Tue Feb-01-05 08:53 PM by L. Coyote
You write, "went ahead and ALTERED the onscreen exit polls to fit the official results..."

You do not need to argue a case for the incorrectly weighted 2nd call numbers being altered, or accuse anyone of doctoring the numbers. The third call numbers are off.

The issue is not, "Were the numbers altered?" They were reweighted. So what? The real issue is, "The exit polls are wrong!"

The exit polls DO NOT fit the results. Hence, they were not altered to fit the results. Why has this ALTERED smokescreen gone up anyway? It is a distraction from the central fact, the exit polls do not agree with the vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Helga Scow Stern Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
5. Yes, yes, and YES!
Thanks for posting. I didn't see it earlier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skids Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
6. I feel so... validated.

That paper pretty much sums up the reaction I had to the NEP report exactly.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
7. kick this for Freeman's fantastic response to Mitofsky report n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaulVB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
8. This is absolutely damning for Mitofsky!
And the list of experts working on it keeps growing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I've never had much love for "experts." I've seen too much "expert" B.S..
...on how dismantling of the environment is actually good for the fish and the birds. But I'm loving them right now! This is what we need...

a

lo-

o-

o-

o-

o-

-ong list of Ph.D.s!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rdmccur Donating Member (622 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
10. Kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
11. I read the Mitofsky report and said "this is bullshit." These folks
say it so much better, but the bottom line is the same. Mitofsky's report is bullshit written to support a conclusion that had been decided in advance.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. yep...
but, short of God coming down and proclaiming on national television that there was fraud, nothing will convince the masses. i mean how much more evidence do people need? blah... anything good going on in the world we can use as a sedative for a few hours?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. More of the "masses" voted for Kerry than voted for the moron-in
-chief. They know who they voted for but have been snowed into thinking they are in the minority. The media is busting its ass to keep people in the dark.

History, at least in free countries, will record that * stole two elections in a row. For now though, even if a majority of the people in the country were convinced the election was stolen, what could they do about it? Sue? Quit paying taxes? Hold our breath until we turn blue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spiffarino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
13. Kick in honor of TruthIsAll
Thanks for not giving an inch. You nailed it, buddy.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dalloway Donating Member (744 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
14. I'll second that--Kick in honor of TIA !! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaulVB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
15. And I proudly join the motion, for TIA (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidgmills Donating Member (651 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #15
24. Count me in
TIA the vindication is coming every day. It just keeps trickling in.

Keep it up prodigious man.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
passy Donating Member (780 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
17. kick to keep it high
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seaclyr Donating Member (182 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
18. another kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
19. Very interesting report. Thanks for posting!!!!
When I read Mitofsky's report, I was dumbfounded by how quickly he jumped to conclusions without proof. And here Freeman and numerous other Phd's say it so much better than I. The report you posted is clear, it is precise, it is convincing.

This is one scary country, where people can vote and have their votes disappear overnight. Where the "Free Press" ignores the rigged election and pretends everything is all right. We are living in a strange and surreal world. At least some of us are not taken into bizarro world. Keep being the voice of reason. Truth will always win out in the end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #19
33. You write, "Truth will always win out in the end. "
Only if enough people are vigilant. There are powerful forces vying for political control. I'm not so optimistic.

What happened to the Truth of 2000? Gore won the election and the popular vote, that's the unquestioned truth today, but power won out!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. When I say the end, I mean the bitter end.
Not five or ten years from now, but in about twenty, people will be talking about this in history books and wondering why all the citizens didn't get up and revolt. I felt that way when I read about some of the slavery and Jim Crow laws that were passed off as legal. But we have some hard, hard times ahead.

You know what really freaks me out? I write Science Fiction for a retirement income and if I had written this out, as if it were a story, people would read it (because I'm just a good writer :)). But they would think it could never happen in America. When I read Freeman's paper, it just sort of hit me like I was living through one of my Science Fiction stories. I would never have believed the media could turn into such a tool of the right and that most people would have taken the obvious theft of the election so passively. It just strikes me as bizarre how Americans are so willing to assume everything is all right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaulVB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
20. Kick (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anaxarchos Donating Member (963 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
21. Excellent... and cheers to L. Coyote and other posters...

who picked up the same issues (even more in some cases).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Freeman PLUS ++ This report is by a team of independent statisticians
Freeman is co-author with eight others:

A Ph.D. Professor Emeritus in Statistical Science Dept.
3 Professors with Ph.D.s working in Univ. Statistics depts.
2 Ph.D.s and an M.S. in Math,
2 other Ph.D.s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
25. Has anyone sent this to Conyers?
He's probably seen it already, but it would be nice to know for sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
operafred Donating Member (62 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
26. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihelpu2see Donating Member (935 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
29. Great paper, Im sure the MSM will be out in masses to
report the findings......oh im sorry this is not the Ukrain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
30. Yes, what a vindication this is for TIA, after all his work on this and
...related issues--and under relentless attack from all corners of the mosh pit. Hats off to you, TIA!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. Actually, its apples and oranges
This is about a different set of numbers than those used by TIA.

And the fact that the third call number do not withstand scrutiny is a more powerful and reasonable argument (than one using the numbers TIA uses).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buddysmellgood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
35. I read Freeman's response and have generated the following summary:
Mitofsky and company are full of shit. The problem with the exit polls, as Mitofsky sees it, is that too many Kerry supporters actually voted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. They are not commenting on the election
and they may actually be saming more between the lines than elsewhere.

Given that they show that the causes of inaccuracy are insufficient to account for the discrepancy, what are they really saying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
37. Nashua Advocate blogging the report
Edited on Sun Jan-30-05 03:21 PM by L. Coyote
"
"We invite all those who care about democratic processes in this country to join us in fully investigating and explaining what really happened in the 2004 Presidential election."

Who does this sound like to you?

Cliff Arnebeck? Bob Fitrakis? Some other progressive activist?

John Kerry? Ted Kennedy? Some other person with much to gain from the overturning of the 2004 presidential election?

Open your eyes, America.

There is disorder in your house.

And it is found not in the speculation of agitators, as some have told you; or in the theories of lunatics, as some have posited; but in the analysis and wisdom of the nation's brightest and most articulate citizens, who speak to you now in the plainest terms to say that a wrong has been perpetrated upon you and must not be allowed to stand.
"

http://nashuaadvocate.blogspot.com/2005/01/breaking-new...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaulVB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
38. This report shows the election was stolen (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
39. The response Press Release online now .. USCountVotes
The so-called "Freeman's Response" is the USCountVotes response, with Freeman and 8 other prominent authors. The Press Release came out minutes ago, so watch the MSM today. :-)

"
Prominent Statisticians Urge Investigation of 2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results by Kathy Dopp January 31, 2005

Prominent Statisticians Refute 'Explanation' of 2004 U.S. Exit Poll Discrepancies in New Edison/Mitofsky Report.

President Bush won November's election by 2.5% yet exit polls showed Kerry leading by 3%. Which was correct?

"There are statistical indications that a systematic, nationwide shift of 5.5% of the vote may have occurred, and that we'll never get to the bottom of this, unless we gather the data we need for mathematical analysis and open, robust scientific debate.", says Bruce O'Dell, USCountVotes' Vice President.
"

"
The statisticians go on to note that precincts with hand-counted paper
ballots showed no statistical discrepancy between the exit polls and the official results, but for other voting technologies, the overall
discrepancy was far larger than the polls margin of error.
"

http://www.uscountvotes.org/index.php?option=com_conten...

SUPPORT THESE PEOPLE! -- VOLUNTEER -- JOIN MAILING LISTS -- DONATE

USCountVotes, a nonprofit, non-partisan Utah corporation was founded in December 2004. Its mission is to create and analyze a database
containing precinct-level election results for the entire United States; to do a thorough mathematical analysis of the 2004 election results; and to fully investigate the 2004 Presidential election results. USCountVotes actively seeks volunteers and accepts donations to help make this unprecedented civic project a reality visit
www.uscountvotes.org for further information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. New Press Release lists authors with credits:
Response to Edison/Mitofsky Election System 2004 Report,
co-authored by a diverse group of professors and academicians
specializing in statistics and mathematics.

The USCountVotes team included:

Josh Mitteldorf, Ph.D., Temple University Statistics Department;
Kathy Dopp, M.S. in mathematics, USCountVotes President;
Steven F. Freeman, Ph.D., Visiting Scholar & Affiliated Faculty, Center for Organizational Dynamics, University of Pennsylvania;
Brian Joiner, Ph.D., Professor of Statistics and Director of Statistical Consulting (ret), University of Wisconsin;
Frank Stenger, Ph.D. Professor of Numerical Analysis, School of Computing, University of Utah;
Richard G. Sheehan, Ph.D. Professor, Department of Finance, University of Notre Dame;
Elizabeth Liddle, M.A. (UK) Ph.D. candidate at the University of Nottingham;
Paul F. Velleman, Assoc. Professor, Ph.D., Department of Statistical Sciences, Cornell University;
Victoria Lovegren, Ph.D., Lecturer, Department of Mathematics, Case Western Reserve University;
Campbell B. Read, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus, Department of Statistical Science, Southern Methodist University.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
43. It sure looks like all of us crazy conspiracy people
are not crazy and are not sore losers. We are very sore winners.

FU to all that manufacture reality. If it quacks like a Duck I guess that means it's a Bush victory huh?

I'm stunned and feeling vindicated and stunned and sad that we have such rotten press and defenders of Democracy.

To read that Bush voters were MORE represented is the salt in the wound. So make up reality and have the press agree. It works in America 2004/2005. Bush (the fake President-the fake religous man-the fake everything) makes up reality everday.

And we are expected to go along or they call US crazy.

Nice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClintCooper2003 Donating Member (629 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
45. Holy f**king s**t!
Steve is the man!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaulVB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
46. Kick (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 19th 2014, 01:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 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