Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CENSUS DATA MATCHED NATIONAL EXIT POLL WEIGHTS(12:22AM, 13047 SAMPLE)

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
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-27-05 07:05 PM
Original message
CENSUS DATA MATCHED NATIONAL EXIT POLL WEIGHTS(12:22AM, 13047 SAMPLE)
Edited on Fri May-27-05 07:50 PM by TruthIsAll
Source: 
U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey,
November 2004.
		
More proof that the Exit Poll of 13047 Respondents at 12:22am
was accurate, contrary to what the die-hard naysayers have
been saying the last six months. 

And it's yet another indicator of fraud. 
According to the census, 125.7 million voted. 
That's 3.4 million (2.78%) over the recorded vote. 

Of course, spoiled Democratic votes is not news.
It happens all the time.

The Census closely matched the weights of the following
demographics:		
Gender	Census	Poll
Male	46.49% 46%
Female	53.51% 54%

Income		
15-30	12.08%	15%
30-50	20.58%	22%
50-75	20.02%	23%
100-150	13.55%	11%


Education							
Some College	30.96%	31%
College Grad	26.84%	26%							

GENDER	Total	Reg	Pct	NoReg	Pct	Voted	CENSUS	13047 POLL	

MALE							46.49% 46%	-0.49%
18+	103,812	66,406	64	37,406	36	58,455	56.3	
18-24	13,960	6,731	48.2	7,229	51.8	5,415	38.8		
25-44	40,618	23,403	57.6	17,215	42.4	19,913	49		
45-64	34,471	24,676	71.6	9,795	28.4	22,520	65.3		
65-74	8,438	6,534	77.4	1,904	22.6	6,119	72.5		
75+	6,325	5,062	80	1,263	20	4,489	71		
									
FEMALE							53.51%	54%	0.49%
18+	111,882	75,663	67.6	36,219	32.4	67,281	60.1		
18-24	13,848	7,603	54.9	6,245	45.1	6,224	44.9		
25-44	41,515	25,967	62.5	15,548	37.5	22,932	55.2		
45-64	36,544	26,984	73.8	9,560	26.2	24,807	67.9		
65-74	9,926	7,591	76.5	2,335	23.5	6,891	69.4		
75+	10,049	7,519	74.8	2,531	25.2	6,426	63.9		
									
									


INCOME
	Total	Reg	Pct	NoReg	Pct	Voted	CENSUS	POLL	DIFF
     161,927	108,796	67.2	53,131	32.8	97,352		

0-15						4,905	5.73%	9%	3.27%
15-30						10,337	12.08%	15%	2.92%
30-50						17,610	20.58%	22%	1.42%
50-75	30,179	22,824	75.6	7,355	24.4	20,559	24.02%	23%	-1.02%
75-100	18,123	14,389	79.4	3,734	20.6	13,434	15.70%	13%	-2.70%
100-150	14,905	12,250	82.2	2,655	17.8	11,600	13.55%	11%	-2.55%
150+	9,120	7,532	82.6	1,589	17.4	7,137	8.34%	7%	-1.34%
						85,582	100%	100%	
									
No Report
      24,723	13,105	53	11,617	47	11,771			




EDUCATION	
Total	Reg	Pct	Noreg	Pct	Voted	CENSUS	13047 POLL
	215,694	142,070	65.9	73,624	34.1	125,736	

<9gr  12,574	4,090	32.5	8,485	67.5	2,971	2.36%		
9-12	20,719	9,479	45.7	11,240	54.3	7,161	5.70%	4%	-1.70%
HSGrad
      68,545	42,180	61.5	26,365	38.5	35,894	28.55%	22%	-6.55%
Some								
College	58,913	43,434	73.7	15,479	26.3	38,922	30.96%	31%	0.04%

College Degree 
      36,591	28,158	77	8,432	23	26,579	21.14%		
PostGrad Studies				7,167	5.70%	
Total						33,748	26.84%	26%	-0.84%
								
PostGrad Degree
      18,352	14,730	80.3	3,623	19.7	14,210	11.30%
PostGrad (Total)				  21,375	17%		
	
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
chomskysright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-27-05 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. I sent it to Kathy Dopp:kathy@uscountvotes.org>
looks like another data point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-27-05 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. good idea n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-29-05 02:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. CHECK OUT THE TINY CENSUS MOE'S
Edited on Sun May-29-05 02:07 AM by TruthIsAll
The total vote of 125.736 mm is correct to within 0.30% at
the 90% confidence level (+/377,000 voters).

Note how close the given MoE is to the calculated MoE (within
0.02%) using the formula:
MoE= 1/sqrt(n), where n= population size (000)



				Census		MoE		
U.S.	Total	Pct	Pct	MoE	  (000)	1/sqrt(n)	Diff	
.Total	125,736	58.3	100%	0.30%	377	0.28%	0.02%	
								
.Male	5
       8,455	56.3	46.49%	0.40%	234	0.41%	-0.01%	
.Female
	67,281	60.1	53.51%	0.40%	269	0.39%	0.01%	

.White alone
	106,588	60.3	84.77%	0.30%	320	0.31%	-0.01%	

..White non-Hispanic alone
	99,567	65.8	79.19%	0.30%	299	0.32%	-0.02%	

.Black alone
	14,016	56.3	11.15%	1.10%	154	0.84%	0.26%	
.Asian alone
	2,768	29.8	2.20%	1.70%	47	1.90%	-0.20%	
.Hispanic (of any race)
	7,587	28.0	6.03%	1.20%	91	1.15%	0.05%	

.White alone or in combination
	107,930	60.3	85.84%	0.30%	324	0.30%	0.00%	
..White non-Hispanic alone or in combination
	100,726	65.7	80.11%	0.30%	302	0.32%	-0.02%	
.Black alone or in combination
 	14,324	56.1	11.39%	1.10%	158	0.84%	0.26%	
.Asian alone or in combination
	2,980	30.7	2.37%	1.70%	51	1.83%	-0.13%	
								
Table 4a. Reported Voting and Registration of the Total
Voting-Age Population, by Sex, Race and Hispanic Origin, for
States: November 2004								
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-27-05 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Why am I NOT surprised? So how will they attempt to explain THIS one?
It oughta be good for a laugh anyway. ;)

Well... it would be funny if it wasn't so damn serious to have a group of thugs steal your country, and now try to "make it permanent"!

:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babsbunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-27-05 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Send this to John Conyers!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
socal_dan Donating Member (45 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-27-05 11:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. Further investigations along these lines?
While this is good, are there data between the exit polls and actual polls that can be compared - aside from the presidential race?

EG - local races, etc?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
organik Donating Member (217 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-28-05 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. posted at http://electionfraudblog.com
I've posted this at http://electionfraudblog.com

TruthIsAll, is that OK?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-29-05 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Fine. And you can post the other two related census threads
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-28-05 01:09 AM
Response to Original message
6. Kerry gets 50.74%, within .06% of National Exit Poll
Edited on Sat May-28-05 01:13 AM by TruthIsAll
Using the gender split Male 46.49%/Female 53.51% and the voting percentages from the 13047 exit poll, the national results are within .06% of Kerry's 50.80% average of 10 demographics.

Total vote (000)
Female:67281
Male :58455

Total: 125736

Kerry:
Female vote: 54% *67281 = 36331
Male vote: 45% *58455 = 27473
Total: 63804 (50.74%)

Bush:
Female vote: 45% *67281 = 30276
Male vote: 52% *58455 = 30396
Total: 60672 (48.25%)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-29-05 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
10. KICK. What a remarkable conincidence. WDMS-what does Mitofskky say.
If he were a typical intellectual entrepreneur, he'd be doing back flips saying, "look how smart I am, pay me more, pay me more" and that wouldn't be a bad thing. These guys should be paid for being extremely bright and hitting their target. But nooooooo, he'll probably issue a press release talking about the rCr (reluctant Census Responder).

:yourock:

KICK

NEW LEADERS FOR A NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY!

Contact the DNC and Give 'em Hell About NOT Acting on Election Fraud
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Internut Donating Member (436 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-29-05 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
11. I don't get the significance -
So the Census closely matches the demographic info. It also closely matches the demographic information of the final, "tainted", exit poll - as you can see yourself at

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/U...

In fact, the demographic information in both "13047" exit poll and in the "13660" exit polls, at least the info that TIA's post is based on, is almost exactly the same in both exit polls. So if the census information matches one, it will match the other as well. What does that prove?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-29-05 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Of course you don't get it. You have no clue as to the TIMELINE
Edited on Sun May-29-05 03:36 PM by TruthIsAll
The only weights which we can check using Census data are from 13047 to final 13660: Gender, Education, Income, Race.

So we have shown that the underlying weights for those demographics which CAN be checked are CORRECT in the 13047 timeline, which Kerry won 51-48.

But what happened to Kerry's share of the gender vote?
THAT was changed from 54% in the 13047 to 51% in the 13660.

OK, Internut, you may ask: what about the How Voted in 2000 demographic?

That's not in the Census, unfortunately.
It's too bad.
BBUT WE DON'T NEED IT.
WE CAN ADD 2 + 2.

Because we KNOW know that the weight was off by over 3% (4 million votes) in the final 13660, when the Bush 2000 voter weighting was ARBITRARILY set to an impossible 43%.

It could NOT HAVE BEEN MORE THAN 39.8%. THAT IS THE MAXIMUM WEIGHTING FOR IT ASSUMES THAT ALL, 100%, TOTAL, 2000 Bush voters still ALIVE turned out to vote this time.

Do you know about that one?
Do you want to naysay it?
Cause if you do, you will surely be chagrined to say the least.

EVERY STATISTIC WHICH CAN BE CHECKED USING HISTORICAL DATA, WHETHER THE BUSH/GORE 2000 VOTES OR THE 2004 CENSUS SHOWS CONCLUSIVELY THAT THE FINAL EXIT POLL WAS MANIPULATED TO MATCH THE CORRUPTED BUSH VOTE.

BUT THAT'S NOT NEWS.
MITOFSKY HAS SAID SO ALL ALONG - THEY MATCH THE FINAL TO THE RECORDED VOTE, COME HELL OR HIGH WATER.

EVEN IF THE WEIGHTINGS AND PERCENTAGES HAVE TO BE CHANGED TO IMPOSSIBLE RATIOS DO IT.

I have been noticing you are new to DU, unles you have undergone a name change.

So, you are the Naysayer Du Jour.
Welcome aboard.
You will learn a lot here.
You will find your naysaying ways shall come to an early end, one way or another, as have all who have come before you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-30-05 05:55 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Edison-Mitofsky reminds me of the Ptolemaic astronomers in the Middle...
Edited on Mon May-30-05 06:07 AM by Peace Patriot
...Ages who kept building more and more elaborate machines to try to account for the eccentric orbits of the planets in a earth-centered system in which the orbits had to be perfect circles (because God wouldn't make imperfect orbits, nor would He place the earth anywhere other than at the center of all Creation), and the more detail they added, the more elaborate, complicated and bizarre the models became...until, one day, someone said, "Hey, wait a minute! This is too weird. What if we put the sun in the center and...".

I was thinking about their weighting the model by eliminating many women's votes late in the day in the final adjustment (to make it fit the official tally), and then making up this story about women voting early and fewer women voting later in the day, and all of this elaborate B.S. they had to use to make it that Bush won.

I mean, how can they DO that? It's just so bizarre. The official tally is not a fixed star. It is not the speed of light. And when you look closely at it (at the source of official tally data), it actually has no validity at all as the only constant in a world of variables. (Prove Bush won. You can't.) What they have done here is so BOGUS! It's as if a forensic scientist, convinced that a certain person is guilty of murder, were to keep splicing in other strands of DNA into a scene-of-the-crime DNA sample in order to come up with a DNA sample that matches the suspect and insures conviction.

Absurd, in other words. Wrong. Bogus. Tobacco science.

I repeat, HOW can they do this? How can this be valid? And just how far would they take this before they entered the realm of complete absurdity? Only Republicans voted after 6 p.m.--and no Democrats--because Republicans pick their kids up after school and take them to Little League practice, and everybody knows that Democrats don't do this?

What conceivable support could they put forward for a theory that less women voted late in the day? Or that more Republicans--including some dead ones--voted late, while Democrats voted early?

I've heard all the standard explanations, and, I'm sorry, but I'm a common sense person, and I don't give a crap for all this "polling expert" voodoo, all done behind the curtain (just like the election) to come up with a given answer. If this is standard practice (and it is NOT so in other countries), then U.S. exit polling has to be placed in the category of Ouija board "science" and Vatican astronomy.

THAT they did it this way--the fact that they fit the data to a predetermined outcome--IS the problem. We had an election that badly needed verification--because of the previous stolen election, and experts crying foul on electronic voting, and Bush buddies owning the secret source code, and Blackwell requiring voter registrations on 80 lb. paper, and RNC operatives shredding Democratic voter registrations in several western states--AND YET DELIBERATELY CHOSE *NOT* to verify, but rather to CONFIRM.

They being Edison-Mitofsky and those who hired them--all the news monopolies. This was a journalistic crime, in my opinion--and one of the first magnitude. It stopped cold any official protest or investigation. It was possibly even the deciding factor in Kerry's concession. It fooled millions of people--and possibly even some DNCers and others who should have known better.

It stunk. It stunk BIG TIME.

All this controversy, and mathematicians duking it out over this formula and that formula, and the creation of doubts and shadows and fanciful theories was UNNECESSARY and, I think, deliberate obfuscation--just like the election itself.

WHY ISN'T IT VERIFIABLE?
WHY ISN'T IT CLEAR?
WHO MADE THE DECISIONS *NOT* TO VERIFY?
WHO MADE THE DECISIONS THAT PLACED BOTH THE EXIT POLLS AND THE OFFICIAL TALLY BEHIND A "WIZARD OF OZ" CURTAIN?

One thing that IS clear: TIA and Freeman and Baiman and others have successfully exposed this election for the fraud that it was, and have done so in extraordinarily difficult circumstances--and despite every effort to thwart them by the Bushites, the pollsters and the news monopolies--through patient attention to THE FACTS, and courageous persistence.

But I think we should keep ever before our minds the fact that this SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE. And every time Mitofsky opens his mouth, he should be immediately asked: Why DIDN'T you seek to verify this highly compromised election system and check for fraud? Why DID you seek to confirm it?

And every time Bush opens his mouth, he ought to get a raspberry.

42% approval rating. Explain THAT away, Mitofsky!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-30-05 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Peace Patriot speaks the God's honest truth. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-30-05 01:09 AM
Response to Original message
13. kick.nt
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 26th 2014, 02:45 PM
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