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

Reply #37: First of all, there's no need to be so snarky and confrontational [View All]

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 » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. First of all, there's no need to be so snarky and confrontational
Edited on Mon Oct-31-05 01:30 PM by Time for change
I've never even communicated with you before, and you're making sarcastic comments to me.

Secondly, you are misquoting me. I did not say that 100,000 votes went for Bush instead of Kerry in Cuyahoga County. I'm suggesting that it appears that close to 100,000 are unaccounted for and may have been deleted electronically, not that they went to Bush.

With regard to the changing of precinct boundaries, I don't see what that has to do with any of my analyses. I am using data that was used to put together the DNC report, and at one point in this thread I made a comparison between the Hagan 02 vote and the Kerry 04 vote. In that comparison I used only precincts that, according to the file, had constant boundaries between 2002 and 2004, which includes the good majority of Cuyahoga precincts.

With regard to the absentee voters, I don't believe that that would affect the low turnout that I calculated for Cleveland, which is consistant with all other reports I have heard on that subject, but I will have to check that out.

With regard to your statement about the voter files in Cuyahoga County not being purged in 5 years, I take it that your implication is that the huge discrepancy between the NY Times report and figures released by Blackwell's office was due to legal purging of unqualified voters. That may be, and I said in my OP that that is a possibility. but I don't see what light your statement sheds on that. The discrepancies between Blackwell's figures and those reported by the NY Times apply not just to Cuyahoga County, but statewide. If you have specific information that indicates that the apparent massive purging of Cuyahoga County voters (as indicated by the discrepancy between the NY Times report and official figures) was legally and ethically justified, I'd appreciate your sharing it with us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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