Reply #4: TIA: have you seen this? Any thoughts? It was posted earlier today

[bleever]

on another thread by jwmealy and seemed very interesting to me:


"My studies of the pattern of "red shift" between the latest exit polls on Nov. 2 and the final tabulated results nationally led to the following spectacularly daring prediction:

For every state in which the disrepancy between last-thing Nov. 2 consortium exit polls and tabulated results for red shift or negative blue shift is greater than the margin of error, the following equation will be true:

Red Shift + Final Spread + 1 > Greatest Recorded Red Shift for the 51 States.

This prediction proved true in all 18 cases without exception.

This result could never attain unless there were an engineered result to the election in most or all the states whose red shifts exceed the margin of error. Some piece of software was keeping tabs on the accumulating results for each of these states as they came into the central tabulation database, and incrementally altered percentages so as to keep Bush ahead by 1% until one of two conditions applied: (1) Bush was projected to win by 1% or more, or (2) the amount of intervention required to give Bush the win by 1% exceeded a certain parameter, hypothetically 5.6%, which is the amount of red shift of Vermont, the highest recorded for the 50 states plus WDC.

Please hold on to this information, and if you don't hear more from me, give it to the professional statisticians. Other statisticians will confirm its significance, if I don't. In a word, this is proof. As a quick check, I have run 3000 randomized election outcomes for those 18 states within the general spread and red shift parameters observed for the group, and not one of them has come up with a result of zero exceptions to the prediction."