Reply #28: You have me confused with someone else

[Mistwell]

I never said a word about your expertise on this matter. You must have me confused with someone else...again.

I said you and I agree that the MOE is concerning demographic data, but disagree about what "demographics" are included.

Are you saying I am wrong in that?

Mr. Mitofsky says that his count of the number of women who voted is correct...BUT NOT HOW THEY VOTED. ALL DATA ON HOW PEOPLE VOTED IS *NOT* INCLUDED IN "DEMOGRAPHICS".

It is not logical for you to keep pretending that you don't get this. You have intentionally misconstrued a single out of context sentence from Mitofsky to fit your own blatantly subjective agenda. You know damn well that how people voted cannot be obtained from the observers, but just from the poll questioners, and the poll questioners have a totally different MOE than the poll observers. Unless you think Mitofsky was able to hire pollserts who could TELL FROM SIGHT how people voted without even asking them...in which case I think even you would think the MOE was in error.

Do you really think you are persuading people with this game you are playing, misrepresenting the margin of error to force the numbers to fit your preconception that the poll proves fraud?

TIA, why don't you show me specifically where Mitofsky defines "demographics data" as including ANY element of how people voted...beyond your warping of his general statement to fit your personal definition of what the word "demographics" means. The methodology is published....show me where he says it.