Reply #40: PERHAPS THIS WILL CLEAR IT UP. PLEASE RESPOND EITHER WAY.

[TruthIsAll]

YOU:
"I agree with all you have said - but perhaps I do not follow exactly the argument being made"

The argument being made is this:
THE FINAL EXIT POLL DEMOGRAPHIC CATEGORY OF "HOW THEY VOTED IN 2000" WAS WEIGHTED USING AN IMPOSSIBLE NUMBERS (43%-37%) TO MAKE IT APPEAR THAT BUSH WON, EVEN IF IT MEANT ONE HAD TO IGNORE THE FACTS OF HISTORY BY OVERSTATING THE BUSH 2000 VOTE BY OVER 2 MILLION (4%) IN ORDER TO FORCE THE FINAL 2004 EXIT POLL TO MATCH THE RECORDED VOTE.

IF THIS WAS DONE WITH A VERIFIABLE DATA SOURCE (THE 2000 VOTE), THEN WE HAVE TO ASSUME THAT OTHER ARBITRARY ADJUSTMENTS HAD TO HAVE BEEN DONE TO ALL THE OTHER UNVERIFIABLE DEMOGRAPHIC WEIGHTS, AS WELL.

YOU:
"I thought it was that the FINAL 2004 percentages as per 2004 questionnaire and Mitofsky weighting in 2004 do not reflect 2000 election history".

THE WEIGHTINGS DO NOT REFLECT 2000 HISTORY, BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE.
SINCE MITOFSKY ADJUSTED THE WEIGHTINGS TO MATCH THE 2004 RECORDED VOTE WITHIN 14 HOURS AFTER THE POLLS CLOSED, THEN HE ALSO HAD TO MATCH TO THE 2000 VOTES FOR THIS CATEGORY.

THIS WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO QUESTION THE NUMBER, BUT HE DID NOT DO SO, AND IN FACT RAISED THE NUMBER FROM 41% TO 43% (WHICH WAS IMPOSSIBLE) WHEN HE SHOULD HAVE LOWERED IT.

THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR RAISING THE 41% NUMBER, WHICH IS ALSO OBVIOUSLY TOO HIGH TO BEGIN WITH, SINCE APPROXIMATELY 1.75 MILLION BUSH 2000 VOTERS DIED, BASED ON ANNUAL DEATH RATES - THAT MEANS THAT IT HAD TO BE UNDER 40%. THAT IS THE ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF BUSH 2000 VOTERS WHO COULD HAVE VOTED IN 2004.

BUT 40% MUST ALSO BE TOO HIGH, BECAUSE IT ASSUMES THAT NOT A SINGLE LIVING BUSH 2000 VOTER STAYED HOME IN 2004 AND DID NOT VOTE.