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 #11: David, rBr IS a hypothesis (a guess) , but can't be tested, so... [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 » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-01-05 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. David, rBr IS a hypothesis (a guess) , but can't be tested, so...
Edited on Sun May-01-05 08:11 PM by tommcintyre
it can't be used to explain the exit poll discrepancy.

You are right, proving the count correct (or incorrect) would be very useful. However, even if we had access to ALL the exit poll data, and were able to recount ALL the votes, I still doubt we could eliminate fraud or incorrect count, since 30% of the votes were on DREs. Many have no independent record so they can only regurgitate the same results. Others have been outright erased (New Mexico). And of those that produced a "paper trail", unless the voter confirmed the output, we can't be sure the paper wasn't produced AFTER the actual vote and modified.

One other point that shows just how weak the rBr hypothesis really is: Even if it were possible " prove the count correct thereby eliminating fraud or incorrect count as the culprit", it still would not prove the rBr hypothesis. Other hypotheses (guesses) could also be proposed and tested. The one(s) that held up best under testing would no doubt receive the most support as the possible explanation for the exit poll discrepancies.

Here are my original posts (and the replies) to my challenge of the validity of advancing the rBr hypothesis as an explanation for the exit poll discrepancies, since it can't be tested:
<Febble has replied to this post. I am revisiting the applicable documentation, and will respond to her post by tomorrow.>

Your related follow-up thread:

David, You say: "We have debated on this board for several days how an hypothesis, which can't be tested..." And: "Some argue that scientifically, rBr is technically not <it is> an hypothesis..."

If there are other threads/posts discussing this specific challenge to the rBr hypothesis, please let me know since I am developing a more formal argument. It would be nice to have more input on the idea. (As I asked you for two days ago (via PM).)

Your reply to my first post on the subject (first link above) was:

"You are on to something.

I don't think it can ever be tested. How are you going to use math or statistics to test what is in the mind of an unknown person?

The arguments I got to refute yours were really far fetched.


It would be useful to have a better idea what your friends actually said (especially if one of them you ran this past was Rick Brady ;) ). I await your reply.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform 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