Reply #122: Febble see post 114

[Bill Bored]

Here's the link:
<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=374482&mesg_id=375093&page=>

Can Warren explain why they had to readjust party IDs so radically, esp. on the Western region? Is there no way to see what the true turnout was among Dems and Repubs? How could these particular weightings have been so far off, especially in the West?

It was well known that there were Republicans for Kerry in 2004, even conservatives (because Bush is truly no conservative). Yet in order to get the polls to match the count, they had to depress the Democratic weighting and embellish the Republican one.

So where did all these Republicans come from, and what happened to the ones who voted for Kerry, and why did the Democrats apparently stay home, particularly in the West?

Could it be because the exit polls were released early and showed Kerry had it all locked up? Or is the whole thing just Warren's best guess to explain away the possibility of vote count corruption?

Frankly, I don't give a damn about reluctant responders! I care about the fact that these polls say my party didn't even bother to show up to vote and this after the biggest grass roots campaign effort in history! That's the issue. (And also that, unlike the Warrens of the world, I KNOW just how easy it is to swing elections on GEMS servers and the like.)

The burden of proof should be to show that this did NOT happen. If this exit poll data can help, then fine, otherwise it's junk.

I would like an explanation for the party ID thing though. That is quite unprecedented and unlike some of the other stuff being looked at, it sticks out like a sore thumb.