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 #34: Well Febble thats great.... [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 locked.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
althecat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #29
34. Well Febble thats great....
Edited on Fri Jun-15-07 08:40 PM by althecat
Lots of stuff about how much you know about exit polls.

Then the nub of your argument:

"My point is that if the anomalies were due to fraud in particular places - if, in other words, that Bush's anomalous looking increase in vote-share among some demographics was due to vote-switching, then it implies that the fraud was non-uniform. It happened in some places, but not others. Yes? Now, fraud will tend to produce a discrepancy between the poll and the count. And the greater the fraud, the greater the discrepancy will be. In addition, the greater the fraud, the better Bush will tend to do than expected on the basis of his 2000 vote share. So, IF we found that in just those precincts where the discrepancy was greatest, Bush's gains were greatest, and that he did relatively badly in those precincts where the discrepancy was least, or, indeed, apparently biased the other way, then that would be strong support for the fraud hypothesis. The trouble is that there isn't even a hint of that pattern. There is absolutely no tendency, observable in the data, for Bush to do better where the discrepancy was greater, or worse where it was less.

Which is essentially: "I have looked at this already. Made some erroneous assumptions about what I am looking for and how to discern it. And concluded that there is nothing to see."

We already know all that Febble. You have already told us this.

What you need at this point is some new material.

Your final para deserves a rebuttal of its own.

In the meantime a question.

Why do exit poll analysis skeptics in DU hunt in packs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | 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