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 #63: That was a truly weak response - as expected [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
WillE Donating Member (150 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #62
63. That was a truly weak response - as expected
I note that despite your handwaving about "cherry-picked pre-election polls," you don't have any to support your version of what happened in New York. I accept your concession.
What concession?
Will you concede that Kerry won ALL three exit polls by 64-65%

I note that you have no substantive response to the Texas sharpshooter issue. I accept your concession.
What concession?
Texas Sharpshooter? Have you lost it?
Are you sure you want to continue?

Will you concede that Bush had Texas in the bag?
And that the 2000 exit polls were very close to the recorded vote?
Where's the beef?

I note that you have no explanation of why Vice-President Bush would be able to rig votes in New York, nor of why he wouldn't be equally able to rig votes in other states (such as PA) that had small WPEs. I accept your concession.

What concession?
There you go, cherry-picking again.
What makes you think he didn't?

Concede this:
In case you didn't know it, there were 10.6 million uncounted votes in 1988.
If 75% were for Dukakis, that lowers Bush's margin by 5 million.
And Dukakis was very close to Bush in the preliminary exits.

I note that while you, selectively, regard Bush Sr.'s quasi-"incumbency" in 1988 as highly significant, you attach no significance whatsoever to the fact that Bush Jr. was governor of Texas in 2000. You didn't concede anything there, so I'll just gape in amazement.

That is very lame. So what if Bush was the governor.
Did that gave him control of Clinton's prosecutors? Bush cleaned house in 2002.

Clinton was the incumbent in 2000.
The exits were close to the recorded vote.

You seem to have a mental block:
The aggregate (national) state exits favored Gore by a 2.0 WPE - a 1.0% vote share deviation. That's within the 1.5% national MoE.

The NY exits favored him by a 3.3 WPE - a 1.6% share deviation.
That's within the NY 2.5% MoE.

The unadjusted NY WPE was calculated by the exit pollsters using three methods:
Method WPE
IMS 12.2
VNS 11.4
DSS 11.9

The question is:
What happened in 1988, 1992 and 2004 when the average WPE was 8.0?
That is equivalent to an average 4% vote share deviation, far outside the NY 2.5% MoE.

In case you didn't know it, there were 5.4 million net uncounted votes in 2000.
If 75% were for Gore (as they probably were) that would account for the small WPE

Bush knew he didn't stand a prayer in NY.
He expected to lose the national popular vote to Gore
He wasn't thinking about a "mandate". He needed that in 2004.
He knew he had to steal it in in the battleground states.
He was focusing on Florida and Ohio and New Mexico and Iowa and New Hampshire.
He barely won NH. Had he lost the 4 EV, Gore would be president.

That's why he needed to pad his vote count in 2004.
He couldn't have a repeat of 2000 where he lost the popular vote by 540,000 officially.
But he would have lost by 3 million had all the votes cast been counted.

Again this is not for YOUR benefit.
It's for everyone else who is interested in a rational analysis of the factual data.
They have all they need in this thread to judge the facts vs. "creationism".

Of course, you will reply to this post with your usual "stuff".I would like to use a stronger word than "stuff", but I had better not.

You called TIA's graphs "crappy".
I won't respond in kind and call your "analysis" crappy.
That's because you have not even done an analysis.

You have made your (very weak) case.
So why continue?

Let's just call it quits.

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