A Conversation about the 2004 Election ( TIA )

[tiptoe]

A Conversation about the 2004 Election
TruthIsAll     http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/Conversation2004.htm

What can we say about Election 2000?
Gore won the popular vote by 540,000.
According to the Census, 110.8 million votes were cast but only 105.4 million recorded.

So 5.4 million votes were uncounted?
You are very quick.

Approximately how many uncounted votes were for Gore?
About 4 million, given that 70-80% of uncounted ballots are Democratic in every election.

So if all the votes were counted, Gore would have won by around 3.0m votes.
That sounds about right.

How many votes were cast in 2004?
According to the U.S. Census, 125.7 million were cast.
But only 122.3 million were recorded, so 3.4m were uncounted.

Who voted in 2004?
Two groups:
1) Those who did not vote in 2000 (DNV)
2) Those who voted in 2000 for Gore, Bush, Nader/other.

Did all Election 2000 voters come to the polls in 2004?
No, some died and others did not vote.

Can we estimate how many Election 2000 voters died?
About 5.4 million died, assuming a 1.25% annual voter mortality rate.
So 105.4m were still living in 2004.

Can we estimate how many of them voted in 2004?
About 100 million (95%) returned to vote.

Doesn’t that mean that there were about 25.7 million new voters?
Your math is correct.

Do we know how they voted?
Based on the National Exit Poll (NEP):
New voters were for Kerry by almost 3-2.
Nader/others (3.5m) were for Kerry by better than 3–1.

What about Gore 2000 voters?
They knew they were robbed in 2000.
According to the NEP, 91% of Gore voters were for Kerry.

What about Bush 2000 voters?
They gave him a higher rating than his 48% national approval.
According to the NEP, 90% of returning Bush voters voted for Bush in 2004.

Then it’s obvious that Kerry must have won the election because
a) Returning Gore voters outnumbered returning Bush voters;
b) Nader/other voters were solid for Kerry;
c) New voters were solid for Kerry.
Not necessarily.

But Kerry won the NEP by 51–48%. Doesn’t that confirm all the above?
Not really. You are citing the Preliminary NEP ( 13047 respondents, randomly-selected, 1% MoE ).
Bush won the Final NEP (13660 respondents) by 51–48%
The Preliminary NEP was biased in favor of Kerry.
Bush voters were less likely to be interviewed than Kerry voters.

But the Final NEP indicated that 43% (52.6m) of 2004 voters were Bush 2000 voters and only 37% (45.3m) were Gore voters. Doesn’t that refute the reluctant Bush responder theory?
Not necessarily. Gore voters misspoke when they said they voted for Bush.
They forgot that they voted for Gore or more likely, they viscerally identified with Bush.

How could 43% (52.6m) of the 122.3m who voted in 2004 have been Bush 2000 voters?
Bush only had 50.5m votes in 2000.
And only 37% (45.3m) were Gore 2000 voters?
Gore had 51.0m votes in 2000.
Doesn’t this prove that the Final NEP was mathematically impossible?
No, it doesn’t. The Final was just a poll. You are referring to actual 2000 votes.

Hold on a minute. Even if the NEP was “just” a poll, does that change the fact that only 50.5m voted for Bush?
Or that 2.5m died and another 2.5m did not vote in 2004?
The physical reality is that only about 45.5m Bush 2000 voters returned to vote in 2004.
You are absolutely correct.

Do you believe the recorded 2000 vote was accurate?
Yes, of course.

But you already said that 5.4m votes were uncounted, so how could it have been accurate?
You have got me on that one.

And if 4.0m of the 5.4m uncounted votes were for Gore, doesn’t that mean returning Gore voters outnumbered returning Bush voters by 3.0m?
You would think so.

So the Final NEP overstated returning Bush voters by 7 million. How do you explain that?
Once again: former Gore voters misspoke. They forgot they voted for Gore or wanted to identify with Bush.

But wasn’t the Final NEP forced to match the recorded vote?
Yes, that is always the case.

Let’s see. The Final NEP was forced to match the recorded vote. But you just agreed that the Final was physically impossible on its face. So what does that say about the recorded vote, if the bogus Final was forced to match it? Doesn’t that prove the recorded vote was also impossible?
It doesn’t prove a thing. It wasn’t the fault of the exit pollsters that 4 million (7.5%) Gore voters would forget they voted for him, lied about it or unconsciously associated with Bush.

What about the Census finding that 125.7m votes were cast in 2004, as opposed to 122.3m recorded?
Of the 3.4m uncounted votes, weren’t the vast majority from minority Democratic districts?
So what? Even if they were counted, Bush’s margin would only have been cut in half, from 3.0m to 1.5m. It wasn’t the fault of the exit pollsters that three million votes weren’t counted.

How do you explain Kerry winning the final 5 million (absentee, provisional) votes by 53–44%?
What does that prove? Bush won the first 117m by 51–48%.
Besides, five million is not a large enough sample size to draw any conclusions.

What about the aggregate of 51 unadjusted state exit polls? Kerry was a 52–47% winner.
Exit polls are not accurate in the U.S. Besides, Bush was a war president even though 9/11 happened on his watch.

But didn’t Bush ignore the the Aug. 6 PDB from the CIA that Bin Laden would strike in the U.S.?
Maybe, but Democrats forgave Bush for stealing the 2000 election and letting 9/11 happen.
They believed that because of his experience and judgment, he would protect them from further attacks.

But isn’t it obvious that the recorded vote was fraudulent and the election was stolen?
The MSM has never described the 2004 election as fraudulent. In fact, they always quote the Final NEP. Since it was matched to the recorded vote, it has to be correct. If there was compelling evidence of Election Fraud, the MSM and the Democrats would have called for a full investigation.

Where did you buy that tin-foil hat to suggest that Rove would architect a stolen election?

 

[tiptoe]

1. kick

[ccharles000]

2. Kick

[PBS Poll-435]

3. Kick

Because this all seems way too familiar.