Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

PRELIMINARY PRES. ELECTION FRAUD PROBABILITY ANALYSIS

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
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 02:06 PM
Original message
PRELIMINARY PRES. ELECTION FRAUD PROBABILITY ANALYSIS
Edited on Fri Nov-05-04 02:19 PM by TruthIsAll
Historically, Exit polls are accurate within 2%

The deviation is the difference in percent between the first exit polls and the vote.

All the following states final results agreed with the exit polls

THEY ALL HAD PAPER TRAILS.

State...% voting deviation from exit polls
+2B means the change was + 2 for Bush

AZ 0
LA +2B
MI 0
IA +1B
ME 0 <no BBV
NV 0 < paper trail
MO -1B
IL 0 paper ballot

..............................................................
Now look at the states that were in play where there was NO paper trail. They ALL had Bush doing MUCH better than the Exit polls indicated.

They were ALL WAY OUTSIDE the 2% MoE.

WI +4B
PA +5B
OH +6B
FL +7B
MN +7B
NH +15B
NC +9B
CO +4B
NM +3B

ALL RESULTS WERE SKEWED TO BUSH!

IS THAT JUST A COINCIDENCE? HOW COME THE SHARP DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BBV PAPER TRAIL AND NON-PAPER TRAIL STATES?

Any deviations above 5% have a probability of 0 to 1%.
Deviation = 4% has a probability of 2%.
Deviation = 3% has a probability of 4%

The JOINT COMBINED probability is VIRTUALLY ZERO that these were just random deviations!

THIS HAS THE MAKINGS OF A CLEAR CIRCUMSTANTIAL CASE THAT THIS WAS A MASSIVELY TAINTED ELECTION.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lutherj Donating Member (788 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. Do you have stats on the rest of the states? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RevCheesehead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. You Go, TIA!!!
Fraud, in order to seem to succeed, must be across the board.

I agree - check the other states, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Expat_Kristen Donating Member (49 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. We need to see all of this data
Compiled for each state, preferably each county (or even precinct!) within each state indicating voter method (some had paper trails, some had Optic scan, some had EV machines).

Is it possible, now that it's over, for the exit poll data to be tracked back to the county and/or precinct it came from??

For example, say Precinct 112 reported an exit poll of B 47% and K 51%, and the opposite turned out to be the final result. That would add up to the overall suspicions and make for an even MORE viable case.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
4. Even the big Dem turnout couln't overcome Repub fraud. It's hard to
believe that Rove et all would perpetrate such a massive crime. But it is likely
what happened.

I think the "Religious came out for Bush" is a smokescreen to cover the fraud.
But, they have go away with it in the past. Why not now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blurp Donating Member (769 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
5. You say this over and over and it's wrong.
Historically, Exit polls are accurate within 2%

The people doing the polling say it's +/-4% for state polls and that assumes they estimate the turnout correctly.


http://www.exit-poll.net/faq.html

"What is the Margin of Error for an exit poll?

"Every number estimated from a sample may depart from the official vote count. The difference between a sample result and the number one would get if everyone who cast a vote was interviewed in exactly the same way is called the sampling error. That does not mean the sample result is wrong. Instead, it refers to the potential error due to sampling. The margin of error for a 95% confidence interval is about +/- 3% for a typical characteristic from the national exit poll and +/-4% for a typical state exit poll. Characteristics that are more concentrated in a few polling places, such as race, have larger sampling errors. Other nonsampling factors may increase the total error.

Among those nonsampling factors includes estimated turnout (which they got very wrong).

"How do you select sample precincts?

"The polling places were selected as a stratified probability sample of each state. The purpose of stratification is to group together precincts with similar vote characteristics. A recent past election was used to identify all the precincts as they existed for that election. The total vote in each precinct and the partisan division of the vote from this past race are used for the stratification. In addition, counties are used for stratifying the precincts. The total vote also is used to determine the probability of selection. Each voter in a state has approximately the same chance of being selected in the sample."

So the error for each state is going to be some combination of the sampling error (+/-4%) and the error that comes from using previous elections turnout numbers.

Bottom line:

The Repubs won the turnout battle. If Dean had been the nominee, you better believe more Dems would have shown up to vote.

Focus on why the primary process screwed Dean and fix that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. You MISS the point totally.
Edited on Fri Nov-05-04 05:15 PM by TruthIsAll
ALL deviations were for BUSH. Period.

Forget the MoE for the time being (you are wrong there also).

JUST LOOK AT THE DEVIATIONS. ALL FOR BUSH.

HOW COME ALL FOR BUSH AND NOT ONE FUCKING STATE FOR KERRY?

HOW COME ALL PAPER-TRAIL STATES WERE RIGHT ON THE MONEY? CAUSE MAYBE THE PROOF IS AVAILABLE, SO FRAUD IS IMPOSSIBLE?

HOW COME ALL NON PAPER-TRAIL STATES WERE OFF AND FOR BUSH BY MORE THAN YOUR 4% MOE (I'LL EVEN GIVE YOU THE 4%)?

ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS. FOCUS ON THE FUCKING FACTS.
OPEN YOUR EYES. THIS WAS ROBBERY IN PLAIN SIGHT. NOT EVEN SUBTLE.

THEY NEEDED TO REVISDE THE EXIT POLL DATA FOR CNN 1AM IN THE FUCKING MORNING ON NOV. 3! AND OF COURSE CNN WENT ALONG WITH THE FRAUD.

THIS NATION IS NO LONGER A DEMOCRACY. IT HAS BEEN HIJACKED, STARTING IN 2000 WHEN GORE WAS ROBBED, IN THE 2002 SENATE ELECTIONS WHEN CLELAND AND OTHERS WERE ROBBED AND IN THIS FARCE OF AN ELECTION.

THE DEMS FUCKED UP BY NOT MAKING THIS AN ISSUE.
BUT DEMOCRACY-LOVERS WILL MAKE IT ONE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. TIA I respect your knowledge etc....
but it is quite clear to me the exit polls undersampled Bushies because they didn't cooperate/were relcutant to be polled.
They were too busy runnig off to prepare for the end times.
I had that suspicion Tuesday and dread of dreads it turned out to be true. (Apparently true, I am still open to whatever can be proved)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Are you serious? Or do I not have a sense of humor?
tia
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
library_max Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. After 2000, everyone knew that perception was the name of the game.
Everyone - Republicans, Democrats, especially voters in battleground states - knew that if the results came out close, the perception of who was legitimately in the lead would be absolutely crucial. So everybody had a very strong incentive to be sure and tell the exit pollers, truthfully, who they voted for. Bush voters had an incentive to keep the Kerry voters from telling the truth, and vice versa; but neither side had any ability to do that. And both sides had a powerful incentive to tell the truth about their own votes. I don't buy the theory that that many Bush voters in that many states lied or refused to cooperate with the pollers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. yes...
...and they also knew that they had to make the margins *just* big enough so we wouldn't bother recounting the votes. but keep it close enough so it's believable... i really have a rough time believing bush won the popular vote (okay, i don't believe it, and won't believe it, and there is no way to prove it true or false as we can't recount votes).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. ELECTION EMBEZZLEMENT!!
.. the missing, misappropriated, disenfranchised, votes ALL ADD UP eventually! Does everyone else not get this?? You collect stories from each precinct in each democratic leaning area, and you'll find a collection of hundreds and thousands of voters with lost, destroyed, miscounted, votes... and many more democratic voters discouraged or turned away by long, nightmarish lines, malfunctions, ballot shortages, power shortages, etc. IT all adds up! That's all they need.. Hasn't anyone heard of embezzlers before? They don't take 250K all in ONE DAY! THey take 200 a paycheck for a few years.. or they take a little from this account, a little from that account. The election was EMBEZZLED!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-06-04 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. That's why we fought for a paper ballot, but the Dems did nothing
tia
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senaca Donating Member (173 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-07-04 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #17
25. Boulder ballots paper vs. paperless in Colorado
Could Boulder serve as a microcosm of the standard deviation debate between paper trail vs. paperless? Once the vote is counted, if the standard deviation falls less than 2%, then it could be a standard to match against a 4% deviation between exit polls and actual votes.

How much does state certification of the vote complicate your efforts? Since Boulder's vote has taken time to count CO probably is not certified. Then throw in the article I believe I read on DU about the military overseas vote possibly being reported to a "private" company in an unconventional way, and it makes me wonder if the backdoor draft issue might be a factor in the overseas military vote. Even if this is not so states should not be able to certify their vote until the military vote is in. I'm sorry if these points have already been discussed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pallas180 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-07-04 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #16
27. Good idea, but these guys like to go for broke. Member Silverado?
all in one fell swoop - the nations banks went belly up for the Bush
family dummies, and the taxpayers footed the bill - as we are doing once again...

Why don't these people remember or understand, Bush name = crook
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. Your idea that exit polls undersampled Bush supporters is just conjecture
I have heard this from other sources, but I haven't seen any evidence. I doubt very much that such an effect would bias polls taken right at the voting station by anywhere near the amount claimed. I have also heard people say that exit polls oversampled women, but again I haven't seen any evidence. I doubt that men or Republicans are shrinking violets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pallas180 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-07-04 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #8
26. Puhleez. You always knew a Bushie-they walked right past you with noses in
the air....or there were a few who came to start arguments....

Bush voters were obvious. Kerry voters were obvious.

What are you talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. I don't know why anyone who believes that the 2000 election was stolen
would not expect this one to be.

Unless there had been safeguards in place - which I don't think there were.


I think the Republicans have tried to skew perceptions so they could claim that it was the Democrats trying to steal it. That was a new twist - and very Rovian - I might add.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-06-04 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
24. It is significant that ALL the deviations were for bush
We should have seen something like 50% -- of the errors going for bush -- a random distribution of the errors.

But to see all going consistently for bush plus all the vote errors being reported all the errors are in bush's favor.

There is fraud and it is heavy handed.

My guess is that a computer code was place in all the computers -- the bush gang knew early in the day on Tuesday that the vote was not going they way. Nothing happened during the day to "suddenly" swing the votes to go bush's way in the last minute. The only way that the votes went big in bush's direction is through vote tally manipulation.

With the Christian reconstructionists involved in the machine voting companies -- we have to begin looking at the BBV as the likely candidate for vote manipulation.


But again it is highly significant -- the statistical probability that all deviations are in bush's favor is the real indication that vote fraud took place on a massive scale.

I've had training in Statistics (I admit that I am rusty from not doing any research lately which requires that I run some statistics) but you don't need to be a math whiz to see that ALL the deviations in ONE direction means ONE thing -- something stinks about the vote totals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. flawed logic
this post makes absolutely no logical sense. you quote facts to try to justify some crackpot logic about howard dean???

dean was assassinated in the media. "fixing" the primary process couldn't have fixed our corrupt media.

i happen to think FEWER democrats would have come out to vote for dean (even though i like him a lot and would have voted for him, yes). but this is just my opinion - which does NOT make it a logical FACT and i certainly wouldn't state it as such.

we have no proof the repubs "won the turnout battle." period.

we haven't even counted all of the votes.

we don't know who won.

we don't know how many ballots have been trashed that could potentially be counted.

proof that the machines were messed up is also hard to show where there isn't a paper trail, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. we need to look at this some more.

there is so much we don't know, it irks me to death that BOTH sides are ready to just ACCEPT what the media pundits are feeding us without question.

this is an insult to democracy.

count the votes.

count the votes.

count the votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senaca Donating Member (173 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. exit polls and activism
This may be naive, but would there be a possibility of asking Dem's in the above outside margin of error states to ask for people who took the exit polls to volunteer to ask for a copy of their ballets? If enough found a discrepancy or were not able to get a copy, then could there be an immediate class action law suit. It seems that the time is now to do this since the Bush Adm. wants to outlaw class action law suits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grannylib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-04 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Check the state forums - Ohio is organizing something, bet other states
where fraud was rampant are too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinrobot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-06-04 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
18. kick
Keep it up, TIA, you're one of my heroes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kimchi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-06-04 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
19. Thanks again, TIA.
I'm no math wiz; but I know fraud when I see it. How can we get all this information together---are we waiting for Bev to do her thing? I've bookmarked 15 different threads that are supposed to be the "official"; and I'm getting confused.

I know OH is being worked on. I know Nader is trying to recount NH. What about FL? What should we put in our e-mails and letters and to whom should they go for maximum exposure? The Patriotic Trio in congress? BBV? Kucinich? Our friends? Nader?

Only 3 congresscritters have the nuts to speak of this. Has anyone heard back from Kerry? Kucinich? Has anyone even hinted they know what the hell is going on besides Ralph?

I've read a million threads, but I'm obviously missing some because I don't know what the plan is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robert Oak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-06-04 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
20. you have to do all states
by precinct, by voting method and by exit poll values upon closing of the polls.

In this election, to have even more validity, you have to show a deviation adding up to the popular vote.

If no paper trail places in "safe" red states also have jacked up
Bush results versus places with paper trail, per precinct,
it shows the deal was rigged.

Right now you have exit poll people claiming that bush supporters
were the type of people who refused to talk to them leaving the polling place and Kerry supporters would.

If you can prove this theory incorrect, again by statistical
analysis, it lends more credibility.

But to jack up the election by > 3M votes is the real thing to prove.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-06-04 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Oh, that is just ridiculous. Looking for a strawman, something to divert?
You miss the forest for the trees.

No analysis, no matter how thorough, would satisfy you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-06-04 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
22. That's the stuff!
And that is why they didn't want a paper trail.



Good for you!



Damnit I wish I could do more than just cheer you on.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-06-04 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
23. None of these "errors" broke in Kerry's direction
The dice were loaded.

You can't win against someone who has loaded dice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Aug 17th 2017, 01:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
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