Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Unanswered Question: Who Really Won In 2004? by Truth Is 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 archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
mahina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 06:08 AM
Original message
The Unanswered Question: Who Really Won In 2004? by Truth Is All
http://www.truthisall.net/
TruthIsAll

With An Introduction by DemocraticUnderground Poster Autorank

According to the vote tabulators, in the 2004 presidential election George W. Bush won a stunning victory that defied all odds, particularly those applied by unbiased statisticians. He won despite trailing in most state and national polls. He won despite an approval rating of less than 50%, usually the death knell for an incumbent presidential candidate. He won despite trailing in the three National Exit Polls three timelines from 4pm to 12:22 am (13047 respondents) by a steady 48%-51%, miraculously winning the final exit poll (with only 613 additional respondents, totaling 13,660). This poll was weighted (altered) to meet the reported election result on the assumption that the reported result was accurate -- quite an assumption. The final poll showed a stunning reversal of the Kerry 51%-48% poll margin, which had been measured consistently all day by the same polling group: major news/networks and polling firm Edison-Mitofsky.

The analysis of exit polls and documented fraud in this election began on the Internet. A number of academics posted detailed work showing the near-impossible odds of Bush overcoming deficits in the state exit polls and the National Exit Polls. Much of this analysis comes from TruthIsAll (TIA), a poster on DemocraticUnderground.Com. TIA has a background and several degrees in applied mathematics. Using various elements of the national and state exit polls and other data sources, he produces results that are thorough, detailed, sober and compelling. He shows ALL data and calculations, while encouraging others to check his math. Only once did he make a minor math error, after asking DUers to check his calculation of probability that at least 16 states would deviate beyond their exit poll margin of error and go for Bush. The answer turned out to be one in 19 trillion! The debates on DemocraticUnderground's "2004: Election Results and Discussion" forum are legendary and have attracted observers from all over the Net.

Before the election, TIA produced a daily update of his Election Model site. On 11/1/04, based on extensive statistical analysis, he projected a Kerry win of 51.63% to 48.38%, using a combined average of national polls, and of 51.80% to 48.2% using a Monte Carlo simulation of individual state polls. After the polls closed, data from the Edison Mitofsky NEP survey (sponsored by the major television networks and CNN) was unintentionally released over the Internet. This was internal network data, embargoed from public use, data with statements like “Estimates not for on-air use” and “This page cannot be displayed.” The networks had locked down this data for their own use in an “electronic cover-up” that was offensive to those who knew the story. Luckily for all of us, Jonathan Simon downloaded the exit poll data and saved the CNN screen shots! The Edison-Mitofsky (EM)-Corporate Media (CM) “embargoed data” was available for anyone with eyes to see it and a mind to review it.

TruthIsAll immediately began analyzing and publishing analyses on the forbidden data. Looking at the demographics on the second to last E-M major network poll, he laid out the set of improbable circumstances needed for Bush to win: “To believe Bush won the election, you must also believe….” This post was cited by Will Pitt in a major blog, which gave it wide visibility on the Net. “KERRY WON THE FEMALE VOTE BY A HIGHER PERCENTAGE THAN BUSH WON THE MALE VOTE…AND MORE WOMEN (54%) VOTED THAN MEN (46%).” It was all right there, polling results that we were never intended to see. But this was only the beginning. There are over 100 individual analytical postings that demonstrate the tremendous odds against a Bush win. This high-level analysis dovetailed with and was confirmed by on-the-ground stories of voting rights violations all over the country, particularly in Ohio.

The key data sources for TIA’s analysis are the four EM National Exit Polls and the 50 state exit polls. For those who doubt the reliability of exit polling, there has been a trend toward accuracy within 0.4% since 1998. These Exit polls are endorsed heartily by international voting rights activists -- the CarterCenter, for example -- and even the Bush administration, which used them, ironically, in the Ukraine elections to demonstrate fraud and call for a new election.

At 12:22 am on November 3, the national exit poll of 13,047 respondents showed Kerry to be the winner by 51% to 48%, matching TIA’s pre-election projection. The poll was “un-weighted,” meaning the EM and CM had yet to apply weighting “adjustments”: percentages and weights applied to all the demographic categories to match the poll results to the reported vote count! Imagine if this technique had been applied by exit pollsters in the first Ukrainian election to show victory for the incumbent, who had committed gross election fraud. Yet this odd technique of turning a poll into a ratification of the actual voting results was applied in the American election. The final exit poll, with 13,660 respondents, showed a stunning reversal of fortune for Bush. The poll results were “re-weighted” to create a Bush “victory margin.”

The odds against the deviations from the state and national exit polls to the final vote count are astronomical. In addition, there is the consistency of the “pristine” exit poll timeline from 4 pm (8349 respondents) to 7:30 pm (11,027) to 12:22 am (13,047).

In addition to the gender-based evidence cited above, TIA has shown that some weightings for the question “How did you vote in 2000” are mathematically impossible. For example, the final poll claims that 43% of all 2004 voters were former Bush 2000 voters. But 43% of 122.3 million, the number of votes in the 2004 presidential election, is 52.59 million, and Bush only got 50.46 million votes in 2000, approximately 1.75 million of them from voters who have since died. Therefore, Bush’s final poll exit poll numbers, WHICH WERE MATCHED TO THE VOTE, had to be off by 4 million votes.

The analysis also demonstrated that other voter statistics make it impossible for Bush to have won. Even if all Bush voters from 2000 showed up and voted for him, he still needed an additional 13 million votes. He didn’t get them from new voters and those who did not vote in 2000; those voters preferred Kerry by an almost 3-to-2 margin. Because of this, a Bush victory required that he must win a whopping 14% of Gore 2000 voters, all of whom had to return to vote in 2004. But Gore voters were angry; they came back to defeat Bush once again after having the election stolen from them.

Logical absurdities and inconsistencies in Election 2004 abound. The data, analysis, and narrative are available here for open-minded individuals who want to form their own conclusions about “Stolen Election 2004.”

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0507/S00238.htm

This work is just part of a comprehensive set of election fraud work and analysis provided by the dedicated voting rights activists in DemocraticUnderground.Com’s “2004: Election Results and Discussion” forum, a unique Net resource.


Corporate America controls the media and we get manufactured news. Corporate America now controls the voting machines and we get manufactured elections.










Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 06:18 AM
Response to Original message
1. They stole two presidential elections.
This is an act of treason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dtexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #1
11. Well now it's business as usual.
The margin was too big to overcome in 2008; but they are geared up for 2012. They plan to "elect" a president even less credible than Dubya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. HW* didn't win NH in '88, either.
but yes, it's an act of treason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I'm glad you agree. The Presidential election is foundational
and symbolic of our democracy. It is the single act of democracy that most Americans engage in. So I must consider interfering with the voting process an act of treason. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
2. K&R! Thanks so much for posting this!
I'm glad to read more on this, since I've always believed that Kerry had to have won. Before the election, I believed that there was no way that Bush* could possibly win after all that had transpired, not to mention his cringeworthy performances in the presidential debates. When I learned that Kerry had conceded, after watching the returns until two in the morning and being told that we wouldn't know the results for more than ten days when the absentee ballots were counted, I was in disbelief. I believed Greg Palast's article, and this one backs up much of what he said... :thumbsup: :hi:

Kerry won. Here are the facts.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mahina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 07:13 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Hey.
You bet. I don't know why Truth is All was banned from DU, but I thought his work was excellent and the facts spoke volumes.

We should have occupied EVERYTHING. Posting TIA's work would have gotten me banned so I welcome the chance to leave it here for the google spiders as well as the DUers and others who remain.

aloha!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. I don't know, either, but I agree with the facts here
And I think that most DUers believe this, hardly a conspiracy theory. Thanks for passing it on... :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. See below: TIA alive and well at DU3. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
16. One of the reasons I kept coming back here
in late 2004 when I was a newbie was because of TruthIsAll's posts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 07:53 AM
Response to Original message
5. I miss TIA.
dammit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
countryjake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. yeppers...another one of the greatest ever n/t.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. TIA posting in the Election Reform Group at DU3. See below. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
7. TIA's name is Richard Charnin and he's posting at DU3
Here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/109114
and here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/109128

He also published a book about Bush election fraud entitled "Proving Election Fraud."

He is one of the greatest living American heroes, in my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mahina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. Wow, thank you.
I appreciate all that info. I'll hele on over to DU3 and be on the lookout.

"He is one of the greatest living American heroes, in my opinion". -agreed 100%. Do you know why he was banned from DU? I hope the new jury system would prevent a recurrence.

Thanks again, aloha.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
10. With the Stolen Election in 2000,
and the "questionable" election in 2004,
you would think that the Democratic Party would DO SOMETHING
once they gained the power to do so.


Transparent, verifiable elections are supported by over 92% of the American people,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x446445

....and EASY WIN/WIN for the Democratic Party!


But NO.
Only silence from the Democratic Party Leadership,
and even MORE unverifiable Black Box Voting Machines and Tabulators with "Private Proprietary" Code
off limits to inspections by 3rd parties.

Something is very, VERY WRONG when the leadership of BOTH dominant Political Parties
refuse to address this issue.

In 2000, it was ONLY the Congressional Black Caucus that openly questioned the stolen election.
In 2004, it was an outside 3rd Party that protested the election in Ohio.

One has to go to the "Far Left Fringe" Wing of the Democratic Party to find a Democratic Official (Dennis Kucinich) willing to talk about this issue,
and he has been completely marginalized by the Party Leadership & The Media.

Why the SILENCE?
I can think of only ONE reason,
and it is scary.

"Elections are too important to leave up to The People."
...ever wonder WHY nothing has really changed over the last 40 years?






You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. I was in Ohio in '04
and Diebold along with Kenneth Starr (Secy of State) stole the election. 2005 was a very bad year for me. Stolen in my home state. We protested, did recounts, went to DC, and nothing we did mattered. Well, maybe it educated some people as to how fragile our Democracy is....which is gone now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. How much help did you get from the Dem Party leadership?
IIRC, it was the Green Party that filed for a recount.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Yes, I worked w/ the Green Party....
they sent a woman from Nebraska who was horribly unorganized so she spent most of her time in Clermont County. She would show up hours late for a meeting. I still have all the buttons from 'Green Party Recount.'

I got Dem volunteers and we did the Recount ourselves. The trouble was Ken Starr and Diebold...the CEO of Diebold lived in Columbus (Upper Arlington) at the time of the election.

Those damn voting machines. Paper and pen would be so much better....and less costly. It was a nightmare and sometimes I still feel like I'm living in it. Except for OWS...only hopefulness I've had since Nixon resigned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbgrunt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. yep. you gotta wonder why the Dems
won't touch it. I remember Howard Dean briefly taking up the cause of the voting machines and then letting it die......

I guess he was re-educated by tpb.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
17. I still have 8 of his reports bookmarked! 2004-2005..
There's no doubt at all that the idiot-in-chief was illegitimate...BOTH terms.
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 Apr 25th 2024, 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion 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