• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 6 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 55

Topic: Was It Hacked?

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Was It Hacked?

    sponsored links


    ***Advertisments***
    By Alan Waldman
    Published 11/18/04

    Editor's note: This is a corrected version of this story. A section on votes exceeding the number of registered voters in 47 Florida counties has been removed because it could not be substantiated.

    Despite mainstream media attempts to kill the story, talk radio and the Internet are abuzz with suggestions that John Kerry was elected president on Nov. 2 – but Republican election officials made it difficult for millions of Democrats to vote while employees of four secretive, GOP-bankrolled corporations rigged electronic voting machines and then hacked central tabulating computers to steal the election for George W. Bush.

    The Bush administration's "fix" of the 2000 election debacle (the Help America Vote Act) made crooked elections considerably easier, by foisting paperless electronic voting on states before the bugs had been worked out or meaningful safeguards could be installed.

    Crying foul this time around isn't just the province of whiny Democrats. Consider that The Wall Street Journal recently revealed that "Verified Voting, a group formed by a Stanford University professor to assess electronic voting, has collected 31,000 reports of election fraud and other problems."

    University of Pennsylvania researcher Dr. Steven Freeman, in his November 2004 paper "The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy," says that the odds that the discrepancies between predicted [exit poll] results and actual vote counts in Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania could have been due to chance or random error are 250 million to 1. "Systematic fraud or mistabulation is a premature conclusion," writes Freeman, "but the election's unexplained exit poll discrepancies make it an unavoidable hypothesis, one that is the responsibility of the media, academia, polling agencies, and the public to investigate." Unlike Europe, where citizens count the ballots, in the United States employees of a highly secretive Republican-leaning company, ES&S, managed every aspect of the 2004 election. That included everything from registering voters, printing ballots and programming voting machines to tabulating votes (often with armed guards keeping the media and members of the public who wished to witness the count at bay) and reporting the results, for 60 million voters in 47 states, according to Christopher Bollyn, writing in American Free Press. Most other votes were counted by three other firms that are snugly in bed with the GOP.

    This election is not the first suspicious venture into electronic voting. In Georgia, in November 2002, Democratic Gov. Roy Barnes led by 11 percent and Democratic Sen. Max Cleland was in front by 5 percent just before the election – the first ever conducted entirely on touch-screen electronic machines, and counted entirely by company employees, rather than public officials – but mysterious election-day swings of 16 percent and 12 percent defeated both of these popular incumbents. In Minnesota, Democrat Walter Mondale (replacing beloved Sen. Paul Wellstone, who died in a plane crash), lost in an amazing last-moment 11 percent vote swing recorded on electronic machines. Then, in 2003, what's known as "black box voting" helped Arnold Schwarzenegger – who had deeply offended female, Latino and Jewish voters – defeat a popular Latino Democrat who substantially led in polls a week before the election.

    A RAT IS SMELLED

    Realizing that the 2004 election results are suspect, many prominent people and groups have begun to demand action. Recently, six important Congressmen, including three on the House Judiciary Committee, asked the U.S. Comptroller General to investigate the efficacy of new electronic voting devices.

    Black Box Voting – the nonprofit group which spearheaded much of the pre-election testing (and subsequent criticism) of electronic machines that found them hackable in 90 seconds – is filing the largest Freedom of Information Act inquiry in U.S. history. The organization's Bev Harris claims, "Fraud took place in the 2004 election through electronic voting machines."

    Florida Democratic congressional candidate Jeff Fisher charged that he has and will show the FBI evidence that Florida results were hacked; he also claims to have knowledge of who hacked it – in 2004 and in the 2002 Democratic primary (so Jeb Bush would not have to run against the popular Janet Reno). Fisher also believes that most Democratic candidates nationwide were harmed by GOP hacking and other dirty tactics – particularly in swing states.

    The Green and Libertarian Parties, as well as Ralph Nader, are demanding an Ohio recount, because of voting fraud, suppression and disenfranchisement. Recounts are also being sought in New Hampshire, Nevada and Washington.

    Although the Internet is full of stories of election fraud, and major media in England, Canada and elsewhere have investigated the story, you'll find almost nothing in the major U.S. media. "I have been told by sources that are fairly high up in the media – particularly TV – that there is now a lockdown on this story," says Harris. "It's officially 'Let's move on' time."

    On Nov. 6, Project Censored Award-winning author Thom Hartmann said, "So far, the only national 'mainstream' media outlet to come close to this story was Keith Olbermann, when he noted that it was curious that all the voting machine irregularities so far uncovered seemed to favor Bush. In the meantime, the Washington Post and other media are now going through single-bullet-theory-like contortions to explain how the exit polls had failed."

    VOTE STEALING 101

    Votes collected by electronic machines (and by optical scan equipment that reads traditional paper ballots) are sent via modem to a central tabulating computer, which counts the votes on Windows software. Therefore, anyone who knows how to operate an Excel spreadsheet and who is given access to the central tabulation machine can, in theory, change election totals.

    On a CNBC cable TV program, Black Box Voting exec Harris showed guest host Howard Dean how to alter vote totals within 90 seconds, by entering a two-digit code in a hidden program on Diebold's election software. Harris declared, "This is not a 'bug' or accidental oversight; it is there on purpose."

    A quartet of companies control the U.S. vote count. Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia and SAIC are all hard-wired into the Bush campaign and power structure. Diebold chief Walden O'Dell is a top Bush fund-raiser. According to "online anarchist community" Infoshop.org, "At Diebold, the election division is run by Bob Urosevich. Bob's brother, Todd, is a top executive at 'rival' ES&S. The brothers were originally staked by Howard Ahmanson, a member of the Council For National Policy, a right-wing steering group stacked with Bush true believers. Ahmanson is also one of the bagmen behind the extremist Christian Reconstruction Movement, which advocates the theocratic takeover of American democracy." Sequoia is owned by a partner member of the Carlyle Group, which is believed to have dictated foreign policy in both Bush administrations and has employed former President Bush for quite a while.

    All early Tuesday indicators predicted a Kerry landslide. Zogby International (which predicted the 2000 outcome more accurately than any national pollster) did exit polling which predicted a 100-electoral vote triumph for Kerry. He saw Kerry winning crucial Ohio by 4 percent.

    Princeton professor Sam Wang, whose meta-analysis had shown the election to be close in the week before the election, began coming up with dramatic numbers for Kerry in the day before and day of the election. At noon EST on Monday, Nov. 1, he predicted a Kerry win by a 108-vote margin.

    In the Iowa Electronic Markets, where "investors" put their money where their mouths are and wager real moolah on election outcome "contracts," Bush led consistently for months before the election – often by as much as 60 percent to 39 percent. But at 7 p.m. CST on Nov. 2, 76.6 percent of the last hour's traders had gone to Kerry, with only 20.1 percent plunking their bucks down on Bush. They knew something.

    As the first election returns came in, broadcasters were shocked to see that seemingly safe Bush states like Virginia, Kentucky and North Carolina were being judged as "too close to call." At 7:28 EST, networks broadcast that Ohio and Florida favored Kerry by 51 percent to 49 percent.

    In his research paper, Steven Freeman reports that exit polls showed Kerry had been elected. He was leading in nearly every battleground state, in many cases by sizable margins. But later, in 10 of 11 battleground states, the tallied margins differed from the predicted margins – and in every one the shift favored Bush.

    In 10 states where there were verifiable paper trails – or no electronic machines – the final results hardly differed from the initial exit polls. In non-paper-trail states, however, there were significant differences. Florida saw a shift from Kerry up by 1 percent in the exit polls to Bush up by 5 percent at close of voting. In Ohio, Kerry went from up 3 percent to down 3 percent. Exit polls also had Kerry winning the national popular vote by 3 percent.

    In close Senate races, changes between the exit poll results and the final tallies cost Democrats anticipated seats in Kentucky (a 13 percent swing to the GOP), Alaska, North Carolina, Florida, Oklahoma, South Dakota and possibly Pennsylvania – as well as enough House seats to retake control of the chamber.

    Center for Research on Globalization's Michael Keefer states, "The National Election Pool's own data – as transmitted by CNN on the evening of November 2 and the morning of November 3 – suggest very strongly that the results of the exit polls were themselves fiddled late on November 2 in order to make their numbers conform with the tabulated vote tallies."

    How do we know the fix was in? Keefer says the total number of respondents at 9 p.m. was well over 13,000 and at 1:36 a.m. it had risen less than 3 percent – to 13,531 total respondents. Given the small increase in respondents, this 5 percent swing to Bush is mathematically impossible. In Florida, at 8:40 p.m., exit polls showed a near dead heat but the final exit poll update at 1:01 a.m. gave Bush a 4 percent lead. This swing was mathematically impossible, because there were only 16 more respondents in the final tally than in the earlier one.

    FLORIDA FIASCO II

    Kathy Dopp's eye-opening examination of Florida's county-by-county record of votes cast and people registered by party affiliation (http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm) suggests systematic and widespread election fraud in 47 of the state's 67 counties. This did not occur so much in the touch-screen counties, where public scrutiny would naturally be focused, but in counties where optically screened paper ballots were fed into a central tabulator PC, which is highly vulnerable to hacking. In these optical-scan counties, had GOP registrants voted Republican, Democratic registrants gone for Kerry and everyone registered showed up to vote, Bush would have received 1,337,242 votes. Instead, his reported vote total there was 1,950,213! That discrepancy (612,971) is nearly double Bush's winning margin in the state (380,952).

    Colin Shea, writing on Freezer Box.com, double-checked Dopp's figures and confirmed that optical-scan counties gave Bush 16 percent more votes than he should have gotten. "This 16 percent would not be strange if it were spread across counties more or less evenly," Shea explains, but it is not. In 11 different counties, the "actual" Bush tallies were 50-100 percent higher than expected. In one county, where 88 percent of voters are registered Democrats, Bush got nearly two-thirds of the vote – three times more than predicted by his statistical model.

    There were thousands of complaints about Florida voting. Broward County electronic voting machines counted up to 32,500 and then started counting backward. This glitch, which existed in the 2002 election but was never fixed, overturned the exit-poll-predicted results of a gambling referendum. In several Florida counties, early-morning voters reported ballot boxes that already had an unusually large quantity of ballots in them. In Florida and five other states, according to Canada's Globe and Mail, "the wrong candidate appeared on their touch-screen machine's checkout screen" after the person had voted.

    Republicans have argued that the Florida counties with majority Democratic registration that voted overwhelmingly for Bush were all conservative "Dixiecrat" bastions in northern Florida, and that all the reported totals were accurate. But Olbermann demonstrated that many of these crossover states voted Republican for the first time. He poked another hole in the Dixiecrat theory when he noted that in Democratic counties where Bush scored big, people also supported highly Democratic measures – such as raising the state minimum wage $1 above the federal level.

    Moreover, 18 switchover counties were not in the Panhandle or near the Georgia border, but were scattered throughout the state. For instance, Hardee County (between Bradenton and Sebring) registered 63.8 percent Democratic but officially gave Bush 135 percent more votes than Kerry.

    WIDESPREAD PROBLEMS

    Voters Unite! detailed 303 specific election problems, including 84 complaints of machine malfunctions in 22 states, 24 cases of registration fraud in 14 states, 20 abusive voter challenge situations in 10 states, U.S. voters in 18 states and Israel experiencing absentee ballot difficulties, 10 states with provisional ballot woes, 22 cases of malfeasance in 13 states, 10 charges of voter intimidation in seven states, seven states where votes were suppressed, seven states witnessing outbreaks of animosity at the polls, six states suffering from ballot printing errors and seven instances in four states where votes were changed on-screen. In addition, the Voters Unite! website cites four states with early voting troubles, three states undergoing ballot programming errors, three states demonstrating ballot secrecy violations, bogus ballot fraud in New Mexico and double-voting for Bush in Texas.

    Kerry's victory was predicted by previously extremely accurate Harris and Zogby exit polls, by the formerly infallible 50 percent rule (an incumbent with less than 50 percent in the exit polls always loses; Bush had 47 percent – requiring him to capture an improbable 80 percent of the undecideds to win) and by the Incumbent Rule (undecideds break for the challenger, as exit polls showed they did by a large margin this time).

    Nor is it credible that the surge in new young voters (who were witnessed standing in lines for hours, on campuses nationwide) miraculously didn't appear in the final totals; that Kerry did worse than Gore against an opponent who lost support; and that exit polls were highly accurate wherever there was a paper trail and grossly underestimated Bush's appeal wherever there was no such guarantee of accurate recounts. Statisticians point out that Bush beat 99 to 1 mathematical odds in winning the election.

    Election results are not final until electors vote on Dec. 12. There is still time to find the truth.

  2. #2

    Re: Was It Hacked?

    bumped for TAI.

  3. #3

    Re: Was It Hacked?

    Rob,

    where was this article printed?

  4. #4

    Re: Was It Hacked?

    I have a few questons...where is the investigation into the exit polls? Or are we just going to accept them as the standard to judge all other data by (ie..they were right where they were right...but where they were wrong shows voter fraud because they were wrong "for Kerry"). Why could this data not suggest that someone "mucked" with the exit polls and not the election data? Which one of those would be more probable/possible to do?

    2nd..where is the investigation into voter registration fraud and people/orgs trying to do this illegally and people trying to cast fraudulent ballots in the election? I don't see that on the list.

    There are signs/data this election that this may have been a problem...(the number of provisionals thown out for invalid address, unconfirmed info, people never registered to vote in any state,, etc.) There's at least one case I know of in FL, where a 68 year old man was contacted (who didn't vote this election)..trying to confirm his provisonal ballot information. Evidently, he voted this election as a 28 year old female on a provisional ballot.

    Just wondering if that's part of your concerns or not?

  5. #5

    Re: Was It Hacked?

    Quote Originally Posted by unison
    Rob,

    where was this article printed?
    Boy, I wish I could tell you. I don't remember now.

  6. #6

    Re: Was It Hacked?

    Quote Originally Posted by dcornutt
    I have a few questons...where is the investigation into the exit polls? Or are we just going to accept them as the standard to judge all other data by (ie..they were right where they were right...but where they were wrong shows voter fraud because they were wrong "for Kerry"). Why could this data not suggest that someone "mucked" with the exit polls and not the election data? Which one of those would be more probable/possible to do?

    2nd..where is the investigation into voter registration fraud and people/orgs trying to do this illegally and people trying to cast fraudulent ballots in the election? I don't see that on the list.

    There are signs/data this election that this may have been a problem...(the number of provisionals thown out for invalid address, unconfirmed info, people never registered to vote in any state,, etc.) There's at least one case I know of in FL, where a 68 year old man was contacted (who didn't vote this election)..trying to confirm his provisonal ballot information. Evidently, he voted this election as a 28 year old female on a provisional ballot.

    Just wondering if that's part of your concerns or not?
    I'm concerned about ANY kind of election fraud. I don't care who it benefits. It just turns out that in almost all of the cases reported so far, Bush has been the one to gain votes. Makes you wonder....

    As for the exit polls, they're done by a non-partisan company hired by the major news agencies. I can't quite see how it would benefit them to fudge the numbers. In fact, I'd think it would HURT them more than anything.

    The things that are being investigated are the problems that have been reported. The GAO got, I believe, over 30,000 complaints, so I'm sure the problems you've touched on are in there somewhere.

  7. #7

    Re: Was It Hacked?

    Quote Originally Posted by unison
    Rob,

    where was this article printed?
    Hey Unison ,

    You can select any big quote from that text and search it on google .

    A search string from that could be : "discrepancies make it an unavoidable hypothesis"
    Theo Krueger - Composer

    www.TheoKrueger.com

    Kontakt 2 Scripts

  8. #8

    Re: Was It Hacked?

    Quote Originally Posted by robgb
    I'm concerned about ANY kind of election fraud. I don't care who it benefits. It just turns out that in almost all of the cases reported so far, Bush has been the one to gain votes. Makes you wonder....
    I'll just submit to you that one can "loose" votes from such fraud as well. (such as they being thrown out due to voter registration fraud, etc). This ultimately leads to an overall "gain" to the other candidate via margin but not because of the other candidate wrongly adding votes to their tally.

    As for the exit polls, they're done by a non-partisan company hired by the major news agencies. I can't quite see how it would benefit them to fudge the numbers. In fact, I'd think it would HURT them more than anything.
    I'm quite sure, that CBS and the companies etc themselves..would "not" do such a thing to cut their own throat. But, some of their partisan employees "would". Those early exit polls were "leaked" onto the net..predicting a Kerry landslide, and him winning all but one swing state by big margins. Somebody leaked that early from inside.

    The "reasons" for fudging or misreping the exit polls are obvious. It's to try and discourage voters... from turning out..thinking the election was already won. In the subsequent articles I've read, there were some further problems with the early exit polls...like they oversampled women..etc. No explanation has ever been given as to why this was so, given that exit polsters "know" that oversampling a group could skew the results.

    The exit polls...where they were wrong..favored "Kerry" everytime. Does that then, using your logic, prove fraud in the exit polling by someone who favored Kerry over Bush? I mean, that's about the logic being used in some of these allegations is it not? If so, then why would the exit polls not be a prime suspect, given the consitency of their error that I could probably prove would be statistically impossible to happen by accident?

    Those exit polling computers, etc..are not NEARLY as secure as the voting machines/data are. Not even. Im quite sure you are right, that the people who own the companies would not cut their own throat by purposefully skewing results of their poll. But, I wouldnt' put it past a few overzealous, partisan employees to do that. At the very least, it's worth an investigation...and as yet, I've not really seen any.

    The things that are being investigated are the problems that have been reported. The GAO got, I believe, over 30,000 complaints, so I'm sure the problems you've touched on are in there somewhere.
    That's my point, this is being selectively reported. (and as a result, selectively investigated) I'll bet you...Conyers and his fellow DNC members, who are brining those complaints to the GAO...do not have "ONE" Bush voting complaint in the entire bunch.

    The things they are looking into ..are "not" disenfranchised Bush voters..because in their view...Bush voters could not be disenfranchised because they won the election. ONly the looser can be disenfranchised and defrauded. And fraud can only happen against the looser. Therefore you only look into issues on the loosing side. And you look at everything, data, etc..from that perspective. It's not that Kerry "lost" votes, due to fraudlently cast DNC ballots voting for him...it's that the RNC disenfranchised them by throwing them out, etc. (ie..votes didn't get counted) I've even heard dems argue, that if someone stood in line for hours...their vote should be counted whether they were registered or not, etc. It's embarassing.

    That's about the state of the logic behind this. In some ways, you are trying to say the same thing. If you can't see the obvious problem with this logic, I won't bother to explain it anymore.

  9. #9

    Re: Was It Hacked?

    Complete US Exit Poll Data Confirms Net Suspicions
    Full 51 State Early Exit Poll Data Released For The First Time
    By Scoop Co-Editor Alastair Thompson

    Scoop.co.nz is delighted to be able today to publish a full set of 4pm exit poll data for the first time on the Internet since the US election. The data emerged this evening NZT in a post on the Democratic Underground website under the forum name TruthIsAll.

    The new data confirms what was already widely known about the swing in favour of George Bush, but amplifies the extent of that swing.


    Click for big version
    Figure 1: Graph showing the "red shift" between 2004 US General Election exit polls & the actual 2004 US Election results

    In the data which is shown below in tabulated form, and above in graph form, we can see that 42 of the 51 states in the union swung towards George Bush while only nine swung towards Kerry.

    There has to date been no official explanation for the discrepancy.

    Ordinarily in the absence of an obvious mistabulation error, roughly the same number of states should have swung towards each candidate.

    Moreover many of the states that swung against Democratic Party hopeful John Kerry swung to an extent that is well beyond the margin of error in exit polls. Exit polls by their nature - they ask voters how they actually voted rather than about their intentions - are typically considered highly accurate.

    Last week in an analysis of a similar, but incomplete set of data, Dr Stephen F. Freeman from the University of Pennsylvania calculated that the odds of just three of the major swing states, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania all swinging as far as they did against their respective exit polls were 250 milllion to 1. (See…"The Unexplained Exit PollDiscrepancy" – Dr Stephen F. Freeman - .pdf format)

    Dr Freeman's academic paper contains a thorough description of why and how exit polls are conducted (in some countries they use them to prevent against vote fraud), and considers a number of hypotheses for why this year's polls could have been so dramatically wrong. He concludes that the reasons are unknown.

    CAUTIONARY NOTE: The data that is released today shows the 4pm data run from the Edison-Mitofsky polling company. This run was based on 63%of the full 13660 sample in the poll. However as we also have a set of data from around midnight with which to compare this data, we can tell that the final exit poll results were not that far different than these early results. This in itself tends to suggest that the polling system did not have a systemic bias in its early data as suggested by some commentators in early reports on this puzzle.

    (For a more detailed description of the limitations of this data and the claimed gender bias in the early data see.. EXTENDED FOOTNOTE ON THE LIMITATIONS OF THIS DATA - By Jonathan Simon )

    *****************
    For more background and the latest news links on this news subject see also Scoop's A Very American Coup Special Feature


    *************

    BACKGROUND

    Ever since the first analyses (See... "Faun Otter: Vote Fraud - Exit Polls Vs Actuals ") showing the swing in favour of US President George Bush between the exit polls and the actual results were published, the internet has been swimming with rumour and speculation about what the results meant.

    These initial internet news reports were debunked in a report from the CALTECH/MIT Voting Technology Project which was widely distributed to the media in the days immediately following the election. The unnamed authors of this report stated:


    "If we look at the 51 separate exit state polls, we see that 30 predicted more votes for Kerry than he actually got, while 21 predicted more votes for Bush than he actually got. Therefore, at the state level, the polls favored Kerry less than the sum of all the polls aggregated up to the national level. Furthermore, if we do a statistical test to see whether the differences between the exit polls and the official returns are significant, only three out of 51 are.5 Therefore, while it is fair to say that the exit polls predicted a significantly greater vote for Kerry nationwide than the official returns confirmed, it is not immediately apparent that any systematic biases are revealed when we take the analysis down to the state level."

    This report was subsequently quoted in a November 12th New York Times front page article ("Vote Fraud Theories, Spread by Blogs, Are Quickly Buried") that purported to debunk Internet conspiracy theories and misconceptions about the 2004 election, including those about the exit polls. The New York Times stated:


    A preliminary study produced by the Voting Technology Project, a cooperative effort between the California Institute of Technology and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, came to a similar conclusion. Its study found "no particular patterns" relating to voting systems and the final results of the election.

    "The 'facts' that are being circulated on the Internet," the study concluded, "appear to be selectively chosen to make the point."

    However CALTECH/MIT's analysis had already been proved flawed on November 11 when Scoop.co.nz published the first iteration of a set of data that was fortuitously captured by VerifiedVoting.org activist Jonathan Simon in the early minutes of Nov. 3 (See… "47 State Exit Poll Analysis Confirms Swing Anomaly"). Dr Freeman's report was also based on this data. However Jonathan Simon had not managed to capture data for all states - hence the hunt for the full set of data continued.

    Interestingly after the Simon data was widely circulated in the blogosphere the authors of the CALTECH/MIT report edited their footnotes (see footnote 2 & compare with the version cited above & hosted on Scoop) making it clear that the source of their data was the publicly available Exit Poll reports on CNN.com which were "rebalanced" in the early hours of Nov. 3. This data which has effectively been recast to fit the final results cannot really be termed exit poll data at all and has been the source of a great deal of confusion.

    *************

    The complete set of New 4pm Edison & Mitofsky 2004 General Election exitpoll data follows in tabulated form (sorted in descending order of the magnitude of the "red shift"):

    EXIT POLLS
    ACTUAL RESULTS
    Red Shift
    State
    Kerry
    Bush
    Kerry
    Bush

    DE
    58.5
    41.5
    53
    46
    10
    VT
    65
    35
    59
    39
    10
    NH
    55.4
    44.6
    50
    49
    9.8
    SC
    46
    54
    41
    58
    9
    NE
    36.8
    63.3
    32
    67
    8.5
    AL
    41
    59
    37
    63
    8
    AK
    40.5
    59.5
    35
    62
    8
    NY
    63
    37
    58
    40
    8
    NC
    48
    52
    44
    56
    8
    CT
    58.5
    41.5
    54
    44
    7
    MA
    66
    34
    62
    37
    7
    RI
    64
    36
    60
    39
    7
    PA
    54.4
    45.7
    51
    49
    6.7
    MS
    43.3
    56.8
    40
    60
    6.5
    OH
    52.1
    47.9
    49
    51
    6.2
    FL
    50
    49
    47
    52
    6
    MN
    54.5
    45.5
    51
    48
    6
    AZ
    47
    53
    44
    55
    5
    ID
    33.5
    66.5
    30
    68
    5
    UT
    30.5
    69.5
    27
    71
    5
    VA
    47
    51
    45
    54
    5
    IL
    57
    43
    55
    45
    4
    LA
    44.5
    55.5
    42
    57
    4
    WI
    52.5
    47.5
    50
    49
    4
    WY
    29
    65
    29
    69
    4
    NM
    51.3
    48.7
    49
    50
    3.6
    WV
    45.3
    54.8
    43
    56
    3.5
    CO
    49.1
    50.9
    47
    52
    3.2
    GA
    43
    57
    41
    58
    3
    IN
    41
    59
    39
    60
    3
    MO
    47.5
    52.5
    46
    54
    3
    NJ
    55
    45
    53
    46
    3
    WA
    55
    45.1
    53
    46
    2.9
    IA
    50.7
    49.4
    49
    50
    2.3
    AR
    46.6
    53.4
    45
    54
    2.2
    KY
    41
    59
    40
    60
    2
    MI
    52.5
    47.5
    51
    48
    2
    OK
    35
    65
    34
    66
    2
    NV
    49.4
    50.7
    48
    51
    1.7
    ME
    54.8
    45.3
    53
    45
    1.5
    DC
    91
    9
    90
    9
    1
    MD
    57
    43
    56
    43
    1
    MT
    39.8
    60.3
    39
    59
    -0.5
    OR
    51.2
    48.8
    52
    48
    -1.6
    HI
    53.3
    46.7
    54
    45
    -2.4
    CA
    54
    46
    55
    44
    -3
    TN
    41.5
    58.5
    43
    57
    -3
    TX
    37
    63
    38
    61
    -3
    SD
    37.8
    62.3
    39
    60
    -3.5
    KS
    35
    65
    37
    62
    -5
    ND
    34
    66
    36
    63
    -5

    NOTE: red shift = the exit poll margin - final count margin

    *****************


    EXTENDED FOOTNOTE ON THE LIMITATIONS OF THIS DATA
    By Jonathan Simon

    Always keep in mind that this 4pm exit poll data is the early sweep, skewed for women (58% to 42%) and therefore towards John Kerry/Democrats.

    While this sample may have been accurate for the time of day measured (more women voting because of workforce composition and schedules), it constituted only one component of the full exit poll (63% of the sample), which consisted of two additional sweeps which reflected increased participation of men in later hours.

    Thus the later updates (c. 12:20 a.m.), which impounded all three sweeps but was posted before contamination with tabulated data, is the best results we have at this time for comparison with the final results.

    The first sweep has been singled out as having poisoned the whole barrel; but this is ridiculous - you simply need to make a slight adjustment to the final gender breakdown (@ 12:21 a.m.), if you believe that to be skewed, which has very little effect on the results (read on to see exactly how this works in terms of actual numbers).

    That is, whether or not the first sweep had some distortion relative to our expectations for that time of day - it all amounted to very little, and is easily and inconsequentially adjusted for in the long run.

    Let's see how it works. Take Florida with the 54% women/46% men exit poll sample that was supposed to be "way" off - you get the following for the full sample of respondents (men and women): 49.8% Bush, 49.7% Kerry.

    If we adjust the sample to 52% women/48% men (probably about right), you get the following for the full sample of men and women: 49.9% Bush, 49.6% Kerry - that's right, a whole glaring 1/10th of one percent difference.

    If we go "all the way" to a 50% women/50% men sample, now it's 50.0% Bush, 49.5% Kerry, a whole 'nother 1/10th of a percentage point.

    The reason for this is that the gender gap is just not that dramatic and neither is the gender departure from a perfectly weighted sample.

    In fact, if we want to get Bush up to a whole 1% lead, we'd have to take an exit poll sample of 55% men / 45% women.

    But Bush "won" Florida by 5% (52% to 47%), a "red flag" discrepancy from the exit poll, however the poll is weighted by gender. Here's a fun fact: to get the exit poll results to equal the tabulated outcome, you'd have to sample all men, that's right 100% men / 0% women, just like the good ol' days before they passed that blasted 19th Amendment.

    The argument has also been made that the early (morning/afternoon) exit poll sweeps were gender weighted 58% women/42% men, thereby invalidating the exit polls in general.

  10. #10

    Re: Was It Hacked?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Phoenix
    Complete US Exit Poll Data Confirms Net Suspicions
    Full 51 State Early Exit Poll Data Released For The First Time
    By Scoop Co-Editor Alastair Thompson
    Regards,
    Brian W. Ralston

    Check out my new FREE iPhone App! Click Here!

Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 6 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •