Skip to main content

View Diary: Gotcha! Gallup Commits "Polling Malpractice" Startling New Info/Controversy on Poll (348 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Okay, you have convinced me that (0+ / 0-)

    election polls are not a "gold standard" and can be fraught with difficulties.  This is the problem with statistical measuring, in general, however.  I still think they are pointing to something because of all the other evidence (a combination of a number of different strategies) of stolen elections and how they almost always fail in Republicans (the thieves) favor.  Evidence which you ignore because you see no "smoking gun" submitted to a "peer- reviewed journal".

    I don't know what you define as a "smoking gun" but I see a roomful of them.  Tell me, which "peer review journal" would one submit a massive coordinated effort of a number of different strategies (many designed to insulate the top from the bottom to prevent prosecution) to steal the vote?  Which one?  Sure, the statistical polling can be called into question, but that is only part of the evidence suggesting vote fraud.  Perhaps you should avail yourself of these excellent articles  and resources and let me know if its not up to your standards.  Here are a few:  

    1. Ten preliminary reasons why the Bush vote does not compute, and why Congress must investigate rather than certify the Electoral College (Part One of Two)
    1. The "Crime of November 2":  The human side of how Bush stole Ohio, and why Congress must investigate rather than ratify the Electoral College (Part Two of Two)
    1. The Conyers Report: What Went Wrong in Ohio, reviewed by Thom Hartman (and many others) and available from Amazon or as a download (pdf).  

    I will not rely as much on exit polls in my argument, but that does not dissuade me in the least that these elections were stolen.  There have been numerous articles and investigations into illegal, criminal activities involving these elections, but like most things with Bush, they either go uninvestigated, unanswered or/and unprosecuted.   I can no longer adopt an "innocent until proven guilty" stance with Bush, the Republicans and the criminals and traitors behind them.  That is exactly what they count on while they continue to steal this country and and destroy it, and all of our futures.

    You don't negotiate with fascists, you defeat them in the name of democracy. --Ambr. Joe Wilson

    by FightTheFuture on Fri Aug 01, 2008 at 01:25:54 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  hello again (0+ / 0-)

      You're still being presumptuous. How can you judge what evidence I "ignore" if we haven't discussed it? Still, this is beginning to feel more like a conversation.

      A common confusion in discussing this subject is to confuse evidence of fraud with evidence that Kerry won or should have won. The former may or may not be the latter; the latter may or may not be the former. (As I've mentioned, there's a decent case that Kerry should have won New Mexico; it's not obvious whether the problem was due to fraud.)

      Most of the material in the Conyers report is pretty solid, although it's sort of a mish-mash. (For instance, on p. 54, the report buys into the "Connally anomaly," or as the report puts it, "the established principle that downballot party candidates receive far less votes than the presidential candidate of the same party." That "principle" is wildly overstated.) I agree with the conclusion on page 100: "Whether the cumulative effect of these legal violations would have altered the actual outcome is not known at this time."

      I'm not sure where to start with the Free Press stuff. Is there some part of this that you find especially convincing that a net 120,000 votes were switched? Some of it seems almost silly: "Most striking is a pattern where turnout percentages (votes cast as a percentage of registered voters) in cities won by Kerry were 10 percentage points or more lower than in the regions won by Bush, a virtually impossible scenario." It's hardly surprising to have lower turnout in cities, nor is it surprising that Kerry did well in the biggest counties, which tend to include the biggest cities. (But I agree that a lot of Kerry voters were disenfranchised because of machine misallocation in Franklin County.)

      If you're looking for a workout, try plowing through the articles here.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site