Man I love this guy - I'm gonna give him my first born.
Tonight on his blog he looks at the UC Berkeley Research Team report and discusses it thoroughly.
He even seems to takes a shot at the media for not covering it more.
click here to read
I assume he'll be talking about it on his show once more.
Here's a snippet:
SECURE UNDISCLOSED LOCATION-- I'm beginning to think like Jim Bunning now.
So far in this post-election trip through Alice's looking glass we've had:
--a University of Pennsylvania professor defending the accuracy of exit polling in order damn the accuracy of vote counting;
--a joint CalTech/MIT study defending the accuracy of exit polling in order to confirm the accuracy of vote counting;
--a series of lesser academic works assailing the validity of the Penn and CalTech/MIT assessments;
--and now, a UC Berkeley Research Team report that concludes President Bush may have received up to 260,000 more votes in fifteen Florida counties than he should have, all courtesy the one-armed bandits better known as touch-screen voting systems.
And, save, for one "New York Times"reference to the CalTech/MIT study "disproving" the idea that the exit poll results were so wacky that they required thoroughly botched election nights in several states, the closest any of these research efforts have gotten to the mainstream media have been "Wired News" and "Countdown."
I still hesitate to endorse the `media lock-down' theory extolled so widely on the net. I've expended a lot of space on the facts of political media passivity and exhaustion, and now I'll add one factor to explain the collective shrugged shoulder: reading this stuff is hard. It's hard work.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240