Daily Kos

Exit Polls and GOP fraud

Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 07:52:03 AM PDT

I'm no tinfoil hat guy, and generally try to take conspiracies with a grain of salt.  That being said, if this election once again produces results that are disjunctive with the exit polls, I'll be convinced that massive fraud will continue to take place for the foreseeable future, whether via electronic voting machines or more "bricks and mortar"-based methods (throwing away ballots, etc.)  Karl Rove's optimism might be, as Kos says, a bluff.  Or it might be the knowing smirking optimism of the prize fighter who knows his bout is rigged.

The question I have, what should we do about it?  I for one don't have any ideas.  But if the evidence is overwhelming (which it appears to be nearing) that massive fraud is tainting our elections, what should we do?

I'm not a scientist, but to me it seems highly likely that fraud has already occurred in every election since 2000.

First, we have the huge and unprecedented gaps between the exit polls and the actual counted results.  To me, this is the most obvious indicator that GOP vote fraud is occurring.  While the GOP faithful try to prop up spurious claims of a new "paradigm" (proposing such nonsense as "Republican voters are less likely to trust a poll watcher who they perceive to be liberal leaning" or "Republican voters are routinely undersampled in exit polls"), this defies decades of sampling, during which time far greater and more empirically validated paradigm shifts have actually occurred (more women voting, Moter Voter acts, the emergence of Nixon's "Silent Majority", etc.)  That polling methods worked through all these changes, without failing, and suddenly stopped working in 2000, and stopped working in 2000 in a way that was completely unidirectional (i.e. always overestimating the Democratic vote in national elections) and in a way that only failed in contested elections (i.e. from my understanding, exit polls were accurate, consistent with historical margins of error, in non-contested elections like Texas and New York State, but saw huge divergences from the actual vote count in contested elections like Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004), seems completely implausible.

Second, it is accepted as given by the GOP party faithful, including its hardcore leaders, that the Dems have engaged in fraud on a massive basis.  Talk to your average wingnut and he can cite, for days, instances of uncorroborated vote fraud that the Dems have committed (i.e. registering dead voters, submitting votes on behalf of senile elderly people, etc.).  Ask that wingnut why he or she can't corroborate his claims (other than from Rush or Hannity) and he or she will tell you it's because of the liberal media bias that pervades our country.  In short, the GOP party faithful believe that elections are already illegitimate.  Given this, is it so hard to believe that they wouldn't do what they can to tip the scales in their own favor, whether through legal or illegal means?

Third, we have already seen an enormous number of examples of Republicans, at both the highest and lowest levels, behaving illegally to keep the GOP in power (e.g., the NH phone jamming on election day, the K Street Project, the countless instances of African American voters complaining that they had been illegally denied the right to vote, Blackwell's misdeeds in 04, Bush v. Gore, etc. etc. etc.)  Given this propensity to break the law to win elections, along with the governing assumption among Republicans that elections are already illegitmate in this country due to massive fraud on the part of the Democrats, it appears to me quite likely that large parts of the GOP will continue to break the law to win elections.  I've been operating under the assumption that the GOP will steal 2-3 points in any election with national implications (this appears to be approximately the differential between the exit polls and the vote count).

The question is, how far will the GOP go?  Given that control of the House might seriously jeopardize the livelihoods and well-being of senior GOP officials (criminal investigations, anyone?), not to mention break the monopoly of power that was so hard for the GOP to attain, and given that the Dems are currently projected to win the House handily, will the GOP be so bold as to actually, and completely impossibly, "win" enough elections to keep control of the House?  What happens if the GOP does keep control of the House, winning races it is projected to lose by 10 or more points?  What to do?

Tags: Fraud, Elections, exit polls, stolen elections (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 15 comments

  •  Then we as Citizens will change the system (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    dkmin, Redfire

    We can use the ballot initiative in every state possible to eliminate these machines and go to a paper ballot.  I am actually in the process of starting a non profit that would coordinate efforts to clean up the election system in the United States one state at a time.  

  •  Vote Rigging == TREASON (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    grndrush, dotsright, MichiganGirl

    We need to enact SEVERE penalties for vote-rigging and election tampering.

    No slaps on the wrist. 30-to-life in Leavenworth.

    This is no less than sedition and attempted coup.

    It needs to be treated as such.

  •  Future polls will have to add a new element (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Redfire, cedelson

    to their forecasts:  "Votes cast but not counted."

    If you don't have an earth-shaking idea, get one, you'll love building a better world.

    by hestal on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 07:58:58 AM PDT

  •  Exit polls are not predictive (0+ / 0-)

    Charlie Cook visited us this week and addressed that question. He was pretty persuasive in making the case that exit polling is designed to help media understand who voted what, and why. It isn't a temperature reading that is intended to reflect the actual outcome of a given race, or confirm that outcome, or anything else with respect to the final tally except for very basic generalizations, i.e., Latinos favored candidate X and women preferred Y, etc.

    Every day's another chance to stick it to The Man. - dls.

    by The Raven on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 08:05:09 AM PDT

    •  This is nonsense (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      bdevil89

      The diarist is 100% correct. Until 2000, exit polling was extraordinarily accurate for decades. Including accounting for liars, etc. Decades.

      The Urkaine threw out the results of an election based on exit poll data - and the differences between the exit polls and the 'official' tallies in that race were LOWER than they were in the past two US Presidential elections.

      cdn

      "See you at the debates, bitches..." -- Paris Hilton

      by grndrush on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 01:28:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Read for yourself (0+ / 0-)

        Charlie explains the issue
        here.

        It isn't a major point with me either way. But he explains what exit polls are designed to do and what they don't do. It's his professional business to know these things. I'm deferring to his expertise on this one.  

        Every day's another chance to stick it to The Man. - dls.

        by The Raven on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 03:27:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Hi (0+ / 0-)

      Raven, you've got to be kidding me,

      Cook responded to my comments about the Ukrainian elections, and his response was downright laughable.

      He's either drinking so much kool-aid or else he's part of the game.

      To say exit polling is never been used to protect against fraud when they have been for over a good amount of time in US history clearly shows something is rotten in Denmark (or the US elections and media, for that matter).

      Persuasive, where? show the facts, and his attack on statisticians and computer scientists just shows his weak argument.

      •  Polling is polling (0+ / 0-)

        Hey, I'm not an expert on this, OK?

        It's not my business. I'm a language person.

        But Cook does this for a living, and I take his remarks as coming from an expert. So I use my imagination and I posit myself as a reporter (which I have been) and I'm snagging people on their way out the door of the precinct facility and I'm quizzing them.

        Does this tell me what the final numbers are going to be? Well, let's say I poll 100 voters, and all of them say they voted for Kerry. Then, checking the final tally, Bush wins the precinct. Hell yes something's amiss.

        But today, with these finely carved margins and 49/51 results, it doesn't seem that exit polling is an accurate, foolproof gauge of the final vote. If you have a link to some data that disproves anything I'm saying, shoot it to me. I want to be more educated on this stuff than I currently am.

        Every day's another chance to stick it to The Man. - dls.

        by The Raven on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 04:56:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Check out (0+ / 0-)

          Steven Freeman's analysis in his book or on his website.

          also, google truthisall, and check out his analysis.  He even poses a challenge to anyone to provide one scenario where bush wins based on the data (i.e. prepolling, "uncalibrated" exit poll data, and past 2000 voter data).  No one has stepped up.

          It's just laughable to me that Cook and the gang, all of sudden are saying exit polls are not indicative of the vote count when in Germany, Canada, and other common sensical countries use them, and have shown them to be accurate to within tenths of percentages.  

          Raven, put all the evidence into play as an objective reporter and there is no other conclusion, than this radical administration will stoop to anything to insure their power and escape from justice (our voting people in who will investigate them and keep them in check).

  •  GreyHawk started a thread asking for ideas (0+ / 0-)

    His commentary is The Spoilage of War (GOTV and voting integrity warning)


    But one thing is clear, "witnessing" is essential. We can't even begin to determine (much less prove) that vote tampering, rigging, or voter disenfranchisement is occurring if we don't, as they say, show up.

  •  www.BLACKBOXVOTING.ORG (0+ / 0-)

    The is another group organizing and traing people to video document what happens at the polls. Take action.

  •  Martial Law is what will happen (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    grndrush, McGirk

    Haliburton is building the jails already. Bush will declare martial law on Wednesday morning as the abnormal exit poll results are announced that contradict the actual results and people take to the streets in protest.

    "Tin Soliders and Nixon's coming, 4 dead in Ohio"

    expect numbers much higher than 4 dead - closer to 400 I'm betting.

    •  They (0+ / 0-)

      won't even be announcing the exit polls until they "calibrate" it with fraudulent vote count.

      They're not going to make that mistake again like in 2004.

      We have to have non-partisan independent exit polling.

      All I have to say is that I have no doubt if the elections were transparent and fair, that the Dems take back the House with a sizable margin, and the Senate with a two seat advantage.

      But e-voting, purging of voter rolls, long lines, vote flipping, and classic voter suppression will give the Repubs the votes they need to supposedly win.

  •  This will be ignored (0+ / 0-)

    But I will try anyway.

    here is a link to analysis of polling in the '04 race.  The margin of error is very low - which tends to refute the black box voting theories.

    http://www.ncpp.org/...

    Take Ohio.  Bush lead in 8 of the last 10 polls.  The average of the last 10 was 1.3% - he won by 2%.  If you through the Harris polls (Which we done via the Internet) the average is 2.0 - exactly what the final result was.

    The Florida numbers ARE strange - but if you look at the other battleground states there is no evidence of a systematic variance in favor of the GOP.

    There.  I tried.

Permalink | 15 comments