Kerry won......
 

Well, it happened 4 years ago and it happened once again :glugglug

Yep, bush is a fucker !

joly shit, these people need to shut it and fucking move on

these accusations do nothing but bad things and create a false hope

And not every official is happy to have your vote. It is well-reported that Broward County, Fla., failed to send out nearly 60,000 absentee ballots. What has not been nationally reported is that Broward's elections supervisor is a Jeb Bush appointee who took the post only after the governor took the unprecedented step of removing the prior elected supervisor who happened be a Democrat.

Greg Palast is one of the country's best investigative journalists... which lends credibility to the assertion.

Haven't read full article...but sounds interesting.

No shit..... Here's one for the conspiracy Kerry Kids......
http://us.st5.yimg.com/store1.yimg.c...s_1811_1251820

Kerry won but Bush is the president..............who won?

"If the vote is stolen here, it will be stolen in Rio Arriba County," a New Mexico politician told me. That's a reasoned surmise: in 2000, one in 10 votes simply weren't counted?chucked out, erased, discarded. In the voting biz, the technical term for these vanishing votes is "spoilage." Citizens cast ballots, but the machines don't notice. In one Rio Arriba precinct in the last go-'round, not one single vote was cast for president?or, at least, none showed up on the machines.

So there is actually no record of these votes? 1/10 of votes weren't counted because of computer error not picking up what the people hit?

If these numbers can be solidified, I can only hope Kerry and everyone else will put up a fight saying - we want who won, and none of the bullshit from last time.

All you need is the elecotral vote and not the majority vote to win.

Matt

I'm dreaming they are fighting behind the scenes but in reality I doubt they are doing a damn thing about it.

You would be stupid to believe that Republicans are the only ones that pull bullshit on elections because the Democrats do the same shit.

So that's what's up!

exit polls show kerry winning then bush wins, exit polls are the same people that voted on the machines. Doesnt that make you question or are you sheep ?

:sadcrying Fucking crybabies.

First of all, in that editorial it says "...it's my job to tell you who got the most votes in the deciding states. Tuesday, in Ohio and New Mexico, it was John Kerry." The guy calls New Mexico a deciding state. It hasn't even been called yet by CNN, and Bush wins even if he loses New Mexico.

Second and more importantly he says "CNN's exit poll showed Kerry beating Bush among Ohio women by 53 percent to 47 percent. Kerry also defeated Bush among Ohio's male voters 51 percent to 49 percent. Unless a third gender voted in Ohio, Kerry took the state."

Below is CNN's Ohio page showing graphs of CNN's EXIT POLL of Ohio.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pag.../00/index.html
It shows that Bush beat Kerry 52% to 47% among men and tied with 50% each among women. Who are you going to believe? Some unknown guy's representation of CNN's exit polls or CNN's representation of CNN's exit polls.

Get over it you fucking crybabies! Bush won fair and square.

You obviously didn't see the previous exit polls on Ohio. It was reported and re-reported in a variety of outlets that Kerry was ahead in Ohio. The ones on CNN now show him behind. Doesn't make you wonder at all though does it?

Holy fuck. I wish it was a pre-requisite to READ ALL INFORMATION before posting.

Matt

Uh huh. The previous polls. The early polls? You mean the ones leaked out by who knows who before the voting was even done? Well sir, I just pointed you to CNN's complete exit poll of Ohio. You can continue to rely on the incomplete poll if you wish, but it just makes you look like an ignorant, tin foil hat wearing, little crybaby. But hey man if that makes you feel better then by all means, continue.

Can you stop IGNORING THE FACTs posted about voters being stopped from voting?

Can you at least ACKNOWLEDGE that that happened/happens? Whether for Kerry or Bush.

Matt

I mean the ones that were on CNN's website when the journalist read it fuckwit. Should he see in the future to write his articles from now on?

The government in power actually has the power to stop certain people from voting if they chose; the people trying to get in power don't have that power / abuse of power.

If they did both have that ability to abuse power, then you could assume it would be fair / equal, and then it wouldn't be a "problem."

Matt

While there is no hard proof in the story i'm thinking that if the exit polls show Kerry winning and the actual voting show bush it's enough for at least an investigation in something as important this...

Will never happen without a push from Kerry.

every body knew that this would happen. Kerry got the votes, but Bush has the power and the means. So it was obvious that Bush would win... We are so fucked!!!!!!!!

won't happen anyway. and yes this thing about black voters (who are 90% democratic) being cheated out of their right to vote happend again in crucial states, especially Ohio....
it's so obvious and still almost all Americans buy it and head on for 4 more years of shit.

Hey man, I don't know if I could even find a link with a quote of it or not, but I remember seeing on election day, on tv, Kerry himself saying the voting is going orderly and fairly when he thought he was winning because of the early exit polls, which ended up showing that Kerry lost.

To sum up. The early exit polls showed Kerry ahead. The final exit polls show that Bush won. The vote counts show that Bush won. The exit polls show that "moral values" were the single largest issue cited most often in the exit polls. Bush won fair and square. If you think Bush stole the election you think that simply because you want to.

Well I live in Ohio and we didn't have any electronic voting shit at my place. It was good old fashioned punch cards. I don't know about the rest of Ohio but my part of Ohio (northeastern), did NOT have electronic voting machines and it also went for kerry...The whole rest of the state was blood red. So it was the hicks who voted him in. I don't think there was a conspiracy.

Did I say Bush stole the election? No.

Do you not think that this is a big enough issue to have investigated though? Would it hurt anyone (other than possibly Bush) if things done prior to the election day by government / politicians had an affect?

Matt

I'm a black voter in Ohio and we weren't cheated out of shit....The young black vote didn't come out at all. Blacks cheated OURSELVES out of this election. It had absolutely nothing to do with "the man" or any conspiracy shit like that....What it boils down to is that niggas were in the bed sleeping or getting high or fuckin or whatever the fuck else besides getting their lazy asses out to vote.

Read the date of the article. 11/04/04 That's yesterday. He didn't have to see in the future. CNN's final exit poll results were added to their website before yesterday. I don't know who Greg Palast is but he's obviously full of shit.

Also you could have went to CNN to verify those numbers before you posted that bullshit article. If you're going to use CNN's exit polls to say Bush stole an election shouldn't you actually go to CNN and look at their exit polls?

Its over Johnny. Over.

Swap "full article" for "the issues" and "sounds" for "looks" and you'll have one of the motives that drove most people to vote for Kerry.

Some people just can't make it to the acceptance phase.

:glugglug

First of all, that article is being reprinted in several outlets and I think they stamp their own time on them.

Second, I did look at the exit polls listed on CNN but they were changed out of the blue Wed morning.

http://www.jihadunspun.com/intheatre...list=/home.php

"But by far the most wide source of public suspicion about the results came from the stark difference between the exit polls, which showed strong Kerry leads in many battleground states including Ohio and Florida, and the actual results in those same states. Bush achieved a 5% margin of victory in Florida and came very close to winning Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

Add in the fact that the reported exit poll results were changed in the early hours of Wednesday morning, and there was a recipe for suspicion brewing in the online internet vote fraud community last night."

And in case you don't actually read anything that is put in front of you I'll sum that one up too. The exit polls were all pretty much accurate EXCEPT in states like OH, PA, and FL where Bush ended up well outside of the margin of error.

More from that article

Already there a variety of odd phenomena which have aroused suspicions about this possibility:

For example:

- In Florida Bush received a million extra votes, while Kerry received only 500,000 extra votes, in spite of a massive Democratic Get-Out-The-Vote(GOTV) and registration campaign in that state;

- In Florida's Broward County, a democratic stronghold and heavily black community, unauditable voting machines recorded a 33% (70,000+) vote gain on Bush's 2000 results and a much smaller gain to Kerry ? again Broward was the scene of a massive GOTV campaign;

- In several places voters reported ( http://www.infozine.com/news/stories...View/sid/4154/) voting for Kerry but noticing the machine record their vote for Bush;

The problem with the way these companies are performing the exit polls is that the error is unknown. If you take a completely random sample of all voters in a state the standard deviation is the square root of the number of people in the exit poll. This allows you to define the error.

The problem with exit polls is they are not a random sample and the error is unknown. They are not a random sample of the population because the variables include time and place. If you sample more in urban areas you get more Kerry voters, for example. If you sample during work hours you get a different voter than before or after work.

I am just guessing but the exit polls were probably conducted more in urban areas than rural ones.

Analysis Of Exit Polls Vs. Supposed Ballot Counts
Method,

Grab one site which lists the exit polls before they were "corrected.?

(Correction is the procedure by which the exit polls are retrofitted to match the figures provided by the vote counting machines. It is easily done by changing the exit poll results, such as the 2.00 a.m. flip-flop of the Nevada exit poll scores which was done without any change to the sample size. A slightly less obvious sleight of hand is to alter the weighting. Weighting is the name for a multiplier used to correct sample subgroups to match the proportions in the whole of a state population. Thus an exit poll can be ?corrected? by saying something to the effect,

?Oh well, the vote results show we must have under sampled Republicans and therefore we?ll multiply that subgroup of the exit poll sample by 1.5 to make our results fit the figures the ballot counting machines are spitting out.?)

Here is one list as an example of raw (pre-correction) exit poll data:

http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=386

[Note another list was published on Scoop.co.nz HERE - Scoop editor]

Then take a look at the results by state, such as on this chart:

http://news.yahoo.com/electionresults

There is a bit of math involved but don't worry, I taught market research at a University - a place where Republicans fear to tread, according to the media?s own polls! The Bush people argue that the exit polls are skewed by the methodology employed. It is odd that they don?t say what that error producing part of the methodology might be. A skew means a systematic error is introduced by the test protocol and causes a consistent shift in one direction.

IF this was true, then all the exit polls would show the same sort of shift from 'actual' results.

The GOP offer an alternative argument that the exit polls are not large enough samples and therefore the results are off by a large random error.

IF this was true, then the exit polls should scatter on either side of the actual result, especially if the final result is close to 50/50.

So what do we actually see when comparing exit polls with actual results?

There is skew - but ONLY in states which the Republicans had previously stated to be target states in play. The skew is in the same direction every time; that is to say in favor of Bush.

The exit poll results are not scattered about the mean as the alternative theory predicts.

They are all on the Kerry side of the vote counts as issued by the states except for a hand full of states which hit amazingly close to the exit poll figures.

Here are the figures. They list the four contemporaneous and uncorrected exit polls. Kerry is listed first and Bush second in each pair of figures. Published = the figure presented as the vote count as of 10.00 a.m. EST on 11/3/04


Arizona
Poll one 45-55 Final 45-55 Published 44-55
Colorado
Poll one 48-51 2nd 48-50 3rd 46-53 Published 46-53

Louisiana
Poll one 42-57 Final 43-56 Published 42-57

Michigan
Poll one 51-48 Published 51-48 Published 51-48

Iowa
Poll one 49-49 3rd 50-48 Final 49-49 Published 49-50

New Mexico
Poll one 50-48 2nd 50-48 3rd 50-48 Final 50-49 Published 49-50

Maine 3rd poll 55-44 Published 53-45

Nevada:
3rd poll 48-49 Published 48-51

Arkansas:
3rd poll 45-54 Published 45-54

Missouri
Final 46-54 Published 46-53

These tracking polls were right where you would expect them to be and within the margin of error. However, if we look at some other states, the figures are beyond curious. either the exit polls were wrong or the vote count is wrong:


Wisconsin
Poll one 52-48 3rd 51-46 Final 52-47 Published 50-49
Pennsylvannia
Poll one 60-40 3rd 54-45 Final 53-46 Published 51-49

Ohio
Poll one 52-48 2nd 50-49 3rd 50-49 Final 51-49 Published 49-51

Florida
Poll one 51-48 2nd 50-49 3rd 50-49 Final 51-49 Published 47-52

Minnesota
Poll one 58-40 3rd 58-40 Final 54-44 Published 51-48

New Hampshire
Poll one 57-41 3rd 58-41 Published 50-49

North Carolina
Poll one 3rd 49-51 Final 48-52 Published 43-56

Taking the figures and measuring the size and direction of the poll to supposed vote count discrepancy, we find the variance between the exit poll and the final result:


Wisconsin
Bush plus 4%
Pennnsylvannia
Bush plus 5%

Ohio
Bush plus 4%

Florida
Bush plus 7%

Minnesota
Bush plus 7%

New Hampshire
Bush plus 15%

North Carolina'
Bush plus 9%

Should also note that realclearpolitics.com averaged a number of polls before the election and predicted the winner in, I believe, 49 out of 50 states. This was a very predictable election. Which state was a surprise? Not Ohio. Bush was ahead in 7 out of the last 8 polls in Ohio.

"If we go back in history to prior presidential elections, those exit polls were dead on," said Dennis Simon, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. "Something has changed to make them less dead on."

I wonder what it is that changed? ;-)

It doesn't even matter to these people man. They'll spin it however they have to to be able to say "poor us. we got cheated. republicans are evil. bush is the devil."

I'm going to bed.

A vote for Kerry is really a vote for Bush on some electronic voting machines.

http://www.infozine.com/news/stories...View/sid/4154/

And before all of you go yelling about how it isn't so someone posted a personal experience on GFY of voting straight democratic but the summary screen showing Bush.

http://www.hfienberg.com/clips/exitpolls.htm

Now I'm going to bed.

Do you not see a problem with millions of votes being "spoiled", electronic voting machines choosing the wrong candidate, republicans using an old ass law to challenge voters in democratic areas, overseas ballots not being recieved, and a myriad of other fuck ups from this "great nation"?

Or are you just a republican that doesn't give a fuck how your candidate got elected you'll just accept what you are told at face value and fuck if it's right or not?

well at least you are one of the brothers that can admit it. Same bull shit happened with the 18-25 voters.. they didn't do shit but sit around and play their X box instead of voting.

It's a shame that that's probably what happened. Probably one of the most important elections in our live time and people were too lazy to vote. Its sad isn't it?

He may be a political scientist but his knowledge of statistics and political history is obviously deficient.

If you don't have a random sample of the population you can have an extremely large error. You really can't even define the error. because they can be systematic.

The 2000 exit polling was replete with error. "Voter News Service" handled the 2000 election. It was said to be a "disaster", "comical" and "a joke". As a result, the networks stopped using them for 2004.

Here's a quick snippet from a 2000 article.

http://baltimore.bizjournals.com/bal...27/daily7.html

"Why the uniformity of (wrong) results? This can be explained by a lack of competition. All of the "competing" major networks are actually colluding with one another, and they call their collusion the Voter News Service. Since they all relied upon the same pooled data, naturally they all made the same error," Lande said.

Lovely aint it?

The problem I see is I read all these people (ok, Democrats) predicting landslide victories for Kerry last week when the average of all the polls was saying it was going to be very close, coming down to Ohio and Florida but with Bush winning in a squeaker.

There were many sites with electoral vote counts and almost all showed an advantage for Bush. One, which used the worst methodology, was latched upon by all those who wanted Kerry to win and there were reason given for how this was a guaranteed win for Kerry. People who really wanted Kerry to win kept on talking about the Democrats getting young people to vote but somehow forgot the Republicans were working their asses off too. Both sides did a great job of getting more people to vote for them in all markets.

In the end, this election was almost a carbon copy of 2000 with the same cultural divide as always. The pre-election poll averages were right on the money.

Kerry won? Does he know this?