Susan Estrich Blows The Rigged Election Wide Open

[ViRedd]

GR sez ...

"The same way ... you will notice ... and nice link by the way ... that McSame is up by as much as 19 points ... but did you notice no independent candidates are listed in the recent polls? National was the only one when they did ... That's to shape the opinion of a two party system ... see how that works Vi?"

Oh, believe me, I know the game they are playing. That's why I've posted so many times about the third party candidates not being in the debates. There are third party candidates that would tear McCain and O'Bama a new one if they had a chance. But they have no chance. Even Ron Paul was very marginalized by the media ... including so called right wing media like Fox. The only person to treat Ron Paul fairly was/is Glenn Beck.

Vi

 

[GrowRebel]

http://www.truthout.org/video/greg-palast-rove-has-already-fixed-2008-electionGreg Palast: Rove Has Already Fixed the 2008 Election

http://www.truthout.org/article/rfk-jr-and-mike-papantonio-is-your-vote-safeRFK Jr., Mike Papantonio: "Is Your Vote Safe?"
[snip]
"For example, if I registered as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and yet my motor vehicle license said Robert Frances Kennedy Jr. I'd be removed from the rolls. If your initial is different, if you leave an initial out, if you leave a "Jr." out, if you leave a hyphen out in your name.
[snip]
...the Democrats are doing nothing to stop it. In New Jersey, which is a swing state, 300,000 voters in New Jersey were just sent letters saying that they are now ineligible to vote. New jersey is nice enough to actually notify them - most states will not even notify them. And New Jersey intends to send out 870,000 letters so that is three quarters of a million people off the voting rolls in a state that could decide this vote by 50,000 votes. And these are Democrats that are being pushed off the rolls.

"Let me tell you about one other of these scams people should know about. If you're a newly registered voter - and of course the Democrats have done these gigantic registration drives - 12 million people on registration - if you're a new voter you MUST include your license or some other state I.D. when you come to vote. What that means is that if you're a college kid (and college kids now - they're sending in absentee ballots - they're not going to the voting place, they do everything online or they do everything remotely - they don't dream of going to the precinct house voting on election day and waiting in a long line) so if they send in the absentee ballot and they don't include a color copy of their license their vote is going to be thrown into a trash can. And none of these people know this because you have had to read the law in order to know it. So there is no notification for when you fill out your registration form, so all of those 12 million people that the Democrats have registered: those ballots are going to be just thrown out.

Like I said ... the fix is in ... they are doing EVERYTHING in their power to make sure YOUR VOTE DOESN'T COUNT as you can see they have already removed millions ... it will take that much and more to stop the fraud ... so get your asses out and vote ...

 

[GrowRebel]

[URL="http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2008/09/27.html"]COULD 2008 BE ANOTHER 2004 STOLEN ELECTION ?[/URL]
It does not take too many states to hijack an election as witnessed in 2004 when four crucial GOP targeted states showed Kerry leading substantially in polls on election day ~ only to have the states flip to Bush with each state demonstrating clear election violations and fraud

 

[GrowRebel]

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Election-Theft-for-2008-Al-by-Kevin-Zeese-080915-186.htmlElection Theft for 2008 Already Underway
The campaigns are in full gear, the candidates are picked, TV ads are running, and election corruption is taking hold. Around the country, particularly in swing states, there are stories of efforts to undercut voter registration especially by poor and African American voters. In addition, this summer has seen story after story of the potential corruption and likely dysfunction of electronic voting machines.


Take heed people ... they are working overtime to steal this election as they have done the others ... the only way to stop them is get out in large numbers ... far more than the numbers they remove from the rolls ... and vote

 

[GrowRebel]

For those of you that are concerned about the election fraud that is taking place I strongly suggest you watch these videos ...
[URL="http://www.prisonplanet.com/cyber-security-expert-hackers-planning-to-steal-election-for-mccain.html"]Cyber Security Expert: Hackers Planning To Steal Election For McCain

[/URL]
The other videos are to the right of the page ...
YouTube

 

[GrowRebel]

[URL="http://snardfarker.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2142922%3ABlogPost%3A67431"]Non-profit offers $100k reward for info tying Rove to election rigging Andrew McLemore[/URL]
A non-profit organization has offered a $100,000 reward to anyone who can supply information tying Republican strategist Karl Rove and computer expert Michael Connell to illegally manipulated elections, according to a Friday press release.

They are going to pay out 100K real soon ...

 

[GrowRebel]

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/10/04/homer-simpson-tries-to-vote-for-obama/Homer Simpson tries to vote for Obama



It's funny ... but it's not ... Check it out ... "six votes for president mccain" ... that cracked me up ...

 

[GrowRebel]

So what did you guys think of the Homer video? ... Pretty funny huh? ... usually when it's true ... it's funny ...
here are more videos on the rigged elections ...
this one is with Nader ... check it ...
Corporate Controlled Elections

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBqnl_tyLAc5 Friends? Hell, tell 10 and tell them there are 6 presidential candidates who are on the ballot in enough states to win enough electoral votes to win the election: Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney, Chuck Baldwin, Obama and McCain

Some dirty tricks going on ... beware ...
http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20081002_Vote-scam_fliers_target_black_neighborhoods.htmlVote-scam fliers target black neighborhoods

With just weeks to go before the presidential election, voter intimidation has reared its ugly head.
An anonymous flier circulating in African-American neighborhoods in North and West Philadelphia states that voters who are facing outstanding arrest warrants or who have unpaid traffic tickets may be arrested at the polls on Election Day.
Deputy Mayor for Public Safety Everett Gillison, who learned of the flier last week, said that the message is completely false


http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0810/S00012.htm[Video] Former Diebold Contractor Blows The Whistle On Election Manipulations


VR has an exclusive interview with former Diebold contractor Chris Hood that talks about many disturbing actions by Diebold during prior elections, including illegal, uncertified and unreported patches, and improper feeding of tabulation results by Diebold Chief Bob Urosevitch. This interview was prepared for a major news program special that was supposed to air two weeks before the 2006 midterm election. At the last moment, however, the special was killed by the corporate media.


http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/appel/judge-suppresses-report-voting-machine-securityJudge Suppresses Report on Voting Machine Security


A judge of the New Jersey Superior Court has prohibited the scheduled release of a report on the security and accuracy of the Sequoia AVC Advantage voting machine. Last June, Judge Linda Feinberg ordered Sequoia Voting Systems to turn over its source code to me (serving as an expert witness, assisted by a team of computer scientists) for a thorough examination. At that time she also ordered that we could publish our report 30 days after delivering it to the Court--which should have been today.


Here's one of the excuses they will use if they are able to pull off the fraud they currently working on ...



http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB122282400242492827-lMyQjAxMDI4MjAyMTgwMjE0Wj.htmlNew Voters Like Obama, But May Not Show up at Polls
So blame THEM for McCain's Miraculous come-from-behind" victory in November! (Nudge nudge wink wink)


Here's another report of voters being purged from the rolls ... can you say ... "the fix is in" ...



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/30/eveningnews/main4490682.shtml?source=search_storyReport Raises Questions About Voter Purges
With Election Day rapidly approaching, a new report, obtained exclusively by CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian, raises serious questions and exposes flaws in the way states maintain their voter registration rolls.
States and counties regularly update their voter registration rolls for accuracy, removing people who have moved, died, or committed a felony. It is known as "voter purging."


Millions of voters are being disenfrancished on a mass scale ... can anyone honestly say after reviewing the links in this thread that the election is not being stolen big time?

 

[GrowRebel]

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=5963751'Tis the Season of Election Dirty Tricks: Scaring Student Voters
Election officials and watchdog groups are bracing for the wave of sneaky or suspicious phone calls, leaflets and emails that typically hit battleground states in the final 30 days of the presidential campaign.
Young voters at Drexel University in Philadelphia, Penn. have already been targeted, with students reporting that flyers have been posted around campus warning that undercover police will be at the polls on Election Day looking to make arrests.

 

[GrowRebel]

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/florida-countys.htmlFlorida Primary Recount Reveals Grave Voting Problems One Month Before Presidential Election
A month of primary recounts in the election battleground of Palm Beach County, Florida, has twice flipped the winner in a local judicial race and revealed grave problems in the county's election infrastructure, including thousands of misplaced ballots and vote tabulation machines that are literally unable to produce the same results twice.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9116465E-voting security results 'awful,' says Ohio secretary of state
I think other election officials around the country are now realizing, thanks to you and [California Secretary of State Deborah Bowen] coming up with these tests, that it's not just crazy bloggers who are concerned about this stuff.
Oh no, no. When I finally saw the results of our [EVEREST] tests, I thought I was going to throw up.
I didn't think it would be that bad. And it was -- it was awful. I looked at it on a Saturday morning, and that night I went to bed and woke up [just before 4:00 on] Sunday morning going, "Oh my God." I never wake up on the weekends -- trust me.




The fix is in people ... denial is not just a river in Egypt ...

 

[TheBrutalTruth]

http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2008/09/27.htmlCOULD 2008 BE ANOTHER 2004 STOLEN ELECTION ?
It does not take too many states to hijack an election as witnessed in 2004 when four crucial GOP targeted states showed Kerry leading substantially in polls on election day ~ only to have the states flip to Bush with each state demonstrating clear election violations and fraud

The exit polls, meaning people who had a desire to actually tell some one who they voted for, despite probably either needing to get to work, get back to work, or having a desire to get home.

The reliability of the exit polls is over stated. Especially considering the fact that in 2004 in New Mexico, at the poll where I went there was no exit poll.

GrowRebel, Rumor and Hearsay are still just Rumor and Hearsay, and exit polls are Rumor and Hearsay.

 

[GrowRebel]

The exit polls, meaning people who had a desire to actually tell some one who they voted for, despite probably either needing to get to work, get back to work, or having a desire to get home.

The reliability of the exit polls is over stated. Especially considering the fact that in 2004 in New Mexico, at the poll where I went there was no exit poll.

GrowRebel, Rumor and Hearsay are still just Rumor and Hearsay, and exit polls are Rumor and Hearsay.

Exit polls have always been accurate ... in other counties it was used as evidence of election fraud ... exit polls are NOT rumor and hearsay ... who told you that? ... Faux news?

 

[GrowRebel]

It's good to keep a record of these reports in case they are able to pull off stealing another election ...
[URL="http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2008/3229"]GOP attacks on American voters turn desperate, ugly and dangerous[/url]
The GOP assault on American voters has hit full stride as the economy and John McCain tank in synch.
With just over three weeks until election day, the Republicans have mounted an all-out attack against newly registered voters and the organizations working to sign them up. As many as 75% of these new voters are expected to vote Democratic, but the attacks have also spread to long-established voters as well. Recent calculations show more than a million more newly registered Democrats in Ohio than Republicans.

I wonder if they will be able to steal another election ... they were only partually able to steal 2006 ... yet ... they were able to keep the dim from having a clear majority in the house ...
... the election fraud machine is without a doubt working in high gear ... we shall see ...

 

[TheBrutalTruth]

It's good to keep a record of these reports in case they are able to pull off stealing another election ...
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2008/3229GOP attacks on American voters turn desperate, ugly and dangerous
The GOP assault on American voters has hit full stride as the economy and John McCain tank in synch.
With just over three weeks until election day, the Republicans have mounted an all-out attack against newly registered voters and the organizations working to sign them up. As many as 75% of these new voters are expected to vote Democratic, but the attacks have also spread to long-established voters as well. Recent calculations show more than a million more newly registered Democrats in Ohio than Republicans.

I wonder if they will be able to steal another election ... they were only partually able to steal 2006 ... yet ... they were able to keep the dim from having a clear majority in the house ...
... the election fraud machine is without a doubt working in high gear ... we shall see ...

Grow Rebel, you attack Fox News, and then go on to cite an even more biased news source... I'm so unimpressed, as far as the exit polls being unreliable.

Irish Trojan in Tennesseeon't trust the unweighted exit polls!

Exit poll error? It’s the Shy Tory Factor, not the Bradley Effect Neither Red nor Blue

Of public opinion, exit polls and fraud (or the lack thereof) (Part 2) | Neural Gourmet Archives

Shortcomings Of Exit Polls, Early Numbers Showed Kerry Headed To Victory - CBS News

Howard Fienberg: Don’t Trust the Exit Polls, Front Page Magazine

Seems to me that the unreliability of the exit polls is pretty common knowledge.

Of course, one can easily expect people not to act with common sense, because common sense isn't all that common.

You are also failing to account for the fact that most exit polls are going to take place inside cities, where there are more people voting, as opposed to rural areas where there are fewer. Not only do you have a sampling error due to the fact that not everyone chooses to participate, but you have an additional sampling error caused by the lack of data for areas outside heavily populated areas.

 

[GrowRebel]

Grow Rebel, you attack Fox News, and

Oh yeah .... which is real easy to do since they are not a creditable news source ... hell ... there's even a study out that proves faux news views are stupid ...

then go on to cite an even more biased news source...

The freepress has been an authority on election fraud unlike the corporate media ... but of course you wouldn't know that being a fauxnews viewer ...

I'm so unimpressed, as far as the exit polls being unreliable.

No ... the exit polls are very reliable ... you just fell for the corporate media bullshit ...

Seems to me that the unreliability of the exit polls is pretty common knowledge.

Only to the corporate media ... and right wing nut job bloggers ... who did all they could to cover up the election fraud that took place ...

You are also failing to account for the fact that most exit polls are going to take place inside cities, where there are more people voting, as opposed to rural areas where there are fewer. Not only do you have a sampling error due to the fact that not everyone chooses to participate, but you have an additional sampling error caused by the lack of data for areas outside heavily populated areas.

You obviously don't know what the hell you are talking about ... but is that surprising for someone that watch fauxnews? ... I think not ...
I. The Exit Polls
The first indication that something was gravely amiss on November 2nd, 2004, was the inexplicable discrepancies between exit polls and actual vote counts. Polls in thirty states weren't just off the mark -- they deviated to an extent that cannot be accounted for by their margin of error. In all but four states, the discrepancy favored President Bush.(16)
Over the past decades, exit polling has evolved into an exact science. Indeed, among pollsters and statisticians, such surveys are thought to be the most reliable. Unlike pre-election polls, in which voters are asked to predict their own behavior at some point in the future, exit polls ask voters leaving the voting booth to report an action they just executed. The results are exquisitely accurate: Exit polls in Germany, for example, have never missed the mark by more than three-tenths of one percent.(17) ''Exit polls are almost never wrong,'' Dick Morris, a political consultant who has worked for both Republicans and Democrats, noted after the 2004 vote. Such surveys are ''so reliable,'' he added, ''that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries.''(1 In 2003, vote tampering revealed by exit polling in the Republic of Georgia forced Eduard Shevardnadze to step down.(19) And in November 2004, exit polling in the Ukraine -- paid for by the Bush administration -- exposed election fraud that denied Viktor Yushchenko the presidency.(20)
But that same month, when exit polls revealed disturbing disparities in the U.S. election, the six media organizations that had commissioned the survey treated its very existence as an embarrassment. Instead of treating the discrepancies as a story meriting investigation, the networks scrubbed the offending results from their Web sites and substituted them with ''corrected'' numbers that had been weighted, retroactively, to match the official vote count. Rather than finding fault with the election results, the mainstream media preferred to dismiss the polls as flawed.(21)
''The people who ran the exit polling, and all those of us who were their clients, recognized that it was deeply flawed,'' says Tom Brokaw, who served as anchor for NBC News during the 2004 election. ''They were really screwed up -- the old models just don't work anymore. I would not go on the air with them again.''
In fact, the exit poll created for the 2004 election was designed to be the most reliable voter survey in history. The six news organizations -- running the ideological gamut from CBS to Fox News -- retained Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International,(22) whose principal, Warren Mitofsky, pioneered the exit poll for CBS in 1967(23) and is widely credited with assuring the credibility of Mexico's elections in 1994.(24) For its nationwide poll, Edison/Mitofsky selected a random subsample of 12,219 voters(25) -- approximately six times larger than those normally used in national polls(26) -- driving the margin of error down to approximately plus or minus one percent.(27)
On the evening of the vote, reporters at each of the major networks were briefed by pollsters at 7:54 p.m. Kerry, they were informed, had an insurmountable lead and would win by a rout: at least 309 electoral votes to Bush's 174, with fifty-five too close to call.(2 In London, Prime Minister Tony Blair went to bed contemplating his relationship with President-elect Kerry.(29)
As the last polling stations closed on the West Coast, exit polls showed Kerry ahead in ten of eleven battleground states -- including commanding leads in Ohio and Florida -- and winning by a million and a half votes nationally. The exit polls even showed Kerry breathing down Bush's neck in supposed GOP strongholds Virginia and North Carolina.(30) Against these numbers, the statistical likelihood of Bush winning was less than one in 450,000.(31) ''Either the exit polls, by and large, are completely wrong,'' a Fox News analyst declared, ''or George Bush loses.''(32)
But as the evening progressed, official tallies began to show implausible disparities -- as much as 9.5 percent -- with the exit polls. In ten of the eleven battleground states, the tallied margins departed from what the polls had predicted. In every case, the shift favored Bush. Based on exit polls, CNN had predicted Kerry defeating Bush in Ohio by a margin of 4.2 percentage points. Instead, election results showed Bush winning the state by 2.5 percent. Bush also tallied 6.5 percent more than the polls had predicted in Pennsylvania, and 4.9 percent more in Florida.(33)
According to Steven F. Freeman, a visiting scholar at the University of Pennsylvania who specializes in research methodology, the odds against all three of those shifts occurring in concert are one in 660,000. ''As much as we can say in sound science that something is impossible,'' he says, ''it is impossible that the discrepancies between predicted and actual vote count in the three critical battleground states of the 2004 election could have been due to chance or random error.'' (See The Tale of the Exit Polls)
Puzzled by the discrepancies, Freeman laboriously examined the raw polling data released by Edison/Mitofsky in January 2005. ''I'm not even political -- I despise the Democrats,'' he says. ''I'm a survey expert. I got into this because I was mystified about how the exit polls could have been so wrong.'' In his forthcoming book, Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen? Exit Polls, Election Fraud, and the Official Count, Freeman lays out a statistical analysis of the polls that is deeply troubling.
In its official postmortem report issued two months after the election, Edison/Mitofsky was unable to identify any flaw in its methodology -- so the pollsters, in essence, invented one for the electorate. According to Mitofsky, Bush partisans were simply disinclined to talk to exit pollsters on November 2nd(34) -- displaying a heretofore unknown and undocumented aversion that skewed the polls in Kerry's favor by a margin of 6.5 percent nationwide.(35)
Industry peers didn't buy it. John Zogby, one of the nation's leading pollsters, told me that Mitofsky's ''reluctant responder'' hypothesis is ''preposterous.''(36) Even Mitofsky, in his official report, underscored the hollowness of his theory: ''It is difficult to pinpoint precisely the reasons that, in general, Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polls than Bush voters.''(37)
Now, thanks to careful examination of Mitofsky's own data by Freeman and a team of eight researchers, we can say conclusively that the theory is dead wrong. In fact it was Democrats, not Republicans, who were more disinclined to answer pollsters' questions on Election Day. In Bush strongholds, Freeman and the other researchers found that fifty-six percent of voters completed the exit survey -- compared to only fifty-three percent in Kerry strongholds.(3 ''The data presented to support the claim not only fails to substantiate it,'' observes Freeman, ''but actually contradicts it.''
What's more, Freeman found, the greatest disparities between exit polls and the official vote count came in Republican strongholds. In precincts where Bush received at least eighty percent of the vote, the exit polls were off by an average of ten percent. By contrast, in precincts where Kerry dominated by eighty percent or more, the exit polls were accurate to within three tenths of one percent -- a pattern that suggests Republican election officials stuffed the ballot box in Bush country.(39)
''When you look at the numbers, there is a tremendous amount of data that supports the supposition of election fraud,'' concludes Freeman. ''The discrepancies are higher in battleground states, higher where there were Republican governors, higher in states with greater proportions of African-American communities and higher in states where there were the most Election Day complaints. All these are strong indicators of fraud -- and yet this supposition has been utterly ignored by the press and, oddly, by the Democratic Party.''
The evidence is especially strong in Ohio. In January, a team of mathematicians from the National Election Data Archive, a nonpartisan watchdog group, compared the state's exit polls against the certified vote count in each of the forty-nine precincts polled by Edison/Mitofsky. In twenty-two of those precincts -- nearly half of those polled -- they discovered results that differed widely from the official tally. Once again -- against all odds -- the widespread discrepancies were stacked massively in Bush's favor: In only two of the suspect twenty-two precincts did the disparity benefit Kerry. The wildest discrepancy came from the precinct Mitofsky numbered ''27,'' in order to protect the anonymity of those surveyed. According to the exit poll, Kerry should have received sixty-seven percent of the vote in this precinct. Yet the certified tally gave him only thirty-eight percent. The statistical odds against such a variance are just shy of one in 3 billion.(40)
Such results, according to the archive, provide ''virtually irrefutable evidence of vote miscount.'' The discrepancies, the experts add, ''are consistent with the hypothesis that Kerry would have won Ohio's electoral votes if Ohio's official vote counts had accurately reflected voter intent.''(41) According to Ron Baiman, vice president of the archive and a public policy analyst at Loyola University in Chicago, ''No rigorous statistical explanation'' can explain the ''completely nonrandom'' disparities that almost uniformly benefited Bush. The final results, he adds, are ''completely consistent with election fraud -- specifically vote shifting.''


So much for your bullshit about exit polls being unreliable ... consider yourself educated ...

 

[TheBrutalTruth]

Oh yeah .... which is real easy to do since they are not a creditable news source ... hell ... there's even a study out that proves faux news views are stupid ...

The freepress has been an authority on election fraud unlike the corporate media ... but of course you wouldn't know that being a fauxnews viewer ...


No ... the exit polls are very reliable ... you just fell for the corporate media bullshit ...




Only to the corporate media ... and right wing nut job bloggers ... who did all they could to cover up the election fraud that took place ...




You obviously don't know what the hell you are talking about ... but is that surprising for someone that watch fauxnews? ... I think not ...
I. The Exit Polls
The first indication that something was gravely amiss on November 2nd, 2004, was the inexplicable discrepancies between exit polls and actual vote counts. Polls in thirty states weren't just off the mark -- they deviated to an extent that cannot be accounted for by their margin of error. In all but four states, the discrepancy favored President Bush.(16)
Over the past decades, exit polling has evolved into an exact science. Indeed, among pollsters and statisticians, such surveys are thought to be the most reliable. Unlike pre-election polls, in which voters are asked to predict their own behavior at some point in the future, exit polls ask voters leaving the voting booth to report an action they just executed. The results are exquisitely accurate: Exit polls in Germany, for example, have never missed the mark by more than three-tenths of one percent.(17) ''Exit polls are almost never wrong,'' Dick Morris, a political consultant who has worked for both Republicans and Democrats, noted after the 2004 vote. Such surveys are ''so reliable,'' he added, ''that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries.''(1 In 2003, vote tampering revealed by exit polling in the Republic of Georgia forced Eduard Shevardnadze to step down.(19) And in November 2004, exit polling in the Ukraine -- paid for by the Bush administration -- exposed election fraud that denied Viktor Yushchenko the presidency.(20)
But that same month, when exit polls revealed disturbing disparities in the U.S. election, the six media organizations that had commissioned the survey treated its very existence as an embarrassment. Instead of treating the discrepancies as a story meriting investigation, the networks scrubbed the offending results from their Web sites and substituted them with ''corrected'' numbers that had been weighted, retroactively, to match the official vote count. Rather than finding fault with the election results, the mainstream media preferred to dismiss the polls as flawed.(21)
''The people who ran the exit polling, and all those of us who were their clients, recognized that it was deeply flawed,'' says Tom Brokaw, who served as anchor for NBC News during the 2004 election. ''They were really screwed up -- the old models just don't work anymore. I would not go on the air with them again.''
In fact, the exit poll created for the 2004 election was designed to be the most reliable voter survey in history. The six news organizations -- running the ideological gamut from CBS to Fox News -- retained Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International,(22) whose principal, Warren Mitofsky, pioneered the exit poll for CBS in 1967(23) and is widely credited with assuring the credibility of Mexico's elections in 1994.(24) For its nationwide poll, Edison/Mitofsky selected a random subsample of 12,219 voters(25) -- approximately six times larger than those normally used in national polls(26) -- driving the margin of error down to approximately plus or minus one percent.(27)
On the evening of the vote, reporters at each of the major networks were briefed by pollsters at 7:54 p.m. Kerry, they were informed, had an insurmountable lead and would win by a rout: at least 309 electoral votes to Bush's 174, with fifty-five too close to call.(2 In London, Prime Minister Tony Blair went to bed contemplating his relationship with President-elect Kerry.(29)
As the last polling stations closed on the West Coast, exit polls showed Kerry ahead in ten of eleven battleground states -- including commanding leads in Ohio and Florida -- and winning by a million and a half votes nationally. The exit polls even showed Kerry breathing down Bush's neck in supposed GOP strongholds Virginia and North Carolina.(30) Against these numbers, the statistical likelihood of Bush winning was less than one in 450,000.(31) ''Either the exit polls, by and large, are completely wrong,'' a Fox News analyst declared, ''or George Bush loses.''(32)
But as the evening progressed, official tallies began to show implausible disparities -- as much as 9.5 percent -- with the exit polls. In ten of the eleven battleground states, the tallied margins departed from what the polls had predicted. In every case, the shift favored Bush. Based on exit polls, CNN had predicted Kerry defeating Bush in Ohio by a margin of 4.2 percentage points. Instead, election results showed Bush winning the state by 2.5 percent. Bush also tallied 6.5 percent more than the polls had predicted in Pennsylvania, and 4.9 percent more in Florida.(33)
According to Steven F. Freeman, a visiting scholar at the University of Pennsylvania who specializes in research methodology, the odds against all three of those shifts occurring in concert are one in 660,000. ''As much as we can say in sound science that something is impossible,'' he says, ''it is impossible that the discrepancies between predicted and actual vote count in the three critical battleground states of the 2004 election could have been due to chance or random error.'' (See The Tale of the Exit Polls)
Puzzled by the discrepancies, Freeman laboriously examined the raw polling data released by Edison/Mitofsky in January 2005. ''I'm not even political -- I despise the Democrats,'' he says. ''I'm a survey expert. I got into this because I was mystified about how the exit polls could have been so wrong.'' In his forthcoming book, Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen? Exit Polls, Election Fraud, and the Official Count, Freeman lays out a statistical analysis of the polls that is deeply troubling.
In its official postmortem report issued two months after the election, Edison/Mitofsky was unable to identify any flaw in its methodology -- so the pollsters, in essence, invented one for the electorate. According to Mitofsky, Bush partisans were simply disinclined to talk to exit pollsters on November 2nd(34) -- displaying a heretofore unknown and undocumented aversion that skewed the polls in Kerry's favor by a margin of 6.5 percent nationwide.(35)
Industry peers didn't buy it. John Zogby, one of the nation's leading pollsters, told me that Mitofsky's ''reluctant responder'' hypothesis is ''preposterous.''(36) Even Mitofsky, in his official report, underscored the hollowness of his theory: ''It is difficult to pinpoint precisely the reasons that, in general, Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polls than Bush voters.''(37)
Now, thanks to careful examination of Mitofsky's own data by Freeman and a team of eight researchers, we can say conclusively that the theory is dead wrong. In fact it was Democrats, not Republicans, who were more disinclined to answer pollsters' questions on Election Day. In Bush strongholds, Freeman and the other researchers found that fifty-six percent of voters completed the exit survey -- compared to only fifty-three percent in Kerry strongholds.(3 ''The data presented to support the claim not only fails to substantiate it,'' observes Freeman, ''but actually contradicts it.''
What's more, Freeman found, the greatest disparities between exit polls and the official vote count came in Republican strongholds. In precincts where Bush received at least eighty percent of the vote, the exit polls were off by an average of ten percent. By contrast, in precincts where Kerry dominated by eighty percent or more, the exit polls were accurate to within three tenths of one percent -- a pattern that suggests Republican election officials stuffed the ballot box in Bush country.(39)
''When you look at the numbers, there is a tremendous amount of data that supports the supposition of election fraud,'' concludes Freeman. ''The discrepancies are higher in battleground states, higher where there were Republican governors, higher in states with greater proportions of African-American communities and higher in states where there were the most Election Day complaints. All these are strong indicators of fraud -- and yet this supposition has been utterly ignored by the press and, oddly, by the Democratic Party.''
The evidence is especially strong in Ohio. In January, a team of mathematicians from the National Election Data Archive, a nonpartisan watchdog group, compared the state's exit polls against the certified vote count in each of the forty-nine precincts polled by Edison/Mitofsky. In twenty-two of those precincts -- nearly half of those polled -- they discovered results that differed widely from the official tally. Once again -- against all odds -- the widespread discrepancies were stacked massively in Bush's favor: In only two of the suspect twenty-two precincts did the disparity benefit Kerry. The wildest discrepancy came from the precinct Mitofsky numbered ''27,'' in order to protect the anonymity of those surveyed. According to the exit poll, Kerry should have received sixty-seven percent of the vote in this precinct. Yet the certified tally gave him only thirty-eight percent. The statistical odds against such a variance are just shy of one in 3 billion.(40)
Such results, according to the archive, provide ''virtually irrefutable evidence of vote miscount.'' The discrepancies, the experts add, ''are consistent with the hypothesis that Kerry would have won Ohio's electoral votes if Ohio's official vote counts had accurately reflected voter intent.''(41) According to Ron Baiman, vice president of the archive and a public policy analyst at Loyola University in Chicago, ''No rigorous statistical explanation'' can explain the ''completely nonrandom'' disparities that almost uniformly benefited Bush. The final results, he adds, are ''completely consistent with election fraud -- specifically vote shifting.''


So much for your bullshit about exit polls being unreliable ... consider yourself educated ...

Not so much, I don't read bullshit.

 

[GrowRebel]

No ... you just post it ... and expect others to read it ...

 

[GrowRebel]

It's a corporate news poll pdf ... so it's not very creditable ... but if it turns out to be correct ... then ... election fraud will not save McSame ....
ABC WP Poll

Hummm ... this could be very bad news for the bushies ... I see faux news is trying to associate ACORN with voter fraud ... but there is no voter fraud going on ... no where near the extent of election fraud ... thousands of voters have been purged from the voting rolls in several states ... maybe even all of them ... you don't get that with so called voter fraud ... but faux news would like the to believe it does ...

 

[GrowRebel]

Check it ...
http://www.wanttoknow.info/008/081014_elections_irregularitiesElections Irregularities
Below are many highly revealing excerpts of important elections articles from the mainstream media. These articles present key, little-known information showing that the U.S. elections system is filled with irregularities which have not been adequately investigated. Links are provided to the full articles on major media websites. For what you can do about this powerful information along with links to a couple short, amusing elections videos, see the end of this message. By choosing to educate ourselves on these important issues and to spread the word, we can and will build a brighter future for ourselves and for our children.

Election fraud in NOT speculation people ... it is FACT ... and it is taking place as I type ... thousands of voters have been purged from the voting rolls ... the only way to stop it is to vote in large numbers ...
... remember you heard it here first ...

 

[GrowRebel]

Well ... at least SOMEONE is doing something about the federal crime that is taking place ... the JC and Conyers were far too corrupt to do anything about it when they found out last year this was going down ...

[URL="http://rawstory.com/news/2008/GOP_voter_purge_declared_illegal_in_1013.html"]Judge: GOP's voter purge a 'violation of federal law'[/url]
The voter purge program, better known to elections integrity experts as 'voter caging,' is a long-storied GOP tactic employed against minority, student and low-income voters. In September, the Obama campaign filed a lawsuit in Michigan challenging the illegal tactic.

This isn't the only state this is happening ... it's going on all over the country ... the repukes are desperate to steal this election ... they will do what ever it takes to do so ...