Click the picture & goto "last" for the latest on Vote Fraud:
Posted on 11/18/2004 1:17:42 PM PST by ArcLight
Summary:
- Irregularities associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000 excess votes or more to President George W. Bush in Florida.
- Compared to counties with paper ballots, counties with electronic voting machines were significantly more likely to show increases in support for President Bush between 2000 and 2004. This effect cannot be explained by differences between counties in income, number of voters, change in voter turnout, or size of Hispanic/Latino population.
- In Broward County alone, President Bush appears to have received approximately 72,000 excess votes.
- We can be 99.9% sure that these effects are not attributable to chance.
(Excerpt) Read more at ucdata.berkeley.edu ...
"Electronic voting raised President Bush’s advantage from the tiny edge held in 2000 to a clearer margin of victory in 2004. The impact of e-voting was not uniform, however. Its impact was proportional to the Democratic support in the county, i.e., it was especially large in Broward, Palm Beach, and Miami-Dade. The evidence for this is the statistical significance of terms in our model that gauge the averageimpact of e-voting across Florida’s 67 counties and statistical interaction effects that gauge its larger-than-average effect in counties where Vice President Gore did the best in 2000 and slightly negative effect in the counties where Mr. Bush did the best in 2000. The state-wide impact of these disparities due to electronic voting amount to 130,000 votes if we assume a “ghost vote” mechanism and twice that – 260,000 votes – if we assume that a vote misattributed to one candidate should have been counted for the other."
They just cant accept the fact that a lot of their own voted for Bush..
You've put your finger on a core inconsistency I've found in liberals. On the one hand, they believe that conservatives (or anyone else who does not agree with them) are fundamentally stupid. If they were only brighter, they would see the error of their ways, they would agree with the "progressive" liberals.
This extrapolates to "Bush is stupid," "Red state voters are stupid," and most recently, "Condoleeza Rice is stupid."
On the other hand, they attribute the most devious, manipulative behavior to the conservatives. "Bush stole the election again," "we really went to Iraq for oil," "they got the marriage amendments on the ballot to bring out more voters for Republicans," "the world is controlled by Halliburton," "the Republicans deceived the voters into thinking the election was about values," etc.
The bottom line is the Greeks had a word for it: "hubris." And just like the Greek tragedies, hubris has been the downfall of the Left.
They aren't stupid.
They have an A G E N D A!!!!
...couldn't agree more with your statement! We should realize that, while some of the Dems may be brain-dead, deep within the heart of that party lies a sinister element that knows EXACTLY what is going on...and they are NOT well-intentioned nor mis-informed.
if i were the ceo of the exit polling company, i would like to understand how "my guys" were so wrong. corporate credibility is at stake. the company that does us exit polling also is called upon to do exit polls in 3rd world nations to ensure election "fairness". there is a lot of money to be made in this market. by screwing up your own country's exit polling, you lose a lot of credibility with not only the united states, but also in the world.
i am not a conspiracy theorist that says the exit polls were rigged. rather, i believe the free market is owed an explanation by the company -- there are other foreign companies that do the same thing and could be called up to do exit polling in third world nations.
D'OH!This is hilarious! First they don't define "...awarded 130,000 excess votes...". This is just another (confusing) way of saying "...more votes than we think he should have gotten", or "...more votes than he got last time", both of which are arbitrary and unfounded.
In addition, I can be 99.9% sure that the "chance" statement is a red herring, since the "not by chance" explanation can be (among other things) that the "effect" could also be the results of 130,000 Bush votes that were not thrown away or replaced this time, due to the increased scrutiny...
What a steaming pile of bovine excrement!
If he convinces enough lefties we actually did steal the election then they'll just give up and quit voting on the theory we'll just steal it anyway.
And this will only make the job of actually winning the elections for us easier.
Could it be this exposes the Democraps fraud on paper ballots in Broward 2000? This sounds like a more reasonable explanation to me. Dems were not able commit fraud this round with electronic voting verses paper last election.
you beat me to it.
Rippin nailed it in reply #20
How are things over at DU??
Getting a little sense of how we feel abouyt this nonsense over here?
Enjoy
How are things over at DU??
Getting a little sense of how we feel about this nonsense over here?
Enjoy
We already had a paper trail.
Then your side decided it was too difficult to use so they went to cartoons on a screen.
And what kind of malicious code are you going to put in a machine? The number of votes has to tally with the register. You gonna shift votes? Only may work in a close election, which this definately was not. I guess one could always code a skull and crossbones to appear when the voter selects a demonrat.
Open source would invite fraud and could be easily manipulated.
I'm happy with optical scans, thank you. Guess my county wasn't deemed dumb enough to go to touchscreen.
Why doesn't anybody ever concentrate on the fraud in Chicago or Baltimore or Philly?
Conclusion: Paper ballots over-represented Kerry votes in the 2004 election.
O.K., he stole it fair and square. He's your President, either way. Live with it.
Click the picture & goto "last" for the latest on Vote Fraud:
Not really the best study in the world. I wish remembered more statistics but a few things srping out at me. For one thing they appearing to be assuming that e-voting never leaves behind a paper trail. I have no idea how many counties use e-voting that prints out a slip of paper but there must be a few. Secondly we have a pretty small sample size here, only a few counties use e-voting. And then there's this correlation between the impact of e-voting and large Democratic majorities which suggests that there's another variable lurking out there.
Still this paperless voting stuff sucks. I just wish Democrats would stop tarring us with it when it's Democratic officials trying to shield their constituents from the evil punch cards that the ones putting these things in place.
Or, as others have noted above, apparently the 'Rats haven't figured out how to cheat on them ... yet.
We still need to improve the e-voting machines. They should have an auditable paper trail, for instance. The software on both the machine in the booth and the collection servers needs better auditing.
Like counterfeiting currency, this will be a never ending battle, between the white hats and the black hats. There is way too much power and money flowing threw our government for the black hats to stop trying to control elections.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.