Democratic Underground - Defending RFK Jr. - Channeling TruthIsAll About Democracy & Democrats

(Ed. Note: IT'S ALL ABOUT ***POLITICS*** RFK JR. MADE THOSE
WHO WORKED FOR KERRY IN 2004 PROUD, PARTICULARLY THE OHIO
DEMOCRATS. WHY? BECASUE HE TOLD THE TRUTH. KERRY WON, THE
POLITICAL PROCESS WAS FOILED.

DENYING ELECTION FRAUD NOW IS LIKE DENYING GLOBAL WARMING:
THE HEIGHT OF ABSURDITY AND “FAITH-BASED” LOGIC.

LYING ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING, LYING ABOUT WMD, LYING ABOUT
HEALTH POLICY, LYING ABOUT STEM CELL RESEARCH, LYING ABOUT NEW
ORLEANS, LYING ABOUT EVERYTHING…WHENEVER THEIR LIPS MOVE, THEY
LIE. THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE REPUBLICANS WON
THE PRESIDENCY IN 2004 AND WE KNOW THEY LOST IN 2000! AND
NOW, TIA’S REPONSE TO RFK JRS NASTIEST CRITIC, FARHAD MANJOO
OF SALON.COM (a “leftist” journal;)
--------------------------------------------

Dear Farhad:

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/06/15/exit_polls/index.html
He links to my DU posts in his June 15, 2005 article. Click
on"all aflame".

"No Exit" - A persuasive new theory explains why
Kerry beat Bush in Election Day exit polls. Just don't expect
those still crying "fraud" to believe it.

"Exit poll results were just one item in a long bill of
election-fraud particulars that folks began passing around in
the aftermath of the election. But over the past seven months,
the exits have proved more enduring to the election-was-stolen
movement than many of the other early indicators of fraud.
Lefty bastions like Democratic Underground ***are aflame***
with discussions purporting to prove how the exits show Bush
didn't really win."

I should have responded to "No Exit" a year ago. But
since you have continued your crusade against the
"fraudsters" with your thrashing of RFK's Rolling
Stone article, now it's my turn. The pathetic rebuttal to RFK
came exactly one year after your "No Exit"
propaganda piece in which you provided a link to my posts on
DU.

It's apparent to many experts that your analysis is wanting.
You say that an "amateur mathematician" proved Ron
Baiman, Kathy Dopp, Steve Freeman, myself and other analysts
wrong. Really? On DU, we won every online debate with all
comers. Baiman and Freeman, both PHDs, have had extensive,
real world analytical experience. Dopp has a masters degree
in mathematics. Their expertise is reflected in the quality of
their published work on the Stolen Election.

I'm NOT an amateur mathematician. I have two MS degrees in
applied mathematics and have been developing financial,
investment and engineering models long before you were born.
What are YOUR academic credentials? What makes you an expert
in polling analysis?

Manjoo, I've got news for you; rBr is dead. You call the
Reluctant Bush Responder theory persuasive, but it was
debunked before you even wrote "No Exit". In July
2005 my Exit Poll Response Optimizer confirmed the USCV
simulation model.

Are you aware that over 3 million votes (the great majority
Democratic) are spoiled and never counted in every election?
In 2004, 3.6mm votes were lost - just check the Census. I'm
sure you would agree that Bush stole the 2000 election,
despite having lost by 540,000 votes, 51-50.5mm. Add 75% of
the 3 million spoiled votes to Gore and it's clear that he
actually won by 2 million.

In 2004, the Bush recorded win was 62-59 million. Where did he
gain over 13 million new votes (1.75mm Bush 2000 voters died
before 2004) to go from 49mm to 62mm? Kerry won between 54% to
61% of those who did not vote in 2000 (depending on the exit
poll timeline) and over 70% of 3 million Nader voters.

According to the Final National Exit poll, 43% of the 122.3
million who voted in 2004 were Bush 2000 voters. But 43% of
122.3 is 52.57 million. And since Bush only got 50.5mm votes
in 2000, of whom about 1.75mm died, only 48.7mm (39.8%) could
have returned to vote in 2004. The 43% NEP weighting was
mathematically impossible. The Bush vote was inflated by 4
million.

You claim that your "expert" sources debunked USCV
and the "fraudsters". No, they have not. And they
are still trying to spread the fiction that exit polls are
bogus; that is, except for the Final National Exit Poll and
state exit polls (which were matched to the vote) after most
CNN voters went to sleep, thinking that Kerry won. But I have
just shown you that the Final Poll at 1:25pm on Nov.3 is
mathematically impossible and that the earlier 12:22am numbers
are close to the truth.

Well, not everyone went to sleep early. Jonathan Simon stayed
up long enough to spot and download the 12:22am state exit
polls. The Washington Post chose not to delete the
corresponding National Exit Poll (13047 respondents at
12:22am) which showed Kerry as the 51-48% winner. We also have
the earlier NEP timelines at 4pm and 7:30pm which established
the 51-48% Kerry trend. He held the lead until the Final
National Exit Poll (13660 respondents) at 1:25pm on Nov.3,
when the numbers magically reverted to a 51-48% Bush win. The
numbers (weights and vote shares) were revised to match the
vote. And the weights have been shown to be mathematically
impossible - unless you believe that 4 million Bush voters
were reincarnated.

Simple logic tells us that if the bogus Final overstated the
Bush vote by at least 4 million, then the Bush recorded vote
had to be overstated by at least 4 million. If you read my
related postings, you would already know this. But since you
never mentioned them in your article, one can assume that a)
you never read the posts, or b) you read them but chose not to
discuss them.

Here is who you are up against: RFK Jr., Howard Dean, John
Conyers, Mark Miller, Greg Palast, Robert Koehler, Michael
Keefer, Thom Hartmann, Jim Lampley, Greg Palast, Bob Herbert,
Steve Freeman, Kathy Dopp, Wayne Madsen, Ron Baiman, pollsters
Harris and Zogby. Over 50% of voters believe that the election
was stolen - and the percentage is growing daily. In fact, the
cable networks (except for the FOX propaganda machine) ran
polls which showed that a majority of viewers believe Bush
stole it: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0605/S00200.htm

Of course, we still have spineless Democratic politicians who
dare not call it "fraud". And that includes wannabee
Al Franken. Well, at least Mike Malloy and Randi Rhodes talk
about the stolen election. Unlike Al, they have no plans to
run for office.

Just curious. What is your math background? Specifically,
statistical voting trends, polling mathematics, probability
theory, Monte Carlo simulation? If you can't follow the logic
or math in my posts, just download the Interactive Election
and Monte Carlo polling simulation models. Do you have Excel?
Or do you still use a hand calculator?

Here's an intro to polling simulation and statistics.
http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/TruthIsAllPollingSimulation.mht

Link to my postings and models at: http://www.truthisall.net

View my recent postings here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x413198

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2385147

I suggest you read the "clincher" thread in which
your pet theory was thoroughly debunked. Kerry wins all
plausible scenarios of 2000 voter turnout in 2004, assuming
constant 100% Bush voter turnout and declining Gore voter
turnout (from 100% to 70%) over a range of NEP Kerry vote
shares (51-60%) of those who did not vote in 2000.

THE CLINCHER
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x379573

As far as the "false Gore voter recall" hypothesis
is concerned, I suggest you read the "game" thread.
His implausible explanation to account for the 3 million Bush
"victory" margin (that 1 out of 6 Gore voters
defected to Bush in 2004, but only 1 of 16 Bush voters
defected to Kerry) is beyond the pale of common sense. But
that's his last arrow. His case is in the "final
throes", reduced to a totally implausible hypothesis.

THE GAME
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x390193

Finally, I suggest you include this analysis, among others, in
your next piece:
__________________________________________________________________
Edited by TruthIsAll on Sat Feb-11-06 12:12 AM

Considering that Gore won in 2000 by over 540,000 votes, and
that
1) Kerry won a majority of new voters (57-41%) and
2) a majority of Nader voters (71-21%) and
3) less than 49.2mm Gore and 48.7mm Bush voters turned out in
2004,
then the discussion should end right here because...

Assuming a 95% turnout of Gore and Bush voters, then Bush
needed
19.5% OF GORE VOTERS TO WIN BY 3 MILLION VOTES. AT THE
NATIONAL EXIT POLL 12:28AM TIMELINE, HE WON JUST 8%.

ARE WE EXPECTED TO BELIEVE THAT ALMOST ONE OUT OF FIVE GORE
VOTERS DECIDED TO FORGIVE BUSH FOR STEALING ELECTION 2000?
OK, FORGIVE. BUT VOTE FOR HIM?

Quere mas?
___________________________________________________________

If we assume a 2% MoE, the probability is LESS THAN
ONE IN 1.5 QUADRILLION THAT BUSH WOULD GET 16% OF GORE
VOTERS!

PROB = 1- NORMDIST(0.16,0..08,0.01,TRUE)
or 1 in 1,501,199,875,790,170

And that's assuming 16% of Gore voters switching to Bush in
2004.
I tried to compute the probability that 19% of Gore voters
would switch,
but...THE NORMDIST FUNCTION COULD NOT PERFORM THE CALCULATION.

IT GENERATED A DIVISION BY ZERO ERROR.
THE PROBABILITY IS AT THE VANISHING POINT!

Quere mas?
_____________________________________________________________

12:22am (13047 respondents)
Assume 95% turnout of Gore and Bush voters.

WHAT BUSH NEEDED TO WIN BY 3 MILLION VOTES...19.5% of Gore
voters!

VOTED IN 2000
Percentage Votes in Millions
Weight Votes Kerry Bush Other Kerry Bush Other
No 21.59% 26.37 57% 41% 2% 15.0 10.8 0.5
Gore 38.27% 46.75 80% 19.5% 0.5% 37.4 9.1 0.2
Bush 37.86% 46.26 10% 90% 0% 4.6 41.6 0.0
Nader 2.28% 2.79 71% 21% 8% 2.0 0.6 0.2

Total 100% 122.2 48.3% 50.9% 0.8% 59.0 62.1 1.0

Bush margin: 3.1mm

Quere mas?
____________________________________________________________

FARHAD, THIS IS WHAT REALLY HAPPENED...

Based on the exit poll vote shares and feasible weightings,
Kerry wins by over 7 MILLION VOTES!

VOTED IN 2000
Percentage Votes in Millions
Weight Votes Kerry Bush Other Kerry Bush Other
No 21.59% 26.37 57% 41% 2% 15.0 10.8 0.5
Gore 38.27% 46.75 91% 8% 1% 42.5 3.7 0.5
Bush 37.86% 46.26 10% 90% 0% 4.6 41.6 0.0
Nader 2.28% 2.79 71% 21% 8% 2.0 0.6 0.2

Total 100% 122.2 52.4% 46.6% 1.0% 64.2 56.8 1.2
Kerry margin: 7.4mm
______________________________________________________________________

Farhad, I'm looking forward to your next piece. But next time,
be sure to discuss the CONTENTS of the links mentioned above-
and not just point to them.

TRUTH IS ALL

Defending RFK Jr. - Channeling TruthIsAll About Democracy & Democrats [View All]