18 Battleground State Exit Polls: Prob Kerry>50%: 99.998% ( he got 48.87%)

[TruthIsAll]

 
MORE CIRCUMSTANTIAL PROOF OF FRAUD:

The Exit Poll 18 state average: 
Kerry 51.53%-Bush 47.53%(4% Kerry margin)

The actual average vote: 
Bush 50.20%-Kerry 48.87% (1.33% Bush margin)

That was a 5.33% net change in Bush's favor, assuming equal
state weighting.Bush beat tremendous odds in winning the
popular vote margin based on 18 exit polls (below)

Of the 18 states, only ONE (MO) saw a Kerry vote pickup (of
1%)
Six (6) showed no change (the exit polls were precisely
correct)
Eleven (11) showed a Bush pickup, ranging from 1 to 18%.


		Exit Poll 2pm	Actual Results			
	ST	Kerry	Bush	Diff	Kerry	Bush	Diff	BushGain		
1	AZ	45	55	-10	45	55	-10	0		
2	LA	43	56	-13	42	57	-15	2		
3	MI	51	48	3	51	48	3	0		
4	IA	49	49	0	49	50	-1	1		
5	NM	50	49	1	50	50	0	1		
6	ME	53	45	8	53	45	8	0		
7	NV	48	51	-3	48	51	-3	0		
8	AR	45	54	-9	45	54	-9	0		
9	MO 	46	54	-8	46	53	-7	-1		
10	IL	55	44	11	55	44	11	0		
11	WI	52	48	4	50	49	1	3		
12	PA	60	40	20	51	49	2	18		
13	OH	52	48	4	49	51	-2	6		
14	FL	51	48	3	47	52	-5	8		
15	MN	58	40	18	51	48	3	15		
16	NH	57	41	16	50	49	1	15		
17	NC	49	51	-2	43	56	-13	11		
18	CO	48	51	-3	46	52	-6	3		
										
average	       51.53	47.53	4.00	48.87	50.20	-1.33	5.33		
										
Prob of Kerry vote majority: 99.9982%								
Assume a 3% Margin of Error (MOE):								
n (sample size) for 18 polls @1000 exit voters/poll =
18000								
Then the margin of error
MoE=1.96/(2*sqrt(n))								
Std=.5/sqrt(n)								

MoE=	0.0073							
Std=	0.0037								

Plugging into the normal distribution function:

Probability =NORMDIST(0.5153,0.5,0.0037,TRUE)= 99.9982%


 
 

[Walt Starr]

1. What is your source for the exit poll numbers?

Just curious if this data is from the company that actually did the polling or if it came from a media outlet.

[TruthIsAll]

2. iI got them from a few other DU threads. I believe they are AP polls.

SoCalDem and Faun Otter, as I recall.

But these are the REAL numbers. These are the Exit Polls BEFORE they were flipped after midnite (we have evidence of this) to make them agree with the Bush "actuals".

Walt, we wuz robbed. Plain and simple.

[Avalux]

3. I believe you

damn I wish you could get some press. You have my respect (and it doesn't mean shit). :hug:

[Kerry in 04]

4. Yeah, it was stolen.

Lets just hope somebody is working as hard as us DUers that have some power and can expose it. cough*kerry*cough.:)

[Walt Starr]

5. So you admit your circumstantial evidence you base your claims upon

comes from second or third hand sources? CNN Is definitely NOT the first hand source of the data and definitely presented data that was run trhough more than one model.

I think you need to find the actual raw data before you start drawing any conclusions. If you're going to charge fraud, you need every single duck in a row! If the raw data matches what you've got, you don't need to go back over your analysis, but my guess is the news agencies would have applied some model to the raw data to get their results.

We all know the polls prior to the election were flawed in the extreme and can be discounted as crap from the get go. Don't get messed up because somebody at CNN made some false aassumptions. Confirm your work with the raw data. You do that, and I'll start believing the claims. You do that, and the media cannot ignore it.

[SoCalDem]

7. SoCalDemocrat...not me

Poor guy... he HAD to pick a name so close to mine :)

[meganmonkey]

6. Question -

Assuming your exit poll numbers are correct, that's pretty good (circumstantial) evidence.
But, wouldn't this make more sense in a popular vote situation rather than an electoral system? You have the state by state breakdown, but your 99.9982% number is based on the averages. The discrepencies are so huge in some states that it skews the final average number.
I'm not trying to say it isn't useful, I'm just trying to make sure I understand what it really means.

btw - excellent input in Will's article on truthout!

[TruthIsAll]

8. This is a focus on the overall, other threads looked at the

variances between states with paper trail vs non-paper BBV.

Of course, there is a mix of BBV and optical scannerss and punched cards.

My goal is to provide an overview. Let others get down to the nitty-gritty precinct/county numbers.

We have enough here to indicate a case for prima facie fraud.

I am not delving any more deeply into the analysis. Let others carry on the fight. I have just taken it to Stage ONE.

There is something rotten in Denmark.

[Baja Margie]

9. Thank You again,

Are you e-mailing this data over to the Michael Moore site? I hope so.

[TruthIsAll]

10. Just sent it to MM.

tia