2008 Landslide Denied: Uncounted Votes and the Final National Exit Poll (TIA) - x

[tiptoe]

2008 Landslide Denied:  Uncounted Votes and the Final National Exit Poll

TruthIsAll      source: http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/Uncounted2008.htm

Nov 7, 2008

With almost 100% of precincts reporting, the latest election results show Obama leading by 65–57m votes (53–46%). That’s a very solid mandate, but his True Vote is better than that. The tremendous GOTV and new registration effort has not resulted in an increase in the recorded vote from 2004. Remember the 17m net increase from 2000 to 2004 (105m to 122m)? The media should be asking the questions. Why is the recorded count at 123m, when a 140m+ turnout was forecast? How many voters were told they had to complete provisional ballots?

Historically, about 75% of uncounted votes (spoiled, lost, provisional and absentee) are Democratic. Therefore, if 143m votes were actually cast, Obama’s current 8 million vote margin would increase to 18m 80–62m — a landslide rivaling Johnson (’64), Nixon (’72) and Reagan (’84). View the Election Calculator projection below.
•••

Obama must have done better than the 53–46% share as indicated by the Final National Exit Poll (NEP). The margin is probably closer to 55–43% (as projected by a few national pre-election polls).
•••

The BIG question is this: How does the official 2.4% Bush 2004 margin equate to the 9% Bush margin in returning voters? It doesn’t. The anomaly is even more ridiculous, since Kerry won the True Vote (see the 2004 Election Calculator, below).
•••



Full article: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=510524&mesg_id=510524

 

[texastoast]

1. We had 25-30 provisional ballots in my one precinct

Out of 1020 votes cast.

[Blues Heron]

2. Kick for TIA

[tiptoe]

3. one good kick deserves another! thanks n/t

[Occam Bandage]

4. TIA is always good for a laugh. Thanks. nt

[tiptoe]

5. You should enjoy these then: "All Monte Carlo EV Simulation Models Predict a 100% Obama Win Prob.."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4362093&mesg_id=4362093

[EconomicLiberal]

6. This crap is a joke. n/t

[tiptoe]

8. Nonsense. (as in "no analysis") n/t

[tiptoe]

7. K!

[foo_bar]

9. "Obama must have done better than the 53–46% share"

FINAL PROJECTION: Obama wins by 76–64 million votes 367–171 EV 53–45% vote share margin.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x510345

Can you explain how Obama "must have done better" than your projection the day before? Are you retroactively changing your "final projection" (in name only) because it falsified your hypothesis/meal-ticket/whatever?

Obama 365.3
McCain 172.7

<...>

The 2008 Election Model (EM) assumes as a base case that a fraud-free election is held today — and that current polls reflect the true vote.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x510345 ("Monte Carlo Simulation Expected Electoral Vote")

Obama Wins Omaha, NE Electoral Vote; Final Tally Looks to be 365-173

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7827576

You weren't expecting to guess the right answer or you wouldn't have written "fraud-free election", but by some stroke of synchronicity you had a hit the one time you wanted a flop.

[backscatter712]

10. Election protection efforts have succeeded...

I mean that they succeeded in that they forced Rove and his flunkies to turn the volume knob down on their cheating - they could only shave a couple points off of Obama's margin of victory. If the poll watchers, election attorneys and all the other folks working to keep this election honest weren't there, we'd be looking at President McCain and Vice President Palin. :scared:

Seriously, I think this is a victory for our side, and a great example of how to keep doing it next time.

[regnaD kciN]

11. This from the same source...

...that still believes Kerry won an easy victory in 2004. :eyes:

By now, TIA's methodology should be obvious to all: 1) Predict a huuuuuge Democratic victory, no matter what the actual poll results indicate. 2) If that doesn't materialize, insist you were right anyway and charge "massive" vote fraud as the explanation as to why the actual results didn't match your predictions.

Boy, is this ever getting tired... :boring: