TIA produced enough documentation to beat up a Republican with it

[RaulVB]

TIA's work has already produced evidence of undisputable fraud on November 2nd.

Can we ALL agree in ignoring the time frame set by the law, since an ILLEGAL act has taken place?

How are you going to limit yourself to certification issues and such, when the ENTIRE process is invalid?

Can we use the same language here and tell it like it is?

THAT'S WHY GORE WAS NOT IN OFFICE IN 2000. People let the Republican's putsch succeed by respecting the rule of law, exactly what THEY DIDN'T DO!

[rockedthevoteinMA]

1. What has gone on is totally unconstitutional -

In fact it's treason, and anarchy at it's highest.

It scares me to think about the reality of it all.

[Straight Shooter]

2. TIA is The Avenger!

He plunges into the bloody political battle, crunching numbers into oblivion, swinging the mighty sword of statistics, slaughtering all enemies who dare to defy him.

The Avenger. Beware, you lowly Republicans, for his wrath is mighty and his logic shall prevail.

[whalerider55]

3. succinct and i agree

[myschkin]

4. !!

Do we have a comparison with the past Exit Polls (2000, 96, 92...)? If they were also wrong, bad for us - if they fitted well, it's a proof.

Maybe a task for Truth is All, showing us the Exit Polls of all states in the past elections (with a graph would be fine)?

Thanks in advance.


PS: If we don't have this comparison, it's not a 100 Billion:1 proof for me at all...

[RaulVB]

5. Zogby's polls

The ones "republicans used to love..." matched the results since 1996.

Exit polls are good if fraud doesn't take place.

[TruthIsAll]

7. I suggest you do some googling on exit poll accuracy.

Google Germany exit polls.

No one has ever questioned Exit Poll accuracy
The Networks have used exit polls with 100% success since the 1950's to call elections. Why is it only since the 2000 selection that these questions have been raised?

The answer is self-evident. Does it have anything to do with Bush running for selection?

[myschkin]

9. always be sceptical about your own theories - popper

I would just like to see it... (see above)

Because if we can send it together with the actual exit poll discrepancy to some media, it would be very convincing.

There are always some other blogs, which say the contrary - and we have nothing in hands.

It's alright what Freeman says, but if we had the last exit polls (before our eyes), it would be like a proof.

It's not enough just to say "networks have used exit polls with 100% success since the 1950's" - at least not for me.

So why we don't find these polls (I've never seen them here nor somewhere else)?

Where's the problem? It would give us more security about this case and would be more convincing for our opponents...

[TruthIsAll]

13. You expect the networks to keep a tally of every election call?

They have made literally thousands of senate, congressional and gov. calls since the 50's.

I have to prove it to you? Document it?
Do you have documented proof that the exit polls were ever wrong?

[myschkin]

23. you behave like a repuke in ohio

Sorry, but you are for me not serious about this...

You don't WANT to know the truth - and stabilize your theory with this.

I would also like the exit polls discrepancy would be a proof - but I want to be SURE... (and you always have to be sceptical about everything)

I would like to see it more serious and less 'polemic'...

[bigmustelid2]

27. Exit polls have been wildly wrong before

http://tinyurl.com/44w5y

The numbers mentioned are unweighted exit polls - but on the other hand those are the numbers that TIA is using in his mathematical calculations on DU.

[me b zola]

14. the sick irony is

that exit polls were one of the main issues the US stated for calling the elections in the Ukraine "illegitimate". I'm quite sure that they did not seek historical polling data in the Ukraine before making such statements. But still, polling data is only soft evidence, meant to raise red flags. The hard evidence, it seems, remains locked in hard drives.

[bigmustelid2]

18. previous exit polls

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/20...

1988: Dukakis vs. Bush - exit poll discrepancy = 8.3% in favor of Democrats

1992: Clinton vs. Bush - exit poll discrepancy = 7.2% in favor of Democrats

1996: Clinton vs. Dole - exit poll discrepancy = 6.2% in favor of Democrats

2000: Gore vs. Bush - exit poll discrepancy = 1.8% in favor of Democrats

[bigmustelid2]

26. The link somehow got cut off by the board

Here is the correct link:

http://tinyurl.com/44w5y

[jkd]

15. 2004 exit poll discrepancy

SO why are the BYU and Mitofsky exit polls four percentage points apart in Utah? I'm not trying to put anyone on the spot. I would just like to know.

[bigmustelid2]

17. Exit polls have been wrong before, by more than in 2004

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/20...

1988: Dukakis vs. Bush - exit poll discrepancy = 8.3% in favor of Democrats

1992: Clinton vs. Bush - exit poll discrepancy = 7.2% in favor of Democrats

1996: Clinton vs. Dole - exit poll discrepancy = 6.2% in favor of Democrats

2000: Gore vs. Bush - exit poll discrepancy = 1.8% in favor of Democrats

[bobbieinok]

21. we know Gore won; maybe Dukakis did too

[Duncan]

24. Please fix link

Link didn't work for me. I wonder why the exit polls in your examples leaned dem, and all were since bush the 1st. Seems to me this might lend more weight to fraud case.

[bigmustelid2]

25. Here is the new link

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005178.php

or, if the board cuts it off again

http://tinyurl.com/44w5y

And puhleeze. You think that Dukakis loss to Bush was fraud-related?

[Senator]

6. A Method to Follow

Can we get every congress critter (yes, repubs too) to stand up for our democracy, or choose neo-fascism?

Declaration of Intent

Put them on the spot. Make them search their souls.

This declaration asks "Are 10-hour poll-tax-lines for poor, minoritie AND none for affluent, whites tolerable??"

Make them face their own mirrors in the morning.

[Helga Scow Stern]

8. International monitors have this info.

I keep writing sending them more information and asking them please not to abandon us.

We'll see what their final report due out soon says. I can't say they have such a good record from the past elections they have monitored, but maybe this time it will be different. They may be especially aware of the irony, since they also monitored the Ukraine.

It is worth a try. Their word could make a difference in the whole scene.

Please write them if you feel like it:

[e-mail]

[e-mail]

[liberal43110]

11. I'll Write the Election Monitors Too

Thanks for the email addresses. I'll email the election monitors too! I think the only way to keep people examining and investigating--no matter how long it takes--is to keep talking about it. There is no reasonable argument against recounting and auditing this election's results, publicly testing the voting equipment, and improving our election system.

[texpatriot2004]

10. kick

[understandinglife]

12. Agree and that is why I, and likely many others, have...

...sent his analysis to Rep Conyers, Mr Arnebeck and many others. I have encouraged folk in WA State to study TIA's analysis carefully and use it to guide them during the recount.

The most potent use of the analysis is to use it to force Mitofsky to release, this week, the 'raw' exit poll data for 2 Nov 2004 and to provide to Rep Conyers the list of names and contact information for every pollster and the location and time they conducted their polls on 2 Nov 2004.

Peace.

"Did Bush Know?"

[Lil]

16. Please excuse ignorance but what/who is TIA?

I know:
Thanks in advance
Transient Ischemic Attack

but don't think they apply to this. Ta. :-)

[jkd]

19. TruthIsAll

Look at the above posts

[Lil]

20. Thanks. Brain tired, I guess - didn't connect - :-)

[ClintCooper2003]

22. Who is TIA?

[Eloriel]

28. Exit Polls

Zogby Speaks Out
According to Zogby, it would have required "wrong sampling in wrong areas throughout the country," or the purposeful manipulation of data to obtain exit poll results so significantly different from the official totals. He viewed neither as a possibility.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=64057&mesg_id=64057
LINK: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1118-11.htm


Here are two excellent articles about the validity and reliabilty of Exit Polls:

Votergate 2004; We Don't Need Paper to Prove Fraud, But We Do Need Money
http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=10385

and

I Smell a Rat
Link: http://www.freezerbox.com/archive/article.asp?id=321
(also on Zogby's site but I didn't keep that link)

Dr. Freeman has updated his paper
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1382287#1382346
Link: http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm

and, there are quite a few other DU discussions on Exit Polls that can be found in these threads:

VOTE FRAUD LINKS - A DU Compendium - Thread #4
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=201&topic_id=6166&mesg_id=6166

VOTE FRAUD LINKS - A DU Compendium - Thread #3
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=201x4927

VOTE FRAUD Links Compendium - Thread #2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=201x3223

VOTE FRAUD Links - a DU Compendium
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=201&topic_id=1984#