"I’ve concluded that Bush won for two reasons..."

[steve2470]

http://www.berkeleydaily.org/text/article.cfm?issue=12-03-04&storyID=20222


Election 2004: Another Look At the Disputed Vote Count By BOB BURNETT
Special to the Planet, NEWS ANALYSIS (12-03-04)

Four weeks after the presidential election, there continues to be a controversy about the difference between the exit poll projections and the actual results. Almost daily, conspiracy theories surface on Internet blogs, only to be refuted a few hours later.
To gain perspective on why many Democrats persist in the belief that the election was stolen let’s remember what happened on Nov. 2. In addition to exit polls reporting that Kerry was going to win, there were widespread reports of voting irregularities. I heard some of these in Colorado, where I was getting out the vote. Periodically the Boulder Democratic headquarters would receive calls that voters were being harassed or told the wrong place to vote.

A national database (https://voteprotect.org/index.php?display=EIRMapNation) captured 24,842 of these voting irregularities. Mahoning County, Ohio, reported more than 1,000 voting incidents; for example, “Caller’s father voted on touchscreen machine for Kerry-Edwards, when he went to check his vote, the vote had recorded Bush-Cheney; he had to try three times to get the vote to Kerry-Edwards.” Similar incidents were reported in Miami-Dade County in Florida, “Voter voted for Kerry; when she reviewed the ballot it showed that she voted for Bush.”

These documented irregularities don’t fully account for a Bush plurality of 3.3 million votes; but the fact that many of us saw or heard about election nastiness does explain why Democrats have a bad feeling about the election, why we want to believe that the Republican cheated their way to victory. To dispel these concerns and accept the results, Democrats require a coherent explanation for what happened—why Kerry didn’t prevail as we hoped.

<snip>
The title statement is right after this excerpt. Comments please.

[steve2470]

1. kick nt

[villager]

2. "That Dean was right is one of the big lessons..."

"Howard Dean, and others, warned the Kerry campaign that they should spend less time appealing to undecided voters and, instead, focus on energizing the Democratic base. That Dean was right is one of the big lessons to be learned from the Kerry defeat."

interesting concluding paragraph, too...

[opihimoimoi]

3. YUP, these dodo heads will do anything, lie cheat steal kill to get their

man in there.

Dean was right....

[Hamoth]

4. Assumption

The author assumes that all errors were caught. If you catch enough problems to show a systematic flaw in the election system, furhter one that is skewed toward a certain candidate or party, then how on earth does that mean a non-issue?

I understand that in science we must work with a specific set of data. However, in the real world, we often have to form our opinions and suspicions with less tangible notions such as "Would I bet my life on the outcome of this machine?".

[KoKo]

5. This article repeats the Rove Lie that "Family Values" trumped because

Repugs got the vote out, and that folks in "Townhouses & McMansions" have suddenly "gotten the religion of the Repug Party."

Anyone looking at that map linked from your post would question how this was a fair election which Bush won. And, I didn't see the article address why all the vote irregularties and lack of polling machines occurred with Kerry voters and not Bush voters.

It's amazing how once you know how the Rove line works in the media you can see it repeated over and over in newspapers and it's always the same.

I'm sorry to see Ron Brownstein referred to in the article because at one time he was a fair reporter but he turned in the last few years. I guess the "perks" are too hard to refuse when it comes to the Bushies.

[flyarm]

6. these are the two reasons>>>>>>>>

1.)he stole the election

2.) he stole the election!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

fly

[PATRICK]

8. And that line was used before

trying to intimidate Democrats with GOP "talent" when in fact the Cozy Nostra gang aspect of RNC vote manipulation seems not only plausible but more and more openly revealed every time. There are a LOT of petty methods, but adding the invisible theft of large scale margins is not only possible but completely within the GOP pattern of surviving and thriving in this country.

Fake. Fake enough to doubt there is ANY real majority basis of support outside those mistaken and fooled and brutalized against truth and their own interests.

[papau]

7. Bullshit - the get out the vote and Exit model correction already debunked

"The first was that Republicans did a better job of getting out the vote. Matt Bai’s article, “Who Lost Ohio?” In the Nov. 21st New York Times Magazine explained, “The Bush campaign had created an entirely new math in Ohio” with so many white, conservative and religious voters now living in the brand-new townhouses and McMansions in Ohio’s growing ring counties, Republicans were able to mobilize a stunning turnout in areas where their support was more concentrated than it was in the past.” ....in Colorado in exurban Douglas County, where Bush received 67 percent, Republicans turned out an astounding 96 percent of those registered."

(Does anyone believe the dead and not normally voting were voted by the GOP?)

"(this)explains the exit-poll discrepancy—the polls were off because they didn’t adequately consider the extent of the Republican turnout in the suburbs and exurbs. In other words, the poll weightings were wrong because they were based upon the 2000 race and, therefore, the pollsters didn’t sample enough voters in the ‘burbs..Democrats got out the vote but so did Republicans; 37 percent of voters self-identified as Democrats and 37 percent said they were Republicans."

(Will someone tell him these are not raw numbers - but are "post fit of exit polls to fraudulent election vote total" results?)

Indeed will someone tell him that if the final day national polls are revised to a 37%/37% model - Gallup and the crew would show Kerry leading in just about every pre-election poll?

So the 37 to 37 is a lie to begin with - and it is not a big enough lie to explain away the fraud.