NEP Head Mitofsky: Exit Polls show no sign of Voter Fraud

[Magically_Delicious]

Now, can we please move on and actually talk about how we can beat the GOP rather than this nonsense that everyone is going through!!




**NEP Head Mitofsky: Exit Polls show no sign of Voter Fraud**

This afternoon at Colby College in Waterville, Maine Mitofsky International head Warren Mitofsky has stated on record that the National Exit Poll he conducted for the major media networks show no sign that Voter Fraud is the reason for the often criticized 1.9% error that the national exit poll produced.

This confirms a report made by Jim Rutenberg of the NY Times.

that the average deviation to Kerry in the completed version of the exit poll was +1.9%. This figure was arrived at by comparing and averaging, on a precint to precinct level, the exit poll data and the precinct vote returns. When asked if the full 1.9% deviation could be explained by non-response bias (Kerry voters being more likely to complete the exit poll than Bush voters), he said:

"It's my opinion, but I can't prove it."

He went on to say that it would be an impossible thing to "prove" categorically because there exist an infinite number of variables that could have a micro-impact on the exit poll which could combine for a statistically significant impact. These factors ranged from the weather to the distance from the polling place some of his poll takers were forced to stand. He is also trying to determine whether there is a statistically significan correlation between certain types of precincts and the non-response deviation. Again, right now he feels the most reasonable and logical explanation of the average 1.9% deviation for Kerry was non-response bias.

touch screen voting machines that don't leave any paper trail being used to defraud the election. To prove this, he broke down precincts based on the type of voting machine that was used and compared the voting returns from those precincts with his own exit polls. None of the precincts with touch screen computers that don't leave paper trails, or any other type of machine for that matter, had vote returns that deviated from his exit poll numbers once the average 1.9% non-response bias was taken into account.

[papau]

1. Meaning exit polls that had a 0.25% err, if assumed to have a 1.9% err -

are proving the final vote to be correct!

Yes - and where did this fellow get his math degree?

So far at least 2 MIT math types disagree with him (the fellow at U of Penn - and me).

[Eloriel]

2. No, we cannot!!

Forget the exit polls if you want to -- there are plenty and plenty and plenty more indicators of fraud. Just take a look:

VOTERSUNITE database of Voting Problems by state
http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp?sort=state&selectstate=NV&selectproblemtype=ALL

2004 COLLECTED VOTE FRAUD STORIES
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/2004votefraud.html

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

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

ALSO SEE: VOTE FRAUD? What can we do? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2701028#
INCLUDING DONATE to our own DUer hedda_foil's 27, Help America Recount: www.helpamericarecount.org

********SEND THESE TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW AND MEDIA TOO *********
Best Fraud Summary I've seen!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x57214
Link: http://www.bopnews.com
Updated Version: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=61029

NEW Berkeley Study: http://ucdata.berkeley.edu (scroll down)
and: http://ucdata.berkeley.edu/new_web/VOTE2004/index.html

[jdog]

3. Optical scanners.

He didn't address the use of optical scanners and the vulnerabilites in the tabulating process.

[Blue in the face]

4. Which exit polls?

The ones that were put up after the "computer glitch" which were changed to show Bush had won or the ones they had been putting out all day which were projecting Kerry winning?

[IAMREALITY]

5. I swear to God

"Now, can we please move on and actually talk about how we can beat the GOP rather than this nonsense that everyone is going through!!"

If we have to say one more FUCKING time not until after DEC 13th, Not Until we have fought our best fight with THIS battle, NO, We will Not Start talking about 2006 or 2008 yet, I swear I'll fuckin lose it.....

[Straight Shooter]

6. Damage control agenda in high gear

How much cold water do they splash on opposing theories until they completely drown dissenting voices?

Something stinks.

[pointsoflight]

7. Uh, no. You work on what you want, we'll work on what we want.

[jdog]

9. Same here.

For me, working intensively for the next few weeks on keeping Bush OUT (because I do NOT believe he WON) sounds alot better than putting up with his policies for the next four years!

[dbonds]

30. I would be much more content with the 'anomaly' if

the media wasn't in cover-up mode. It just adds another layer to the whole process that stinks. I also, think the burden of proof should be on the election officials to show why there is such a discrepancy. If there is missing money in an accountants books, isn't it the accountants responsibility to show where it went.

I don't know what to make of those saying get over it. My mind swings from people that just can't get their head around a stolen election to complete involvement (I know, wild extreme). Are our elections just for show and illusion?

[Spiffarino]

8. What is the difference what Mitofsky says?

I've read your posts for a couple of days and I have little doubt where you're coming from so let me put this as succinctly as possible:

I - and many on this board - don't care any more if Kerry will win or not. I frankly don't think BushCo would ever leave office even if it meant a second Civil War. They love power and will do anything to keep it. Kerry becoming president is not the real point.

There is no reason...NONE...that we should blindly trust machines that cannot provide a recount. And don't BS me with Diebold or Republican talking points. I am tired as shit of them. You should know the BBV arguments as well as anyone. If you don't, then you are utterly blinded by your ideology.

This affects our democratic system; whether it benefits our side or yours is immaterial.

[corky44]

17. cripes! a second civil war!?

at least we've got them surrounded...

[Helga Scow Stern]

10. It would be nice if it were true, but unfortunately it's not.

Cheating is cheating is cheating and pretending it didn't happen doesn't make it go away.

[pointsoflight]

11. In all seriousness, do me a favor.

Let me ask you for just five minutes of your time. Please go to the following link and look at it for just five minutes. Then come back and tell me if you think there's nothing to look at here.

http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp?offset=0&catid=&showall=&sort=

[jdog]

12. There's your reality! n/t

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IAMREALITY]

16. Buh Byeeee Byee Nowwwwww Buh Byeeeee

:hi:

[Straight Shooter]

31. "You're in denial." "You're sore losers." "You are immature."

Thanks for the deep character analysis.

Now here's a response: If you don't want to fix the problem and prefer to keep a fixed election, then you're a rollover, a doormat, and have a severe case of cognitive dissonance.

This problem is too big to ignore. Our elections have always been subject to tampering, but I'll be damned if I'm going to look back 20 years from now and wish I had fought a little harder.

Those who get away with a little will always come back to get away with a little more.

[noiretextatique]

42. like we won in 2000?

:hi: i would also like to wish you a fond farewell :hi:

[nashville_brook]

15. we have PROOF -- not just opinion

this is one guy -- who the heck is he anyway -- with an OPINION. We are The People. We demand to be heard. This government represents us or it represents nothing.

[RuleofLaw]

19. So the official explanation is

When asked if the full 1.9% deviation could be explained by non-response bias (Kerry voters being more likely to complete the exit poll than Bush voters), he said:

"It's my opinion, but I can't prove it."

Wow. I am impressed. We have to show proof of fraud and concrete evidence of our theory, while the discrepancy can be explained with the statement that: "Kerry voters being more likely to complete the exit poll than Bush voters"!

How does that correspond to the fact that the Bush Voters were more motivated and have stronger beliefs?


This is BS

[nashville_brook]

22. not only BS, but designed to shut us up

they are trying to wrest control of the debate back to "move along, nothing to see here."

HA! we are not buying it! we are proving this wrong and in the end we will crush them totally.

this is where we MUST concentrate our forces. this is their weakness. the vote was rigged. they can't prove otherwise.

we will focus our power here and not let go. this is a rich mine. DIG!

[seaclyr]

36. exactly! n/t

[ParanoidPat]

41. Who the heck is he?

Why he's the guy who insists that you believe he's right about his getting it so wrong! :crazy:

Of course you can trust him! :evilgrin:

[bruised]

18. Florida exit Poll- original document found

Yesterday exit poll figures for 4 pm on 11/2 were published on http://scoop.co.nz/mason/features/?s=usacoup
Below is the data from a pdf file of an official exit poll document which we are not “allowed” to see.
As usual the overall % is not shown but is easy to calculate: Kerry 49.9% Bush 50.1%.
The date is not shown or has been removed, but the number of respondents (2826) appears on the document. This is only 36 less than the total in the “final” changed data that appeared on CNN at 1.30am on 3/11.
So this is pretty much the final exit poll - before the figures were “fixed” to fit the results!
These figures show pretty much a dead heat in Florida! As these figures are slightly less favorable to Kerry than those published yesterday they may already be weighted –but as nobody is telling, it is difficult to know!

Exit poll summary
Kerry Bush
49.9% 50.1%
The exit poll data meant a cliffhanger.

But the declared votes was a walkover for Bush
Kerry Bush Declared Bush lead
3 574 509 3 955 656 381 147 votes
47.47% 52.53% 5.05%
This is 5.02% more margin for Bush than the exit pole

Conclusions
1/ No normal weighting is ever going to explain the 5% discrepancy between the exit polls and the declared result.
For example if the men/ women ratio needed to be weighted because there was evidence that men were underrepresented in the sample, increasing the 46/54 ratio shown in the document to a 49/51 ratio, only gives Bush an extra 0.2% of the vote.
2/ Either the poll was rigged or the exit poll was appallingly wrong
3/ All the exit polls that were published on the evening 2/11 have disappeared. (This data form Florida is one of the few exceptions)
4/ CNN, NBC, CBS are not releasing any information – and consider the whole subject as hype.
5/ Nobody is saying how many times the exit poll data was fixed or why.

Warren Mitofsky one of those behind the NEP, $10 exit polling operation has stated that
http://mayflowerhill.blogspot.com/2004/11/mayflower-hil... the polls were skewed 1.9% compared to the results. Looks like more to me!
If they really want to restore confidence then they need to face this issue and release the raw canvassing data on a precinct-by-precinct basis for all thestates that were canvassed.



But don’t count on it – it might turn up some more surprises!


The following is page 1 of 8 that I have in in pdf
(I would have posted the whole pdf file but didn't know how)
Florida General Exit Poll Page 1 of 8
Total KERY BUSH NADR Rep2000
Are you: (n=2,826) Male 46 47 52 1 -2
Female 54 52 48 0 3
Sex by race (n=2,775) White male 33 42 57 0 -
White female 38 46 53 0 -
Non-white male 13 59 40 1 -
Non-white female 16 64 36 0 -
Are you: (n=2,791) White 70 44 55 0 -2
Black 12 87 12 1 5
Hispanic/Latino 15 46 54 0 5
Asian 1 - - - -
Other 2 34 66 - -
AGE (60 and over) (n=2,825) 18-29 17 60 39 0 -1
30-44 27 48 51 0 1
45-59 28 44 55 0 6
60 or over 27 49 50 0 -1
Age 65 & over (n=2,825) 18-64 81 49 50 0 2
65 or over 19 51 49 1 -3
2003 total family income: (n=2,524) Under $15,000 9 61 38 1 -
$15,000-$29,999 15 61 37 1 -
$30,000-$49,999 22 53 46 0 -
$50,000-$74,999 21 47 52 0 -
$75,000-$99,999 14 40 60 0 -
$100,000-$149,999 10 46 54 - -
pages 2 to 8 omittted but I have them in pdf

[Carolab]

45. In other words,

JUST PROVE IT!!!!!!

[mdb]

20. No we cannot and shouldn't move on right now.

First things first. There will be 4 years to work on other things. Getting to the bottom of irregularities is more important. Another words what good is it to get out 8 million more voters in 2008 if this is going to be trumped by cheating. It wouldn't matter how many voters you get out the vote to.

[Capn Sunshine]

21. "Either the exit polls were rigged or apallingly wrong"

Yet the SAME exit polls are cited, probably by the OP elsewhere, as "Proof" this election was about "moral values"

If we're going to concentrate on winning first we need to define what we are , not what a rigged or apallingly wrong exit poll says we should be.

Next!

[bruised]

23. clarification

I meant
Either the election was rigged or the exit poll was appallingly wrong

[goldengreek]

24. Hey! We need to be civil.

If we're going to have as strong a case as possible we MUST listen to dissenting opinion. Dissenters will uncover weak spots.

I have a problem with Mitofsky's opinion, though:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x62880

and...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=62078&mesg_id=62078

That's just too much of a coincidence. And remember: we ARE documenting evidence of fraud and massive violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1965.

[indy_azcat]

25. This is the 2004 Results and Discussion Forum

This is where we can dissect and analyze all that occurred on Nov 2, 2004 and the events leading up to it.

The future election forum is over here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=108

We can all get along here on DU :)

[mdb]

26. Quote from John Zogby.

"Something is definitely wrong," said Zogby.

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.commondreams.org/headlines04/1118-11.htm

[milkyway]

39. Great to see Zogby questioning this. Thanks for the link.

[Hobbes199]

27. Come on...

>> in the completed version of the exit poll was +1.9%... error that the national exit poll produced.

What about the non-completed versions, you know before they were

>> comparing and averaging, on a precint to precinct level, the exit poll data and the precinct vote returns.

Come on. They lay it out there so nice, but it's all the simplest forms of fallacy.

[nashville_brook]

28. NEP is a secret consortium with intelligence ties

EP, formerly VNS....

VNS (now NEP) is a top-secret private consortium owned by ABC News, The Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News, and NBC News that allegedly projected election night winners as well as reported actual election results from 1989-2002. As an organization, VNS's roots date back to 1964.  Questions abound as to its real mission. One theory is that VNS could have conspired with election officials and used bogus exit poll projections as a cover (a de fact certification) for election fraud. It should be noted that the late Collier brothers, authors of book VoteScam: The Stealing of America, which exposed VNS's secret operations, were off-the-mark when they stated the following: "By means of an unofficial private corporation named News Election Service (NES - now known as VNS), the Establishment press has actual physical control of the counting and dissemination of the vote, and it refuses to let the public know how it is done." This statement is not completely correct. Tabulation and certification of elections is done at the local, county, state and federal levels. However, it is true that those who control the tabulation, control the election. And all-to-often it is private corporations who control vote counting technology. 

http://www.ecotalk.org/VNS.htm

here's more

Suspicion Surrounds Voter News Service


by Lynn Landes 1/20/03


It doesn't add up. Why is Voter News Service (VNS) really going out of business? That's only one of many questions that dog VNS, a private consortium of the major news organizations that allegedly projected election night winners using exit polls. VNS is owned by ABC News, The Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News, and NBC News. But VNS has always conducted its operations in a highly secretive manner.


I want to know why VNS sent surveys to counties asking them for information about the kinds of voting machines the counties used? Why should VNS care? What do voting machines have to do with exit poll projections? The voting machine industry is completely dominated by Republicans. Many people believe that the major news networks are also dominated by Republican ownership. Is there a connection between VNS closing its doors, the increased use of computerized voting machines, and the growing disparity between pre-election polling predictions and election results - a disparity that appears to heavily favor Republican candidates? Are we witnessing election fraud on a massive scale and is VNS involved?


One reason VNS is shutting down could NOT be, as VNS spokespeople continue to claim, that they screwed up the 2000 election exit polling in Florida. Any comprehensive review of the Florida vote count proves that VNS's projection was correct...Gore would have won Florida handily had it not been for uncounted "over-votes", the notorious butterfly ballot, and the illegal removal of 91,000 names of mostly black and Democratic registered voters from the rolls by a Texas firm hired by Jeb Bush's Secretary of State.


The second reason VNS has offered for closing its doors is that they couldn't handle the technical and logistic demands of Election Day exit polling. What has changed from previous years? After all, the major news networks have claimed that they've been processing election data and using computers and thousands of temporary employees since the mid-1960's. For this last election VNS even hired the well known, if not controversial, Battelle Memorial Institute to revamp their system. The hiring of Battelle, a major military defense and government intelligence contractor, raised the eyebrows of many observers who believe that there may be a connection between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and VNS. Some suspect that the CIA doesn't limit its legendary vote rigging abilities to elections in foreign countries.

http://www.ecotalk.org/VNSclosingdoors.htm

[The Flaming Red Head]

29. People were also denied access to the polls

Everywhere you look in this election, swing and non swing states, there is evidence of fraud, computer errors, incompetence, and blocking whole groups of voters from even casting a provisional ballot.

Oh no, this one ain't going away.

[stirringstill]

32. Release the RAW Data Now!

NEP must release the raw data for public analysis. Why are they delaying the release of the data? Previous years data can be obtained from The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. Mutofsky's analysis is good to know but he shows us no real data for us to vet. All we have currently are weighted numbers based on different formulas and his opinions on what went wrong. Its great that he has an opinion. The very idea that Bush supporters were less likely to be interviewed is nothing more than conjecture based on anecdotes and settles NOTHING. They could also have been Raptured at he pooling booth (as I read on some other post). Where are the RAW precinct to precinct numbers? The public needs access to these numbers now, not in two months. RELEASE the numbers!

[milkyway]

33. "completed" versions? He means the exit polls that were altered to better

coincide with the reported vote count?

[grumpy old fart]

34. Isn't he talking "national average"?

thought the big gaps were just in certain states, Ohio, Fla, etc...so that the national average deviation is not that big, but the key (stolen)states were..

[milkyway]

35. Repugs are trying to end exit polling. Mitofsky wants to save his career

and reputation.

After putting an end to exit polling, next move by the regime might be to put an end to all polling completely. We will learn what the people are thinking only when Diebold, ES&S, etc. tell us on election day.

[Borgnine]

37. Sure. Whatever you say.

"Now, can we please move on and actually talk about how we can beat the GOP rather than this nonsense that everyone is going through!!"

What do you think we're doing? Why do you think we keep losing more and more? It sure as hell isn't "moral values," I'll tell you that much.

You can try and pretend we still live in a democracy all you want, but when 2006 rolls around and we lose the power to fillibuster and then 2008 comes and we lose the presidency yet again, I hope you realize what we're up against. The reason we're talking about this and fighting is isn't even for Kerry. It's for democracy itself.

[harmonyguy]

38. He's right - It wasn't the VOTERS that committed the fraud. nt

[txindy]

40. Honestly

You shouldn't put yourself through all this aggravation. Why not just hang out in the forum addressing future elections? I'm sure they'd appreciate you there. You will not dissuade anyone here. Don't even bother. No one will be distracted. Certainly not by you.

[hyphenate]

43. You are looking more and more like a freeper

with every post you make. It's time your true colors are shown, and you should admit it. You will feel a lot more at "home" in freeper land than among those of us supporting the Democratic party.

The election WAS stolen, and whether we can prove it or not is the only current goal. Shut the hell up about us "losing" because we didn't. And whether that is proven before January 20 or not won't change the facts regarding the continual corruption of the Repukes party.

[Razorback_Democrat]

44. My Thoughts, Did He drink the Kool Aid? n/t

[masshole1979]

46. How can anyone say that the Dems were at fault in this election...

...even just considering all the countless people who got to the polling places in heavily populated areas, but coudln't find a place to park, couldn't wait in line--or just didn't want to--or were just flat out turned away or intimidated, while over in rural republican land, even the most casual voter had ample opportunity to cast a vote.

Even if you won't acknowledge the posssiblity of deliberate fraud or ballot counting problems, the inequity in polling access alone would have been what kept us from winning the election. After all, this election was not lost by 3,000,000 popular votes but by 50,000-100,000 votes in Ohio, plain and simple (assuming there was no fraud and the provisionals go to Kerry according to the proportion of them cast in Dem. precincts). If the election could be won by popular votes, the turnout in the blue states would always be so massive that the right wing would never win the presidency ever.

Think about it. If everyone who wanted to vote were able to vote easily, Kerry would have carried Ohio, NM, possibly Fla, and would have won MN, MI, WI, NH and the others by larger margins. In a state as large as Ohio, there easily could have been 50,000+ people who just turned around once they realized what a pain the whole thing would be--giving unfair advantage to less populous (and therefore more Bush-leaning) places.

And that's not even mentioning all the votes that were lost in working-class precincts with shoddy punch card machines, a la Greg Palast.

If there was one Dem. fault it was failing make sure the whole process was pristine and fair and well organized. We absolutely have to do this, state by state, county by county, precinct by precinct, before the next election.

[99Pancakes]

48. There is an elephant in the room, I agree

but donkeys KICK harder!
:kick:

[YBR31]

47. If there is no sign of fraud, why not release the raw data to Dr. Freeman?

Read note 31 at the bottom of page 15 of Dr. freeman's paper. The NEP refuses to release the raw exit poll data to Dr. Freeman until early 2005. I'll interpret that as meaning after the inauguration. What reason would they have to withhold data from a University of Pennsylvania professor at this point?