NY 2004: Bush vs. Kerry. Padding the "mandate"

[WillE]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x514068

[tritsofme]

1. Yes I agree, the probability that it all happened exactly like this must be at least 99.99474768%

TIA is always a bag of laughs.

[brooklynite]

2. Why is this being cross-posted everywhere?

Pick one forum and stick to it

[Peace Patriot]

3. Thank you for posting this! It can EASILY happen again. nt

[WillE]

4. Peace!

Nayayers on DU would have you believe that

36. The fact that the exit polls (1-2% MoE) were the first indicators of election fraud is no reason to accept them over pre-election polls (3-4% MoE).

37. There is no benefit in comparing the aggregate pre- election and post election polls; it is better to just cherry pick individual polls to prove that the aggregate is incorrect.

38. The fact that there had to be 5-6 million phantom Bush voters in order to match the 2004 recorded vote is of no consequence; it was merely due to respondents misreporting their 2000 past vote to the exit pollsters.

39. It makes a lot of sense to continue to try to debunk scores of mathematical and statistical analysts who have proved that the 2004 election was stolen beyond a reasonable doubt largely on the basis of exit poll analysis (on a Democratic Internet forum).

40. There is no reason to believe that naysayers still trying to debunk the stolen Kerry landslide have an agenda of anything other than to present the truth as they see it, even though they themselves may have have been debunked every time they have tried.