In all this muck going on now about he did this and she said that...

We must not lose track of the fact that statistical evidence points overwhelmingly that huge voter fraud occurred.

The University of Pennsylvania study showed that there was one chance in 250 million that the exit polls in Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania were as off as much as they were by chance.

The Berkeley study puts the odds of the discrepancies in Florida being random chance in the hundreds of thousands.

Earlier studies by Mitofsky and Edelman pointing out that exit polls had only been wrong in 6 cases out of 2200.

The news networks REFUSE to release their original exit poll data, which would clarify the situation immensely.

Statistical evidence as described in these articles would be damning in a criminal trial. Somebody would get convicted for sure, unless they were OJ.

I think we are losing our focus, grasping for straws -- 250 votes lost here, 1,500 votes lost there...

Stick with the hard facts, with the hard statistical evidence. Then demand answers.

Has anyone heard of lawsuits against the MSM or polling organizations to obtain the earling exit poll data? Was MSM complicit?

The raw exit poll data was requested from Mitofsky by Conyers earlier this week. However, Mitofsky claimed that he would not release raw exit polling data because it was "proprietary" property of his company. Go figure

I believe that the MSM was complicit. They are the ones who have custody of the raw polling data, and they are fighting requests to release it.

I just posted this question in another thread:

Why is a private organization allowed to conduct the exit polls for the U.S. elections only to have that company turn around and use the claim that the information is proprietary to impede an investigation into whether or not the election was conducted in a free and fair manner?

Where is the transparency? What's the big secret?

Ohio

I wrote a post a while back about polling centers and transparency. When I find it in my archives, I'll post it. It'll answer some questions about the proprietary nature of polling.

Nick

That polling data is a matter of national security. They should be forced to release it.

I pledge to uphold and defend our Constitution, from all enemies foriegn and DOMESTIC...

Hopefully the request of the Congressional panel will get the info released.

If not... get out the subpoenas. I don't see how they can claim it is now private if it was previously released. Maybe the raw data was not released, but the exit polls certainly were. I think they will have a hard time not coughing up the previously released data... and if there are lawsuits brought they will probably have to release it all... at least to the parties to the suit or investigators. How can data be proprietary anyway ? The information is not confidential. The collection methods may be proprietary.... as may the questioning used... but the data itself isn't.

*******
If you ask me they are just stonewalling. The question is WHY... and WHO ARE THEY PROTECTING ? Is there any connection with the GOP/Bush/Cheney/Rove ? Did they release data knowingly in error simply so that they would create doubt about the validity of the polls and thus draw attention away from fraudulent results ? IMHO this organization needs to be investigated also.

Nothing a little Congressional subpoena won't fix!!

I don't believe Conyer's committee is official. I don't know if they have supoena power.

As promised:

Thu, 7 Feb 2002 00:38:32 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Americans coming to their senses

How can we be sure Bush's popularity was 92% to begin with?

I worked for a telecenter that did political surveys. The numbers we
dialed were random but from databases of phone number AREA CODES and
PREFIXES used again and again, so I guess there it depended on your
definition of random. On some jobs the database was uploaded by the client
so the survey was only minimally handled by the third party (telecenter).

So what about demographics? In this article I see lots of percentage
points and 1,545 Americans. Counties? Military personnel voting? Let's see
if I'm a Republican think-tank and I want to influence the survey I'm
putting out wouldn't it make sense to instruct the telecenter to only dial
conservative counties where 80% or more voted for Bush to get that
92%-80%? This is exactly what happened at the telecenter I worked at. Who
says 1,545 was the running total? Perhaps it was 3,000+ originally and
surveys were tossed to favor a certain outcome before going public?

We need double-blind surveys conducted by independent third party
telecenters with proportionate dialing of demographics, including ALL
results, with no surveys getting tossed on the backend. Transparency in
surveying is crucial to accurate polls.

This way you might get 60%-50% favoring Bush, as I suspect the real
numbers reveal or will soon enough.

BTW, I don't know what "weighting" is but the 2000 Census has a margin of
error by a few million people.
http://www.internetional.se/toft/missingmillions.htm

This numbers shifting thing is everywhere and not just in auditing and
accounting.

"How the Poll Was Conducted

The Times Poll contacted 1,545 Americans nationwide by telephone
Jan. 31-Feb. 3. Telephone numbers were chosen from a list of all exchanges
in the nation. Random-digit dialing techniques were used so that listed
and unlisted numbers could be contacted. The entire sample was weighted
slightly to conform with census figures for sex, race, age, education and
region. . ."