• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Clear Evidence 2006 Congressional Elections Hacked (1 Viewer)

Billo_Really

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
The Republicans are more hated (and out of touch) than I thought. It seems they tried to fix the election and still lost! Their so out of touch with American sentiment, they underestimated the level of dissatisfaction with their leadership. I could see this watching the Beltway Boys. It's like their in their own little world with no concept of reality for the majority of American's. The only question is, "Are they that stupid, or do they just not care?"
November 17, 2006 at 10:59:41

Results Skewed Nationwide In Favor of Republicans by 4 percent, 3 million votes


A major undercount of Democratic votes and an overcount of Republican votes in U.S. House and Senate races across the country is indicated by an analysis of national exit polling data, by the Election Defense Alliance (EDA), a national election integrity organization.

These findings have led EDA to issue an urgent call for further investigation into the 2006 election results and a moratorium on deployment of all electronic election equipment.

"We see evidence of pervasive fraud, but apparently calibrated to political conditions existing before recent developments shifted the political landscape," said attorney Jonathan Simon, co-founder of Election Defense Alliance, "so 'the fix' turned out not to be sufficient for the actual circumstances." Explained Simon, "When you set out to rig an election, you want to do just enough to win. The greater the shift from expectations, (from exit polling, pre-election polling, demographics) the greater the risk of exposure--of provoking investigation. What was plenty to win on October 1 fell short on November 7.

"The findings raise urgent questions about the electoral machinery and vote counting systems used in the United States," according to Sally Castleman, National Chair of EDA. "This is a nothing less than a national indictment of the vote counting process in the United States!"

"The numbers tell us there absolutely was hacking going on, just not enough to overcome the size of the actual turnout. The tide turned so much in the last few weeks before the eleciton. It looks for all the world that they'd already figured out the percentage they needed to rig, when the programming of the vote rigging software was distributed weeks before the election, and it wasn't enough," Castleman commented.
For those that automatically treat op-ed's as bullshit, I've included the link to the actual report by the Election Defense Alliance.

The link is here.
 
The Republicans are more hated (and out of touch) than I thought. It seems they tried to fix the election and still lost! Their so out of touch with American sentiment, they underestimated the level of dissatisfaction with their leadership. I could see this watching the Beltway Boys. It's like their in their own little world with no concept of reality for the majority of American's. The only question is, "Are they that stupid, or do they just not care?"For those that automatically treat op-ed's as bullshit, I've included the link to the actual report by the Election Defense Alliance.

The link is here.


So your clear evidence is exit polling data? lmfao
 
Wow. I'd bet that if the Dems weren't afraid of being branded sore winners by Rush Limbaugh, they'd investigate this. But hey, they already won. I'm not sure if they'll do anything.

I thought that this would happen. So that's why Rove looked so happy all the time.

If this is true... I'd just laugh. If you cheat and still can't win, people must really not like you.
 
Wow. I'd bet that if the Dems weren't afraid of being branded sore winners by Rush Limbaugh, they'd investigate this. But hey, they already won. I'm not sure if they'll do anything.

I thought that this would happen. So that's why Rove looked so happy all the time.

If this is true... I'd just laugh. If you cheat and still can't win, people must really not like you.

Did you even read the article? Their so called "clear evidence" is exit polling data their findings must also presuppose that just because someone voted for Kerry that they would vote Democrat in their congressional races when we all know that Congressional elections are local.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by TOT:
So your clear evidence is exit polling data? lmfao
I'm definately no expert in the field, but from what I've been seeing while researching the subject of "exit polls", they are historically extremely accurate.
 
I'm definately no expert in the field, but from what I've been seeing while researching the subject of "exit polls", they are historically extremely accurate.

The poll this group bases their findings on presupposes that just because someone voted for Kerry in 2004 they would automatically vote Democrat in their congressional elections sorry but that's not the way it works, congressional elections are local.
 
Exit polls have been wrong before:

December 24, 2004

Have the Exit Polls Been Wrong Before?

Here is the documentation on previous errors. First, from the Washington Post's Richard Morin:
The networks' 1992 national exit poll overstated Democrat Bill Clinton's advantage by 2.5 percentage points, about the same as the Kerry skew
Warren Mitofsky, who ran the 2004 exit poll operation along with partner Joe Lenski, wrote the following in the Spring 2003 issue of Public Opinion Quarterly (p. 51):
An inspection of within-precinct error in the exit poll for senate and governor races in 1990, 1994 and 1998 shows an understatement of the Democratic candidate for 20 percent of the 180 polls in that time period and an overstatement 38 percent of the time...the most likely source of this error is differential non-response rates for Democrats and Republicans:
From the internal CNN report on the network's performance on Election Night 2000 (p. 48 of pdf):
Warren Mitofsky and Joe Lenski, heads of the CNN/CBS Decision Team, told us in our January 26 interview with them that in VNS's use of exit polls on Election Day 2000, the exit polls overstated the Gore vote in 22 states and overstated the Bush vote in 9 states. In the other 19 states, the polls matched actual results. There was a similar Democratic candidate overstatement in 1996 and a larger one in 1992.
In short, Mitofsky and Lenski have reported Democratic overstatements to some degree in every election since 1990. Moreover, all of Lenski and Mitofsky's statements were on the record long before Election Day 2004.
Of course, those errors were apparently bigger and more consistent this year. According to an internal NEP report leaked to the New York Times, this year's "surveys had the biggest partisan skew since at least 1988, the earliest election the report tracked." However, in some states, the errors in 2000 were still quite large. Consider this comment from Joe Lenski to CNN on December 12, 2000 (p. 48 of pdf), describing the table also copied below:
The second group contains five states that had stupendously bad exit poll estimates. Here is a comparison of the final best survey estimate at poll closing with the final actual results for these five states... As you can see the exit polls in these five states were off by between 7 and 16(!!!) [Emphasis in original]
lenski_table.jpg

The exit poll errors four years ago led Mitofsky to tell the CNN investigators, "The exit poll is a blunt instrument," and Lenski to add, "the polls are getting less accurate" (p. 26 of pdf). They recommended "raising the bar" on projections made from exit polls: "The proposed changes result from a belief that exit polling is "less accurate than it was before" and that "we should take exit poll data with caution in making calls," said Lenski" (p. 27).
All of this led the authors of the internal CNN report -- Joan Konner, James Risser, and Ben Wattenberg - to conclude (p. 3, 7):
Exit polling is extremely valuable as a source of post-election information about the electorate. But it has lost much of the value it had for projecting election results in close elections...[Their recommendation to CNN:] Cease the use of exit polling to project or call winners of states. The 2000 election demonstrates the faults and dangers in exit polling. Even if exit polling is made more accurate, it will never be as accurate as a properly conducted actual vote count.
[FAQ on Exit Polls]

Mystery Pollster: Have the Exit Polls Been Wrong Before?
 
Originally posted by TOT:
The poll this group bases their findings on presupposes that just because someone voted for Kerry in 2004 they would automatically vote Democrat in their congressional elections sorry but that's not the way it works, congressional elections are local.
Once again, you read too fast without comprehension. I can see in your responses that it is obvious you just hunt for the one thing you can spin into a case, then run with that. There is no desire on your part to seek the truth. You can't oppose a certain position until you know what that position is. You fell short of the mark on this one. But it's early.

Your probably out right now trying to find some way to discredit exit polls. I think that's Chapter 2 in Neocon 101.


Landslide Denied: Exit Polls vs. Vote Count 2006

In presenting exit poll-based evidence of vote count corruption, we are all too aware of the campaign that has long been waged to discredit the reliability of exit polls as a measure of voter intent. Our analysis is not, however, based on a broad assumption of exit poll reliability. We maintain only that the national exit poll for E2006 contains within it a specific question that serves as an intrinsic and objective yardstick by which the validity of the poll’s sample can be established, from which our conclusions flow directly.

For the purposes of this analysis our primary attention is directed to the exit poll in which respondents were asked for whom they cast their vote for the House of Representatives. 2 Although only a few House races were polled as individual races, an additional nationwide sample of more than 10,000 voters was drawn,3 the results representing the aggregate vote for the House in E2006. The sample was weighted according to a variety of demographics and had a margin of error of +/- 1%.

When we compare the results of this national exit poll with the total vote count for all House races we find that once again, as in the 2004 Election (“E2004”), there is a very significant exit poll-vote count discrepancy. The exit poll indicates a Democratic victory margin nearly 4%, or 3 million votes, greater than the margin actually recorded by the vote counting machinery. This is far outside the margin of error of the poll and has less than a one in 10,000 likelihood of occurring as a matter of chance.
 
What did I tell ya!
 
I don't understand why people get so confused by how easy it would be to have voter fraud using these electronic machines. They only need to manipulate the numbers slightly to produce the results they want. Plus, the election machine code is very seceret. So anyone, the company, a programmer, a third party, could easily switch out one part of the code without it being noticed. Election fraud using these machines is VERY easy if you have a mind to do it and half a brain at programming. I bet I could rig the entire next Presidential election by myself.
 
Once again, you read too fast without comprehension.

Umm no I didn't the article says the following:

"2 Although only a few House races were polled as individual races, an additional nationwide sample of more than 10,000 voters was drawn,"

So there we have it only a handful of individual House races were polled, a national poll is meaningless in House Races where were their samples drawn from? For all I know they could have been drawn from heavily Democratic districts.
 
Originally posted by TOT:
Umm no I didn't the article says the following:

"2 Although only a few House races were polled as individual races, an additional nationwide sample of more than 10,000 voters was drawn,"

So there we have it only a handful of individual House races were polled, a national poll is meaningless in House Races where were their samples drawn from? For all I know they could have been drawn from heavily Democratic districts.
Another case of selective reading. They stated the survey was ajusted according to the demographics.
The sample was weighted according to a variety of demographics...
And since their the experts, and your not, TOT, I think their claim...
...and had a margin of error of +/- 1%
...is more credible than your drabble.

When I was in my 20's, I thought I was an expert on everything too.
 
Another case of selective reading. They stated the survey was ajusted according to the demographics.
And since their the experts, and your not, TOT, I think their claim...
...is more credible than your drabble.

When I was in my 20's, I thought I was an expert on everything too.

How does a national poll have anything to do with a Congressional election? Even according to them only a handful of House Races were polled. Anyways this point is moot considering the fact that I have already proven that exit polls are unreliable now so more than ever. As for expertise they are an organization founded just to do what they did, they have an agenda, they had a pre-concieved notion that there would be voter fraud and they latched on to anything that would correspond with their conclusion which they had reached before the elections had even taken place.
 
What kills me is that the Republicans actually did try to fix the election. It's called redistricting. They did everything they possibly could to gerrymander districts to ensure that they would stay in power and they still lost. Now they're saying that the margin of Democratic victory was razor thin as solace at their failed attempt to dominate the country permanently. Sad really.
 
What kills me is that the Republicans actually did try to fix the election. It's called redistricting. They did everything they possibly could to gerrymander districts to ensure that they would stay in power and they still lost. Now they're saying that the margin of Democratic victory was razor thin as solace at their failed attempt to dominate the country permanently. Sad really.


Umm redistricting is SOP for both parties, both parties gerrymander and it is beneficial to any incumbant so don't make it seem like it's some GOP conspiracy, incumbants from both parties do it.
 
Umm redistricting is SOP for both parties, both parties gerrymander and it is beneficial to any incumbant so don't make it seem like it's some GOP conspiracy, incumbants from both parties do it.
Incumbents from the MAJORITY party get to gerrymander when the census data is available. I never said it was a GOP conspiracy. I said it's untrue that the Democratic margin was as thin as the Republicans keep saying. However, the redistricting was taken to a new art form by Republicans in the past 6 years and it was the Republicans who benefited this time around. They were the majority. You try to make it sound like Democratic incumbents were carving up districts when they were in the minority. That's completely untrue.
 
Incumbents from the MAJORITY party get to gerrymander when the census data is available. I never said it was a GOP conspiracy. I said it's untrue that the Democratic margin was as thin as the Republicans keep saying. However, the redistricting was taken to a new art form by Republicans in the past 6 years and it was the Republicans who benefited this time around. They were the majority. You try to make it sound like Democratic incumbents were carving up districts when they were in the minority. That's completely untrue.

It doesn't matter who is in the majority, it is the state legislature's that determine the boandaries of districts not the U.S. Congress.
 
The Republicans are more hated (and out of touch) than I thought. It seems they tried to fix the election and still lost! Their so out of touch with American sentiment, they underestimated the level of dissatisfaction with their leadership. I could see this watching the Beltway Boys. It's like their in their own little world with no concept of reality for the majority of American's. The only question is, "Are they that stupid, or do they just not care?"For those that automatically treat op-ed's as bullshit, I've included the link to the actual report by the Election Defense Alliance.

The link is here.

so the Republicans lost the election despite RIGGING the election :roll::roll::roll:
you are such a simpleton partisan hack
get a life already
 
Originally posted by TOT:
How does a national poll have anything to do with a Congressional election? Even according to them only a handful of House Races were polled. Anyways this point is moot considering the fact that I have already proven that exit polls are unreliable now so more than ever. As for expertise they are an organization founded just to do what they did, they have an agenda, they had a pre-concieved notion that there would be voter fraud and they latched on to anything that would correspond with their conclusion which they had reached before the elections had even taken place.
Trying to spin the obvious highlights your own immaturity.

Accuracy of "exit polls" highly reliable

prominent survey researchers (e.g., Asner 1999, Cantril 1991:142), political scientists (e.g., Edwards & Wayne 1999:84), and journalists (e.g., Jurkowitz 2000) concur that they are highly reliable. As far back as 1987, political columnist David Broder wrote that exit polls "are the most useful analytic tool developed in my working life" (1987:253). Edwards & Wayne (1999:84) caution only that, "Š the problem with exit polls lies in their accuracy (rather than inaccuracy). They give the press access to predict the outcome before the elections have been concluded." An exit pollster himself for more than 20 years, St. Louis University Professor of Political Science Ken Warren (2003) has never had an error greater than 2 percent, except one time-in a 1982 St. Louis primary. In that election, massive voter fraud was subsequently uncovered
 
Trying to spin the obvious highlights your own immaturity.

Not according to the facts:

December 24, 2004

Have the Exit Polls Been Wrong Before?


Here is the documentation on previous errors. First, from the Washington Post's Richard Morin:
The networks' 1992 national exit poll overstated Democrat Bill Clinton's advantage by 2.5 percentage points, about the same as the Kerry skew
Warren Mitofsky, who ran the 2004 exit poll operation along with partner Joe Lenski, wrote the following in the Spring 2003 issue of Public Opinion Quarterly ( p. 51):
An inspection of within-precinct error in the exit poll for senate and governor races in 1990, 1994 and 1998 shows an understatement of the Democratic candidate for 20 percent of the 180 polls in that time period and an overstatement 38 percent of the time...the most likely source of this error is differential non-response rates for Democrats and Republicans:
From the internal CNN report on the network's performance on Election Night 2000 ( p. 48 of pdf):
Warren Mitofsky and Joe Lenski, heads of the CNN/CBS Decision Team, told us in our January 26 interview with them that in VNS's use of exit polls on Election Day 2000, the exit polls overstated the Gore vote in 22 states and overstated the Bush vote in 9 states. In the other 19 states, the polls matched actual results. There was a similar Democratic candidate overstatement in 1996 and a larger one in 1992.
In short, Mitofsky and Lenski have reported Democratic overstatements to some degree in every election since 1990. Moreover, all of Lenski and Mitofsky's statements were on the record long before Election Day 2004.
Of course, those errors were apparently bigger and more consistent this year. According to an internal NEP report leaked to the New York Times, this year's "surveys had the biggest partisan skew since at least 1988, the earliest election the report tracked." However, in some states, the errors in 2000 were still quite large. Consider this comment from Joe Lenski to CNN on December 12, 2000 ( p. 48 of pdf), describing the table also copied below:
The second group contains five states that had stupendously bad exit poll estimates. Here is a comparison of the final best survey estimate at poll closing with the final actual results for these five states... As you can see the exit polls in these five states were off by between 7 and 16(!!!) [Emphasis in original]
lenski_table.jpg

The exit poll errors four years ago led Mitofsky to tell the CNN investigators, "The exit poll is a blunt instrument," and Lenski to add, "the polls are getting less accurate" ( p. 26 of pdf). They recommended "raising the bar" on projections made from exit polls: "The proposed changes result from a belief that exit polling is "less accurate than it was before" and that "we should take exit poll data with caution in making calls," said Lenski" (p. 27).
All of this led the authors of the internal CNN report -- Joan Konner, James Risser, and Ben Wattenberg - to conclude (p. 3, 7):
Exit polling is extremely valuable as a source of post-election information about the electorate. But it has lost much of the value it had for projecting election results in close elections...[Their recommendation to CNN:] Cease the use of exit polling to project or call winners of states. The 2000 election demonstrates the faults and dangers in exit polling. Even if exit polling is made more accurate, it will never be as accurate as a properly conducted actual vote count.
[ FAQ on Exit Polls]

Mystery Pollster: Have the Exit Polls Been Wrong Before?
 
It doesn't matter who is in the majority, it is the state legislature's that determine the boandaries of districts not the U.S. Congress.

And the majority of state governments were controlled by Republicans.

Republicans had 28 or 29 (?) governors before this election; not sure how many state congresses.
 
And the majority of state governments were controlled by Republicans.

Republicans had 28 or 29 (?) governors before this election; not sure how many state congresses.

It doesn't matter how many state governors they had the governors only approve the redistricting, it is the state legislatures which actually conduct the redistricting and only for 36 states the rest have special non-partisan committees do it.
 
It is perfectly obvious that either of the 2 main party's currently in power will utilize any method (fair and or foul) to perpetuate their hold on that power.
This time the GOP got it wrong, not because of most of their policy's but mainly because of Iraq as well as fraud and theft as well as sexual deviancy by both, but primarily the GOP party.
This coupled with what was seen as the Republican President blatantly spinning to start a needless war and having not the slightest idea as to how to achieve any kind of victory.
Exit Polls may or may not have been accurate, what was pleasingly very accurate was that the American electorate saw through the miasma of lies, and deception by the ruling party and punished these a$$holes for that deception.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom