This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Larry, >>Sarah, the only thing you've "proven" is that someone was playing fast = and loose with the numbers from the exit polls.=20 "Proving" is done by attorneys and folks like you. Scientists would = never be so arrogant as to presume to have "proven" anything. They = formulate and test theories, and the modern scientist does this with = heavy use of mathematical principles of probability, a.k.a. statistics. Now, let's formalize this, in semi-lay terms ('cuz I don't want y'all to = fall asleep on me): PINKO COMMIE THEORY: Bush didn't really win. The election was "won" = only through hacking of the non-paper vote. HYPOTHESIS: The vote count will differ from exit polling in states where = non-paper balloting is utilized. DESIGN: Randomly sample states with non-paper balloting and states with = paper balloting. Record the differential between Kerry's margins in the = final vote tally and in the exit polls. Translate the data to actual - = predicted margin, yielding "margin error." Test for differences between = paper and non-paper states. RESULTS: As stated before in "Who REALLY won" post. Non-paper states = had a much greater margin error that statistically favored Bush. = Moreover, paper states had no statistical margin error that would favor = either candidate. The hypothesis is therefore supported, providing support for the pinko = commie theory. This does not "prove" the theory. It is merely a = (strong) point in favor of the theory. Other issues and hypotheses can = and should be examined, of course. POSSIBLE PROBLEMS: (1) The states might not have been randomly sampled, hence my question = to Thump. Since I didn't collect the data, I don't know. (2) Exit polling may not have been done the same way in all states. In = particular, if there were differences in exit polling between the two = *groups* (i.e. paper and non-paper), then the data could be screwed up. FACTORS THAT ARE *NOT* PROBLEMATIC: (1) Exit polls were not done at *all* polling locations (e.g. Conrad's = point). However, if the polling locations were randomly selected, which = would be consistent with the goals of an exit poll, then the exit poll = data *should* predict the actual vote count with no net bias towards = either candidate. The results would be +/- a certain margin for error. = In the long run, with infinite sampling, the error would be zero. = Statistical methods, such as I used, detect departures from zero bias. = Tests get more sensitive with more extensive sampling. My testing = reveals that there is a statistical departure between paper ballot and = non-paper ballot states, assuming that the polling data were collected = the same way in both sets of states. The question to be answered is = what the source of that departure is. Now, I would enjoy hearing clarification on the possible problems with = the data. I suspect that these issues do not present as problems with = the data, but again, I don't *know* that. They aren't my data. LARRY'S ISSUES: Larry has suggested that "someone was playing fast and loose with the = numbers from the exit polls." That may be, Larry. That's why I would = like clarification on the above. Please understand my conclusion, = though, which is that this error between exit polling and vote count = exists only in non-paper states and favors Bush. Why is that? Perhaps = you are proposing a different conspiracy from the pinko leftist commie = media? LARRY'S PROPOSED CONSPIRACY??: The entity conducting the exit polling wanted to produce data = implicating that the non-paper states were guilty of election fraud that = would favor Bush. They were less concerned with arriving at credible = outcome conclusions that they could utilize to correctly "call" = electoral outcomes, and thus they were willing to sacrifice their = reputation for reliability to the greater cause of pointing a finger of = blame towards the Republicans. Well, like most theories, this is potentially testable. What hypotheses = do you propose, Larry? What is your evidence? Finally, David Love wrote, "I think arguing about whether Bush won or = not absent any real evidence is unproductive." I agree. However, the = exit poll data *are* evidence. And contrary to the suggestions of a = few, it *does* matter what happened. I am the first to admit that Bush = "won" the election and that it is pointless to dispute the election = results. Bush will serve another 4 years, whether I like it or not. = However, the bigger issue is election reform. Remember, everyone (you = especially, Larry), the pendulum swings in two directions, not one. = There will probably be a huge backlash of liberalism in decades to come, = and the Republicans will then be out of power. Do all you Republicans = REALLY want an election system that can be rigged by the party in power? = Hey, just imagine paperless balloting, with no possibility for recount, = in a political environment such as in the latter FDR administration, = only with more rampant corruption. Do y'all REALLY want that? Think = about it! Now is the time to nip all this paperless balloting in the = bud, before our "Democracy" becomes a "Demockery." Hey, all you veterans, didn't you fight wars in defense of Democracy? = Where's your fight now, when Democracy is arguably on the chopping block = in our own country?! I'm not suggesting you oppose Bush. I'm = suggesting you oppose paperless balloting with no accountability! Peace, Sarah PS Larry: "You wrote If you can't see that CBS blatantly attempted to = do harm to Bush during an election, something is seriously wrong." In = fact CBS is owned by Viacom, which has repeatedly stated it would prefer = Bush as president (with deregulating and such...). Ya gots ta' cater to = tha' boss, ya' know, and that's why CBS wore a muzzle and suppressed = damning stories in the final stages of the election. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/6b/3e/33/aa/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC