11 Responses

1. 

   1)

   old turk - $$$ to BRADBLOG to stop the fraud said on 10/13/2006 @ 5:20pm PT: [Permalink]

   brad on aar now

2. 

   2)

   Hannity Rules said on 10/13/2006 @ 10:42pm PT: [Permalink]

   {Ed Note: Disninformation is not welcome on this site. Your map shows no such thing as you state. –99}

   http://www.verifiedvoting.org/v...038;state=Ohio

3. 

   3)

   TruthIsAll said on 10/14/2006 @ 6:23am PT: [Permalink]

   There are currently 31 GOP House seats in play. If the election were held today, the probability that the GOP would win at least 1 of the 9 in which
   the Democratic lead EXCEEDS the 3% polling MoE is 20%; the probability they would win at least 2 is just 2%. Let’s assume that the GOP doesn’t steal ANY
   of these seats. It would be too obvious if they tried. The Dems win the 9 seats.

   But the Dems need to win 15 GOP seats to gain control of the House, assuming they win every one of their current seats. What’s to stop the GOP from stealing 5 of the 10 seats in which the Democrats lead (within the MoE) or are tied? That’s all the GOP would need to win a one-seat House majority.

   I hope I’m wrong. I want to see the Dems win big. But we all know what happened in the last three elections, don’t we?

   The data source for the “House Forecast Update” below is mydd.com. FRAUD is not mentioned once in the OP or the 50+ comments. It’s as if there is a ZERO probability of vote-switching or spoiled, uncounted Democratic votes.

   ………………………………………………………. DemWinProb…>MoE?
   Dems win these:
   1 NY-26: Davis (D) 56%–40% Reynolds (R) 100% y
   2 OH-15: Kilroy (D) 53%–41% Pryce (R) 100% y
   3 NY-24: Arcuri (D) 53%–42% Mieir (R) 100% y
   4 OH-18: Space (D) 51%–42% Padgett (R) 100% y
   5 PA-07: Sestak (D) 52%–44% Weldon (R) 100% y
   6 NM-01: Madrid (R) 52%–44% Wilson (R) 100% y
   7 NC-11: Shuler (D) 51%–43% Taylor (R) 100% y
   8 NC-08: Kissel (D) 51%–44% Hayes (R) 100% y
   9 PA-06: Murphy (D) 52%–46% Gerlach (R) 100% y

   Can the GOP steal at least 5 of these?
   10 MN-06: Wetterling (D) 50%–45% Bachmann (R) 100% ?
   11 IN-02: Donnelly (D) 50%–46% Chocola (R) 100% ?
   12 AZ-01: Simon (D) 50%–46% Renzi (R) 100% ?
   13 OH-02: Wulsin (D) 48%–45% Schmidt (R) 98% ?
   14 FL-13: Jennings (D) 47%–44% Buchannan (R) 98% ?
   15 WI-08: Kagen (D) 48%–46% Gard (R) 90% ?
   16 IA-02: Loebsack (D) 48%–47% Leach (R) 74% ?
   17 KY-03: Yarmuth (D) 48%–48% Northup (R) 50% ?
   18 IL-06: Duckworth (D) 47%–47% Roskam (R) 50% ?
   19 CO-07: Perlmutter (D) 47%–47% O’Donell(R) 50% ?

   GOP wins these:
   20 MN-01: Gutknecht (R) 48%–47% Walz (D) 26%
   21 VA-02: Drake (R) 48%–46% Kellam (D) 10%
   22 NJ-07: Ferguson (R) 48%–46% Stender (D) 10%
   23 NY-03: King (R) 48%–46% Mejas (D) 10%
   24 WA-08: Reichert (R) 48%–45% Burner (D) 2%
   25 KY-04: Davis (R) 49%–46% Lucas (D) 2%
   26 VA-10: Wolf (R) 47%–42% Feder (D) 0%
   27 ID-01: Sali (R) 49%–43% Grant (D) 0%
   28 CT-05: Johnson (R) 52%–46% Murphy (D) 0%
   29 CA-04: Doolittle (R) 52%–44% Brown (D) 0%
   30 IL-14: Hastert (R) 52%–42% Leasch (D) 0%
   31 IL-19: Shimkus (R) 53%–36% Stover (D) 0%

4. 

   4)

   dannybill said on 10/14/2006 @ 10:22am PT: [Permalink]

   FRAUD is not mentioned once in the OP or the 50+ comments. It’s as if there is a ZERO probability of vote-switching or spoiled, uncounted Democratic votes.

   This story states:

   A report to the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) on voter fraud and voter intimidation was released yesterday by USA Today over four months after it had been presented to the commission. The report confirmed that there is little verifiable evidence to support anecdotal accounts of polling place fraud …

   Brad – can you comment on this finding? Did they miss anything?

   As for current polls – remember 2004. Exit polls captured during the polling flipped overnight. How can we say polls 3 to 4 weeks out will mean anything? Remember – actual results may vary…

5. 

   5)

   TruthIsAll said on 10/14/2006 @ 12:51pm PT: [Permalink]

   Dannybill:

   1) I am referring to the mydd.com OP.

   2) The EAC confirmed “no voter fraud”. That is what we have been saying all along: that ZERO fraud was perpetrated by the VOTERS. But “Election fraud” was accomplished by the GOP through a combination of schemes: disenfranchisment of minority voters, spoiled/ lost votes; hacked voting machines and optical scanners at the polling place and central tabulators.

   THAT IS WHAT THE EAC MISSED.

   DANNYBILL said:
   3) “As for current polls – remember 2004. Exit polls captured during the polling flipped overnight. How can we say polls 3 to 4 weeks out will mean anything? Remember – actual results may vary”¦”

   THAT IS TRUE, BUT I SAID “IF THE ELECTION WERE HELD TODAY….”

   THE FINAL EXIT POLL (13660 RESPONDENTS) POSTED ON CNN AT 2PM, NOV.3, WAS THE FINAL COUP DE GRACE. IT WAS MATCHED TO THE BOGUS RECORDED VOTE. AND IT’S A PROVEN FACT THAT THE FINAL EXIT POLL WAS MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

   HERE’S THE PROOF:

   The 12:22am National Exit poll (13047 respondents) had Kerry winning by 51-48%. It flipped to Bush (51-48%) later that day in the Final Exit Poll.

   1) Bush got 50.456mm recorded votes in 2000.

   2) The “How Voted in 2000” demographic in the Final said that Bush 2000 voters comprised 43% of the total 2004 electorate (122.3mm votes).

   3) 43% of 122.3 = 52.57mm, which is 2 million MORE than the ACTUAL Bush 2000 vote.

   4) Of the 50.456mm who voted for Bush in 2000, approximately 1.75mm died, based on U.S. mortality rates.

   5) Therefore, a MAXIMUM, of 48.7mm Bush 2000 voters were STILL ALIVE to vote in 2004.

   6) But 48.7/122.3= 39.8%. NOT 43%.

   7) At least some Bush 2000 voters stayed home in 2004, so the TRUE weighting is less than 39.8%.

   8) Bottom line: The final exit poll overstated the Bush 2004 vote by a MINIMUM OF 4 MILLION VOTES.

   9) The RECORDED VOTE WAS Bush 62mm-Kerry 59mm.

   10) The TRUE vote, after returning the 4mm votes to Kerry, was a Kerry win: 63-58mm. AND THAT IS A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE (KERRY ACTUALLY DID BETTER), SINCE IT ASSUMES 100% TURNOUT OF BUSH 2000 VOTERS. WE KNOW THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE. KERRY WON 57% OF NEW VOTERS AND THOSE WHO DID NOT VOTE IN 2000.

   Here’s the math for the Most Likely Scenario:
   3.5% death rate (0.87%/year) for Gore and Bush 2000 voters)
   95% turnout in 2004 of Gore and Bush 2000 voters.
   122.27mm total recorded votes in 2004

   National Exit Poll (12:22am, 13047 respondents)

   VOTED IN 2000
   Voted Votes Weight Kerry Bush Other
   No….. 20.69 20.93% 57% 41% 2%
   Gore. 49.22 38.24% 91% 8% 1%
   Bush. 48.69 37.83% 10% 90% 0%
   Other.. 3.67 3.00% 71% 21% 8%

   Total…….100% 52.64% 46.32% 1.04%
   ……………122.27 64.36 56.63 1.27

   49.22mm =.965 * 51.0 (Gore voters alive)
   38.24% =.95 * 49.22 (Gore voter turnout/122.27)

   48.69mm =.965 * 50.456 (Bush 2000 voters alive)
   37.83% =.95 * 48.69 (Bush 2000 voter turnout/122.27)

   Kerry vote:
   52.64%=0.2093*57%+0.3824*91%+0.3783*10%+0.03*71%64.36mm =122.27*52.64%

   Bush vote:
   56.63mm = 122.27 *46.32%

6. 

   6)

   DONNA said on 10/14/2006 @ 4:22pm PT: [Permalink]

   BLACKWELL TO GIVE DECIDING VOTE ON STICKLAND BEING ABLE TO BE IN ELECTION ! Had to get this in somewhere. Democratic Underground ran the story Fri. From Akron Beacon Journal. They claim Strickland is registered to vote in the wrong place. Owns and rents votes from where he rents (I think) for 3 years now. 2 to 2 vote Blackwell has deciding vote on if he can run. (unregistered people can’t run for office)

7. 

   7)

   John said on 10/14/2006 @ 4:48pm PT: [Permalink]

   Donna,
   I know that some have misreported this article. It is not Strickland’s ability to run for Governor that is in question. It is only his voter eligibility that is in question. He can be in the election. He just may not be able to vote for himself.

8. 

   8)

   Betty said on 10/14/2006 @ 9:25pm PT: [Permalink]

   I wish that along with the letters to the governers there could be a way to mobolize a huge rally somewhere to demonstrate to the governors the determination of the American people to have fair and honest elections – or else.

9. 

   9)

   Ancient said on 10/15/2006 @ 7:19am PT: [Permalink]

   Wow, TruthIsAll thanks for interpreting those numbers. That’s why I say one of the best ways to prove their fraud is a people sponsored independent exit poll.

   Please act now!

   http://electiondefensealliance....ent_exit_polls

   I totally agree with you Betty.

10. 

    10)

    DONNA said on 10/15/2006 @ 12:51pm PT: [Permalink]

    #7 Thank you John ! At least I can sleep tonight.

11. 

    11)

    Laura said on 10/15/2006 @ 7:40pm PT: [Permalink]

    Ancient #9, Your link doesn’t work.

    {Ed Note: Try it now, Laura. –99}