Or Florida (the two most important, others are important, too)?
It's possible to prove vote fraud by statistical means if we can establish a timeline of the preliminary results!Those of you who are good in math, statistics and probability theory will better understand what I mean.
I think Ohio votes were counted to 70% when I went to CNN's Ohio County page. Kerry was trailing by more than 100000 votes, but he had to expect at least 100000 votes from Cayahoga alone which was counted 50%.
I forecasted the other countys, too, to establish the final outcome for Ohio. For instance, when a county voted 25000:15000 in favor of Bush with 80% votes counted, you'ld expect another 6000 votes for Bush and 4000 for Kerry. This is statistical standard procedure. There is, of course, a statistical deviation, but it has its strong limits.
I forecasted the votes for every Ohio county, and the result was that Kerry could expect 150000 votes and Bush 60000. This would have yielded a close race.
But it didn't happen like that. Quite to the contrary, Bush's edge was growing despite Kerry'S Cayanoga wins.
At this point, I smelled something fishy. Bush's wins were extremely improbable. Have you seen the results in the smaller Ohio Counties? Bush 76: Kerry 23 and something like that? Do you think these results are right?
http://us.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/OH/P/00/county.000.htmlIs anyone in contact with the Kerry campaign? Get a good statistician or mathematician, and get PRELIMINARY COUNTY RESULTS! And then DO THE MATH!