FOCUS! FOCUS! FOCUS! It's the EXIT POLLS stupid!

[intensitymedia]

Fellow activists!

We are being made dumb, dizzy and mindless by the MSM in general, and in particular by its refusal even to discuss - let alone release - the NEP/Mitofsky exit polling data, showing discrepancies that are greater than in the Ukraine, and showing in Steven Freeman's analysis that Bush's "win" in Ohio and elsewhere was and is a statistical impossibility.

In other words, it didn't happen.

We have to raise hell about this, and never stop.

Why? We are facing what appears to be a sinister, Stalin-esque conspiracy by all the networks and major newspapers to "shield" Americans from the potentially disturbing information that a neo-fascist tyranny has been imposed upon us by the treasonous and criminal theft of the 2004 election.

Despite all their efforts to censor this information, the Exit Poll data has been available online, a pro-freedom-of-the-press whistleblowing coup that, to my mind, is as historically important as the publication of the Pentagon Papers or even more important.

Send your friends and neighbors to:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm

and here for the complete data

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/pdfs/Mitofsky4zonedata/

as well as to Freeman's analyses:

http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm


I suggest that we find as many ways as we can to take this explosive, smoking gun proof of election fraud and force EVERYONE to confront what it says, and what it means.

To me, this is our greatest weapon, Square One in our battle to throw the bums out, making sure that the recent travesty of democracy never occurs again in the Land of the (formerly) Free.

Let's make them answer this, and answer for it!

Let's FOCUS! It's the Exit Polls, stupid ...


peace - but never give up the struggle -

Che

[henslee]

1. I have a hard time understanding that graphic -- like what the numbers are

actually representing on the side. I bet many Americans are like me -- thanks to a second rate education -- math makes me dizzy. I understand that polls do not lie and that actual election results are very suspect when compared to polling data. But I have never seen it all spelled out in a concise, comfortable retard proof way. Like starting with the history of polls and how they have always been respected blah blah blah. Show examples of previous exit poll/election poll scenarios. Etc.

[helderheid]

2. I'm like you

with the graphs. We are definitely not alone. I agree - we need something spelled out very simply. I know this election was stolen but we need a basic way to show it with the info we have.

We cannot let this go.

[Atman]

3. I've tried...

I'm amazed at the number of people who simply shrug and say "so, the exit polls were wrong this time." They're willing to accept that exit polling has basically ONLY been wrong for George Bush. Some come up with an obscure election for Dog Catcher of Podunk County in 1988 as "proof" that exit polls can be wrong, but I am literally amazed at how many -- even DUers -- who dismiss this exit poll thing. It is THE issue here. I don't know if they used the exit polls to tell them how much to pad Bush's final tabulation (counted by GOP-backed/run companies, remember), or whether the exit polls were scrapped for being so far off from what they expected to have to steel. But I am in absolute agreement...Mitofsky should be under oath, coughing up the raw date, NOW.



1st Amendment Shoppe

[Lurker321]

7. Why look to obscure elections - let's look

at the latest "proof" that exit polls are accurate - the Ukrainian elections.

http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/10499250.htm?

There were three exit polls. Their results were:

58.1 to 38.4 MOE=2
56.5 to 41.3 no MOE
56 to 41 MOE=2

What were the official results of the election?

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11909776%5E2,00.html

51.99 to 44.20

So - how good were the exit polls? ALL of them were completely wrong and WAY OUTSIDE of the margin of error. Compared to these polls, US national exit polls of 2004 were a lot closer to the final result.

Edit: fixed the links

[allthatjazz]

12. neither one of your links work n/t

[Lurker321]

13. fixed the links -

but you don't have to trust the links - a couple of minutes googling will come up with other links to the same info.

[euler]

15. Do your own research. You appear to have accepted...

...what counts as conventional wisdom here on DU.

Exit polls are not always accurate.

Even liberal blogs and web magazines have started reporting the facts about exit polls.

http://www.alternet.org/story/20934

Scroll to the section that begins with:


Charge: Exit poll results were more accurate than actual ballots
Finding: False
Explanation of Problem: Imperfect nature of polls

[pauldp]

19. So you'd agree we need the raw data right?

[righteous1]

31. The raw data tells you absolutely nothing

[euler]

33. I have no problem with the release of the raw data.

The problem you will have with the raw data is what has been said about it by the pollsters who collected the data (you know, the really real exit poll experts.) They are saying things like: "It's not possible to use statistics on the raw exit poll data to make any kind of credible statements about the veracity of the election."

Everywhere but in this DU forum, this is a big hurdle to get over. Arguments like 'Mitofsky is a idiot, of course the raw numbers can be used to show fraud' really won't count for much outside this DU forum - you know, in the real world.

[tngledwebb]

24. One article by Baker is not proof the other way.

Anomalies in the Ukraine exit polls are not proof the other way. Florida 2000 would be all the proof we needed, if we lived in a real democracy with a true free press.

[NationalEnquirer]

46. Thanks for the link.

I guess I should look at other opinions, especially if its from fellow liberals.
I'm not too good with statistics, I sure hope when all is said and done, SOMEBODY can write the definitive study on this that a LAYPERSON can understand.

[intensitymedia]

68. This article is a heap of guesses, assertions, and distorted

swamp gas that says nothing substantial or factual to prove any of its points.

Diebold wouldn't "risk" the "calumny" of fixing the vote for Bush?

HAAAAAHAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

The "raw" data is useless, says a "source" "close to the thinking" of Mitofsky?

Then why did they release it to CNN?

This article is the worst kind of nonsense, really propagandistic disinformation, designed only to confuse people about facts that are so utterly crystal clear.

The exit polls prove that Kerry won, and that there was widespread fraud.

Sorry that bothers you so much.

If you think that relying on flimsy opinion pieces like this is going to sway anyone to believe your repetitiously expressed falsehoods regarding the science of exit polling, you're wasting your time.

Please don't waste any more of mine.

We're going to change the world. Get out of the way.

Che de Vera

[davidgmills]

70. Just another reporter

Who is relying on a "source" who told him Freeman is wrong.

Certainly not capable of learning for himself.

[Mistwell]

4. A question about faulty registrations

Just a question:

Has anyone looked into the impact of faulty registrations on flawed exit poll results?

We know that there was a massive new registration drive by both parties. We also know that 1) some people were registered who were not allowed registration according to the law (such as some illegal aliens, some prisoners and parolees in states that do not allow them to vote, some double registrations in multi-counties and even multi-states, etc...); and 2) some false registrations took place (such as for dead people, for simply ficitional people, etc...).

One of the weighting factors for exit polls includes number of registered voters (in other words, early polls predict turn-out based on number of registered voters, interview people based on those predictions, and if that registration number is flawed, then the poll itself can be flawed).

In addition, if someone is not allowed by law to vote (and uses a provisional ballot that gets thrown out, for example), their exit interview would still be counted in the exit poll (thinking their vote actually counted) but would not reflect an actual vote.

Couldn't these two factors result in some flaws in exit polling that would not be accounted for by the margin of error, if they happened at a rate greatly increased from prior years?

[helderheid]

5. no

but electronic vote machines switching votes from Kerry to Bush would explain it. ;)

[intensitymedia]

8. You should really take a look at Freeman's article #2

... because he makes it clear that vote suppression is NOT reflected in Exit Polls (they only poll people who have actually voted and were allowed to vote), so that is an added issue outside the exit poll results, suggesting that Kerry's "win" in Ohio should have been by an even GREATER margin than the exit polls reflect.

On provisional ballots - I can't answer that, but Freeman makes it pretty clear that the huge statistic shift shown in the three national exit polls could not have occurred through some kind of minor phenomenon unique to this election.

If you check, the third national poll at that URL is the "contaminated" poll reversing the figure and making Bush appear to be the winner by mixing in "real" voting data with the polls - an unsupportable protocol.

peace - but never give up that struggle -

che

[Mistwell]

18. okay

I will check it out, thanks...

[Imnottelling]

6. Agree, the exit polls keep me up at night

I agree that the exit polls are a big deal and the lack of coverage in the MSM is astounding. Trying hard to get this info out is a very good idea and, IMO, Mitosfsky should be FORCED to answer for his "flawed" exit polls by the MSM who purchased them.

That being said, I see a very big problem. The average Joe has limited understanding of mathematics and statistics. Not that the statistical analyses of the exit polls is particularly sophisticated but a great many people out there consider balancing their checkbooks as an excercise in mathematics...they are simply ill equiped to really understand the arguments being made about exit polls.

Now, if a person has any bias to begin with toward Bush they are going to simply brush away the mathematics as some sort of mumbo-jumbo cooked up by liberal elite to steal the presidency from Bush. As screwed up as that sounds...it WILL happen...it has happened. Even my father (who is well educated) joked about the early Berkeley study on exit polls I told him about...he said "what do you expect to come out of Berkeley?"

Further, not very many people are receptive to the idea that public officials would commit something like election fraud. The ones that can imagine that electron fraud was committed will brush it off as insignificant,localized, and thus unimportant when it comes to the final vote tallies and declaring a winner. Massive election fraud is very hard for many people to come to terms with. Although, considering that thousands of people in the FBI or CIA are able to keep a secret should make it more believeable that many people could have been involved in election fraud.

The is a lot of psychology to fight here.

SOOOOO, to make a rambling post a little longer...we need to do two things

(1) Find a smoking gun....a confession...a video tape...something of somebody actually cheating on a large scale.....an email...something. This should be easy :)

(2) Try very hard to cast the exit poll arguments in a very understandable layman language that is easily accessible to the undereducated and closed minded.

[euler]

16. You are way behind.

[Imnottelling]

17. Behind what? (nm)

[Mistwell]

9. I thought the exit polls DID falsely favor Bush in a couple of places

According to this site:

http://synapse.princeton.edu/~sam/pollcalc_letters_florida_jimg.html

Bush actually did better in some exit polls than he did at the actual poll (though I keep hearing that all the exit poll evidence shows that ONLY Kerry was harmed).

New Jersey: B +2

New Mexico: B +1

Wisconsin: B +2

And their data shows that Bush was falsely favord in some counties in Florida as well.

Were these somehow disproved at another time?

I'm trying to get at the truth here. I want to believe there was election fraud against Kerry that resulted in him losing the election. However, I am not fully there yet, and asking the hard questions (and getting good answers) is how I can get there.

[rdmccur]

10. As a mathematician I

have been confounded since early November (I became suspicious right after the election) about the silence of the media and lack of response by the offended party (Democrats). Made me realize how powerful and ruthlessly controlling the Bush administration (and some component of the Neocons) must be. Sobering!

[meganmonkey]

11. Sobering? Has the opposite effect on me!

I need a drink...:beer:

[Zan_of_Texas]

14. Exit polls don't prove anything.

Especially in Ukraine, where the Bush administration was working to get one side to win.

The Mitofsky US exit poll guy -- we have no way of knowing what his true political ties are, or whether he's honest. We just don't.

We do know that they slid in actual results toward the end of the voting day to try to "correct" the mismatch. What exactly does that tell you?

We also know that he has not voluntarily released the polls - what does that tell you?

We also know that he is paid by the consortium of major media -- we know that those people are the same ones who call us conspiracy theorists and virtually refuse to report on election fraud and anomalies, and that most of them are big Bush supporters. What does that tell you?

The mismatch between exit polls and tallies was a shout-out for further examination.

Congresspeople, judges, Joe Blow, and reporters will NOT be reporting or judging by the studies that have relentlessly popped up here, with their standard deviations and derivations of derivations, and lack of even rudimentary labeling of what the hell they are trying to show.

Exit polls can be wrong. They can be fixed or fudged. They can be manufactured out of thin air -- and I wonder if the previous exit pollster for major media, Voter News Service, did that -- there is little to no evidence they hired people to do their nationwide polling. They did, however, meltdown and report ZILCH for the 2002 Mid-Terms.

That said, I firmly believe the presidential election was rigged, fixed, manipulated, hacked, edited, suppressed, and corrupted.

But, my best evidence is certainly not exit polls.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zan_of_Texas]

22. We are not discussing fingerprints. Nor DNA.

We are not discussing where I come from (I do not come from Texas, I am a Northerner who resides here, but never mind), nor my mental state.

We are discussing exit polls. Well, I was discussing them. You are attacking me.

My statistical proof is in your 1 post -- nuff said.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[intensitymedia]

39. if you want to discuss the exit polls please continue the thread

otherwise don't waste our time

che

[foo_bar]

30. 2 out of 3 dentists agree

DNA evidence and fingerprint evidence, my friend, are STATISTICAL.

I have a strange feeling this won't go over well, but I'll try to explain the difference to anyone else with an open mind.

If genomes and friction ridges had the option of lying or not responding to the polling authority, they would also be dubious self-selected statistics. If exit pollsters could perform a brain scan of every nth voter with sufficient precision to know how they voted (and not how they say they voted), exit polls would be something more than an experiment in mass psychology, assuming voters couldn't refuse. Even that wouldn't make the fudgie* margin of error disappear, or the confidence interval 100%, or a distribution with zero degrees of freedom, but it would make it easier to isolate counting errors from "human error".

As it stands, 2 out of 3 dentists get a free supply of Trident for giving the answer the pollsters want to hear. In terms of an election involving a publicly reviled nincompoop who makes people feel "safe from ter'ists", this means people give a different answer when they think people are watching. This much we know.

*The margin of error grew out of a well-intentioned need to compare the accuracy of different polls. However, its widespread use in high-stakes polling has degraded from comparing polls to comparing reported percentages, a use that is not supported by theory.

The margin of error is a simple transformation of the number of respondents into an ambiguous term that is neither a "margin" nor the whole of "error".

Perhaps most importantly, there are many different sources of error in polling, and variance due to sample size is not likely to be the only contribution.
source

[euler]

34. Thanks for that.

I've been looking for papers that studied non-response bias.

[euler]

35. Here is an anecdotal tidbit that can open eyes about...

...flaws with exit polling.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=97506&mesg_id=97575&page=

[euler]

36. By the way foo_bar,

I've found that posts like yours rarely receive a substantive reply.

[intensitymedia]

40. foobar you're just regurgitating some primitive delusions about exit polls

You should read Freeman's second paper.

Margin of error, statistically, is mathematically related to the sample number.

Your supposition about how people did or didn't subjectively feel about answering the exit polls are likewise irrelevant. Exit polling over the years and over thousands of elections continually finds corrections to make error margins smaller. Freeman goes through some of this. Point is - all your 'problems' have already been taken into account and the poll adjusted to correct any problem, not just the subjective ones you raise, but against ANY skew away from accuracy.

In Germany they've been accurate to .1% for years.

In neighboring Wisconsin the exit polls predicted Kerry's victory to .1%. Compare that with a nearly a four point late in the day swing in Ohio. Doesn't wash.

And you're arguing against Mitofsky's own assertion - Mitofsky, the inventor of exit polling and supposedly one of the very best - that his own MOE was +/- 1%.

That's largely based on the size of the sample.

A lot of erroneous smoke about the "problems" you may think exit polling might encounter evaporates in an instant when the true weight of the numbers - and the historical and scientific consistency - of exit polls is considered seriously.

The comments you make are frivolous because they don't even discuss the methodology - the only real criticism that would be meaningful.

che

[Joe Chi Minh]

44. Happy now, euler?

We aim to please (though I have less patience than intensitymedia).

[foo_bar]

45. thanks a lot euler

(edited for decorum)

"Preach the Gospel. If necessary use words"
- St. Francis of Assisi.

[demo dutch]

48. 7 pollsters incl Zogby stand by their early prediction that Kerry

would win the presidency.

[davidlynch]

49. Deleted Message

[googly]

21. I say, declare the winner based on exit polls and forget counting

of votes. That will save the tax payers a BILLION dollars
every two years. Exit polls have picked a winner in 99% of
the time since their inception, and that 1% miss is no big
deal when you add up the savings.

[Philly Buster]

25. You're kidding right?

[googly]

27. Well...I am not sure

On the surface it seems frivolous, but when you think
it out, it has many positive traits. First and foremost,
the enormous savings of tax payer dollars. Then we would
have a extremely rapid knowing of who won. And can anyone
recall when exit polls were more than 1 or 2% off?

So, unless the exit polls are close, there is no need to
spend millions counting votes.

[intensitymedia]

41. census head would prefer surveys to a full count

I just had to jump in on this because the idea you raise isn't as crazy as it sounds.

I was surprised to read in Freeman's paper that the former head of the Census bureau is in favor of a survey process to replace the "full" head count that the census laboriously provides. The main argument is that counting millions and millions of people one at a time runs into a lot more problems than a statistically accurate survey, which would not undercount undocumented aliens, misanthropes, survivalists or any other group that didn't want to be counted.

Actually it boils down to a political issue: a more accurate count would mean that more money would go do disenfranchised groups, which tend historically to be undercounted.

che

[tngledwebb]

26. Or the reverse, at least

since November '04. Or better yet, let the SCOTUS decide by a small majority. Anything is better than this silly one person one vote stuff.

[Bill Bored]

23. Where did you see discrepancies greater than in the Ukraine? n/t

[intensitymedia]

28. where didn't you?

do your own homework

che de vera

[ottozen]

32. BUMPER STICKER

A VOTE FOR KERRY was A VOTE FOR BUSH!?!

[StephanieMarie]

37. We need something in one page. kick

and printable so we can all download it, print it, and leave it everywhere (offices, stores, gyms) and staple to phone polls and bulletin boards, etc. Something clear with a web address to go to for more details.

[Carolab]

42. Yes, you are right. The fraud is occuring through NEP/AP.

Just like it has for at least the last 10 years (although prior to NEP it was called "VNS"; only the name has changed; it's still the same media consortium pulling the strings). Read the article I posted on another thread about vote fraud in America. Election results, once they are fed downline to the polling services and to the "vote tallying companies" for the news media, are easily electronically altered. Clearly, the results were manipulated between the hours of 11 p.m. and 1:33 a.m. when the totals shifted from Kerry's to Bush's favor. There are many races in this country that were not voter-determined. The exit polls are of particular importance in the presidential race since this race was the one that received the primary polling attention.

[go west young man]

43. When is Mitofsky supposed to release his tampered with data?

Does anyone have any idea?

[demo dutch]

51. I has to be. I heard Carter mention that exit polling is used by

Intl. watch groups in third world country elections to make sure that that there is no tampering. However if the USA gets involved, like in the Ukraine, the polls are manipulated to get the desired results.
I think exit polls are only trustworthy if they are done by independent unbias organizations. That definitely excludes the MSM/NEP because the networks and their conglomerates all have have political agendas.

[Helga Scow Stern]

55. Carolab, would you please post a link to this article you posted

in another thread? Thanks.

[demo dutch]

47. It's my understanding that Conyers has requested the early

exit polls, but that the MSM have sofar refused

[davidlynch]

50. Respectful Question--If Exit Polls Definitive, Why Did Kerry Concede?

I feel the same way and I've read the Freeman study (both versions). I've read numerous posts by TIA and have understood them. I've corresponded with Mitofsky directly, and he's been respectful enough to answer some of my questions.

So I'm with you.

But one thing I don't understand, and it's a tough one. If the exit polls prove Kerry won, why on earth, with his massive on-the-ground resources, lawyers and so on, would he concede?

[demo dutch]

52. Because the average American believes everything the MSM

feeds them. The fact that the exit polls could be manipulated is too far fetched for them! because "that kind of stuff only happens in 3rd world countries!" Also pretty hard to prove!

[davidlynch]

53. But You're Saying that Kerry Caters to Whims of MSM? Why?

[demo dutch]

59. No, I think that he knew that it would be a long process to get to the

bottom of it all. I think he knew that the MSM would do to him what they did to Gore turning it into a media circus, and that it was going to be hard to convince the American people while we are at war(like it or not) The repugs would have had a field day with that!
"putting the country at risk" etc.
He is smart enough to realize that the dems need to bide their time and not jeopardize the "minority" democrates and his possible future run for presiden. That are ways to work behind the scences to make the truth come out on all of it!

[Helga Scow Stern]

56. David, I wonder the same thing about Kerry, but not because of the exit

polls. I just don't know what went on with him, and I hope that we understand more of what he's about as time passes.

I am bothered that there is so much focus on how exit polls are wrong, when it just seems so obvious that there was massive cheating.

Did you see this article in Wired Magazine:

Can Polling Be Fixed?
What it will take: better questions, smarter analysis, and deeper pockets.

John Zogby was on a roll. In 1996, he made his name as a national pollster by precisely predicting Bill Clinton's margin of victory. In the run-up to the 2004 presidential election, he was profiled in The New Yorker. He killed on The Daily Show. Then, on Election Day, at 5 pm on the East Coast, Zogby International released the results of its final poll: John Kerry would win the electoral college vote, 311 to 213, though George W. Bush might eke out a slim popular-vote margin. Oops.

A few days later, Zogby posted this statement on his Web site: "We feel strongly that our pre-election polls were accurate on virtually every state. … I thought we captured a trend, but apparently that result didn't materialize."

more....


http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.01/start.html?pg=2

[berniew1]

54. The exit poll results were explained by the documented vote machine fraud

http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html
etc. in other states as previously posted

[1democracy]

57. Lawyers not computer geeks and mathematicians on the ground

Senator Kerry had thousands of lawyers on the ground--- not statisticians and computer experts. At first glance (to lawyers) the numbers made it appear that it was impossible for him to win.

[intensitymedia]

58. which gives you an idea about the limitations of lawyers

who are neither statisticians nor investigators. Question: did they have enough information?

Word of mouth says they were champing at the bit to haul bush's ugly butt into court, but what did they know in the hours before the tainted exit poll was released?

I haven't seen anyone else ask this question. The tainted poll wasn't released until after noon on the third.

What did the kerry lawyers know before that which would cause them to concede?

You can bet it was a political calculation, and to my mind a cowardly one. we'll need some time to fix the blame more precisely, but i'm sure the lawyers are not the only ones to blame.

decisions come from the top -


che de vera

[MadisonProgressive]

60. You guys are getting freeped big time! Don't argue with chimps!

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pendulum]

63. We can't do much about those things...

if our votes disappear into a black box every two years.

The integrity of our election process has to be a primary focus of progessives, for without fair elections, our political power can only decline.

[dustoff034]

64. Agreed ....

So we should focus on electoral reform (or just getting a reciept form the machine)....

NOT focus on trying to prove that Bush stole the election.

That was tried in FL in 2000 and all that happened was the media PROVED that Bush would have gotten more voted if the recount went forward... the same thing is going to happen here.

[Pendulum]

65. Agreed!

But I think that pursuing evidence of fraud in 2004 is imortant for that goal. Regardless of whether *,** is removed in some kind of electiongate, the electoral reform movement is helped by increasing public acceptance of the idea that the election COULD have been stolen (rather than just miscounted).

Without this, we know from the last four years how hard it is to get the election reform ball really moving.

[Philly Buster]

67. For some reason

some on this site would rather commiserate about the past rather than work toward the future.

For myself I'm most concerned with reforming elections. We're not going to change the past but where crimes were committed they should be prosecuted. But those are going to be at a local level and neither party does anything about it anyway.

I'm most concerned with election reform because honest elections are the bedrock of democracy.

[Pendulum]

62. Arguments about whether the exit polls prove anything

can get us nowhere. :shrug:

We should take the exit polls as what they are--evidence (maybe proof, maybe not) that something is screwy and (a) should be investigated further and (b) prevented from occuring in the future.

:think: :think::think: :think:

That said, there's an argument going around that the exit poll can't be used as an indicator of who won, because that is not the poll was not designed for that purpose.

:puke:

Well I say data is data. One CAN use it to answer questions beyond those that it was designed to answer. But to do this it is very imortant for someone from our cause who understands polling and statistics to understand EXACTLY how the poll was conducted. And this is aparantly not being offered up.

:crazy:

I think the polls have served their purpose, and that claims that they prove nothing don't hurt our cause one bit! Don't buy into the RELEVANCE of the prove nothing "argument"! This means not screaming that the exit polls are all that matters...


:hi:

[intensitymedia]

66. No, trumpeting the significance of the Exit Polls can get us everything

There's no way to build the movement we'll need to reform the voting system unless a hell of a lot of people get outraged about what the Exit Polls are telling us.

My experience, once someone gets it about the Exit Polls ... it's like what the christians used to describe as a "conversion experience: profound, revolutionary, and permanent. It changes how one sees the world, the election, the republikans, the future, and what's needed to get there. It liberates us from the miserable loser mentality and handwringing apologetic puke-inducing soul-searching that the right is encouraging democrats to inflict on themselves now, with depressing success.

I started this thread not as forum for disruptors to nitpick the signficance or relevance of exit polls themselves - that's been clearly established by Freeman, Baiman and Simon and many others - but to insist on their importance in all our future political initiatives, necessary for any attempt to change the privatized rotten system in place now.

Disruptors, please go back to the chimp cage at freeperland.

We're here to change the world. Don't get in the way.

Che de Vera

[StephanieMarie]

69. kick

[berniew1]

71. Vote machine fraud found in many states; explains exit poll results

Florida, Ohio, New Mexico http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html
Texas(Austin,Houston,SanAntonio) http://www.flcv.com/texas.html
Pennsylvania http://www.flcv.com/mercerco.html
Washington http://www.flcv.com/snohomis.html
California http://www.flcv.com/orangets.html
New Mexico http://www.flcv.com/bernalil.html
North Carolina, Wisconsin, Indiana, Texas, etc.
(default straight ticket Dem to Bush)