Reply #11: ESI had no such correlations. [View All]

[Bill Bored]

Here's a link to their unexplained slide show:

<http://www.votewatch.us/Members/stevenhertzberg/report.2005-07-19.7420722886/view?searchterm=None>

and their incorrect explanation of it almost 3 months later! (Whoever wrote this obviously didn't know what he was looking at):

<http://www.votewatch.us/Members/stevenhertzberg/report.2005-07-19.2452304843/view?searchterm=None>

And here's Fritz Scheuren's unsubstantiated statement about the Ohio vote:
http://www.votewatch.us/articles/aapor_2005_statement
which concludes:

"On last observation, even though we have found errors in the Ohio vote, we did not find systematic fraud and, in any case, the errors were not enough to change the declared winner. They were enough, though, to warn us to be prepared for next time with better election processes."

Say what you will abut the DNC report, but at least they put some effort into it, came out strongly against DREs, and proposed some needed reforms. So far all I've seen from ESI is lip service with nothing whatsoever to back it up.

I was willing to give these guys the benefit of the doubt, because after all, they are "scientists" but as it stands now, it would be a tough choice between donating to ESI, Bev Harris or my local chapter of the Flat Earth Society.