Detroit's Metro Times: I think Bush really won.

[skipos]

I am sure many DUers will disagree, but I think this is a good person to have on the side of election reform.

"Kennedy, as well as Bleifuss and Freeman, present what looks like pretty damning evidence of tampering with the vote count in the Republican suburbs around Cincinnati, where the certified count does look a bit suspicious, compared to the rest of the state."

"So has the case been proven? Was the election stolen?"

"My gut instinct, reinforced by a lifetime of studying elections and election returns, is still — no. I think Bush really won. I think the exit polls were flawed, because people didn't tell the truth. I think, worried by national security concerns, and wanting to stick it to Osama bin Laden, people cast an uneasy vote for the Shrub."

"But the authors of this book have proven that, maybe, it could happen here. There is a bill now before Congress sponsored by U.S. Rep. Rush Holt, a New Jersey Democrat with a Ph.D. in physics. His Voter Confidence Act (HR 550) would require a paper trail and otherwise make voting safer and fraud harder. Urge your congressman to fight to pass it, now."

http://www.metrotimes.com/editorial/story.asp?id=9369

[Avalux]

1. Wait a minute.

Why would he think people lied at the exit polls? I'm to buy into his belief that people verbally stated they voted for Kerry, but at the button, pressed Bush because of fear? I think this guy's logic is flawed.

I guess having him in the corner for paper trails is good though.

[skipos]

4. This is not scientific evidence but

Before the election I never heard any of my friends say they were going to vote for Bush. After the election, many of them admitted voting for him. Maybe it was embarrassing to vote for such an undeniable turd?

[Avalux]

8. Hmm.

So then Bushco was successful in convincing people to vote for Bush or die, even though they didn't like him and then they felt compelled to lie about it? I can't say I've encountered such a phenomenon, but I'll take your word that you have. It's really quite tragic if so.

[skipos]

11. There is no intelligent argument for supporting Bush

why SHOULDN'T they be ashamed of it? It has been scientifically proven that people who voted for Bush were less informed and less in touch with reality.

[InternalDialogue]

5. I second that notion.

He ends up in the right place, encouraging a paper trail.

But, if his "theory" is right, what caused people to lie at the exit polls in 2004 in numbers that created historically inaccurate exit numbers? They have been nearly dead-on every other time. When a control sampling method has been proven over time as accurate as the poll it's sampling, and out of the blue its results disagree significantly with its poll, rational people look at the entire system to see what changed. They don't rationalize the error with an unprovable theory that people must have voted one way and then lied to the exit pollers.

[rurallib]

2. In election after election here and all over the world exit polls

have proven to be extrememly accurate with only a couple of exceptions. Do I need to state what those exceptions are?

[skipos]

6. Exit polls have been off in some elections in the 90s

I have seen links to this info before, but I don't have them right now. Let me see if I can find them.

And as for pre-election polls, they can insanely off.

[winter999]

7. Sorry polls don't count. Only votes do.

[Recursion]

3. Just curious, why mention the PhD in physics?

I'm not sure how understanding physics relates to running secure and verifiable elections...

[NNadir]

10. Rush Holt is my congressman. He was assistant director of the

Princeton Plasma Physics Labs, not just an ordinary PhD in physics.

If you see him speak on the subject, you are immediately aware that as an outgrowth of his career, one needs to know how computers work, and about the reliability of data.

I'm sure that in his career in Physics, he had routine exposures to computer gliches.

[Vinnie From Indy]

9. LOL! So we have this guy's gut versus statistical analysis?

Maybe this guy would be happy if his bank determined his balance using their gut or maybe his doctor could determine his blood composition using his gut. The only thing that keeps him from appearing as a COMPLETE moron is his desire to change the status quo in regard to paperless balloting.

[NWHarkness]

12. Lessenberry is not a moron

He's a strong liberal and a good analyst.

Disagreeing does not make one a moron.

[Vinnie From Indy]

13. Disagreement does not make one a moron, but

using one's gut in the face of statistical analysis is moronic. Being a Liberal does not immunize one from being a moron on some issues. Would you want your doctor or bank to deal with you using their gut instinct instead of science and statistical analysis?

[noonwitch]

19. Lessenberry sticks to facts

He's a liberal, but not always a huge fan of every democrat. He's not a big supporter of the governor, for example, or of Kwame Kilpatrick or his mother.

[debbierlus]

14. How on earth could he or anyone else know?

We don't.

Did you read the WaPo article today about how ONE person could hack an entire election?

I don't know for sure, if Kerry lost. But, I do know that Republicans cheated their azzes off last election with the goal of keeping Bush in office.

Read the article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/27/AR2006062701451.html

[RagingInMiami]

15. Bush really lost

When are people going to start accepting that fact?

[zbdent]

16. You know, the righties have always had "one piece of evidence"

that Kennedy "stole the 1960 election" - the "one more vote for Nixon in each district" mantra (never mind that Illinois' electoral votes would not have given Nixon the election anyway) . . .

We have tons of evidence of tampering . . . "Oh, that's just a few sore loser whining liberals complaining!" . . . and not just Ohio . . . then you get "Oh, well there's evidence of vote fraud in every election!" . . . blah, blah, blah . . . :puke:

[lildreamer316]

17. ok, so instead of a machine

problem/tamper/flaw; a HUGE bunch of ordinary people LIED.
Yep; I 'll believe that.:sarcasm:

[LA lady]

18. Many lied on exit polls

I was working on a Texas University campus that fall and they had a huge Young republican club. They had flyers suggesting if you were exit polled to say you voted for Kerry. I sent a copy of this to a couple of the people investigating and no one ever replied.

[SmokingJacket]

20. So republicans lied consistently, and democrats didn't.

I guess it comes down to this: either republicans all over the country lied to exit pollers, and democrats didn't, or republicans stole the elections.

Liars, or thieves?

(your anecdote is interesting. Why would the republican club be interested in skewing the exit polls, unless they have an interest in undermining their validity? Why *wouldn't* they want exit polls to be honest? Democrats seem to want them to be honest.)

[LA lady]

21. not my group

There theory was that if the Democrats thought Kerry was winning, some might not vote.

[SmokingJacket]

22. Were there democrats who thought that if repubs wouldn't vote

if Bush was winning? You'd think there would be.

It just seems to me that if the "liar" theory about why exit polling doesn't work is correct, it doesn't explain why, in the last election anyway, the liars were only people who lied that they voted for Kerry.

Why wouldn't it go both ways? Why wouldn't the liars cancel each other out?

[WI_DEM]

23. Bin Laden cost Kerry the election--proof that he wants Bush in office

and the question is why? because Bush decided to invade Iraq instead of hunting him. If Bin Laden sends out another video just before this midterm election we will know for sure.