These people are saying that the 2006 midterm election was engineered - but that it was such a landslide their programmed "tweak" didn't actually do the trick for the Republicans. Are these people reliable, Brad? I would not put anything past the Bushites, at this point, so I would rather hear your own opinion on this, as EDA is suggesting something I am too willing to believe.
I've reviewed the paper and this is very important work in my opinion.
Exit poll resutls are generally weighted to match voter demographics, and in 2004 were "forced" through re-weighting to match the presumed accurate poll results.
In 2006 the exit polls included a question that lets us objectively measure the bias introduced by the forcing. 2006 exit polls asked whether the respondent voted for Kerry or Bush in 2004. Through analysis of the answer to this question, we can estImate how much the weighting has to be forced to match the 2006 results. What we find is that to make the exit polls match the 2006 "results," voters who voted for Bush in 2004 must be weighted up to 49% vs. 43% for Kerry. This is 4% more than Bush's "margin of victory" in 2004, and illustrates the extent to which the 2006 election results must have been manipulated.
This is my reply to that well-known disinformationist Febble, who roams the Net disparaging all analytical efforts which utilize exit polls and who constantly thrashes exit poll accuracy and usefullness in uncovering fraud. Her latest comments are in the post with the link shown below.
The post is a reply to a thread which I started on DU. The analysis I present is to show why the Republicans could not fully overcome the Democratic Tsunami in the House. They probably stole 10-15 seats, so the Democrats projected 42-seat gain has been reduced to 29. There are about 7 races still to be decided.
This is my reply which will soon appear in the thread:
Febble, once again you stubbornly avoid the FACTS and the IMPLICATIONS of the FACTS.
First of all, you didn’t do the math. Because if you did, you would know that at MAXIMUM, only 48.7mm Bush 2000 voters could have voted in 2004. And therefore the MAXIMUM Bush weighting was 39.8% = 48.7/122.3%. The 43% weighting was IMPOSSIBLE. This is a MATHEMATICAL FACT.
Therefore, if you were willing to accept this MATHEMATICAL FACT, you would have to agree that the Final NEP 43% Bush weighting was a FICTIONAL ARTIFICE AND NOT A SAMPLED RESULT. IT WAS AN ARBITRARY FUDGE WHICH WAS REQUIRED TO FORCE THE FINAL NEP TO MATCH THE BUSH RECORDED VOTE.
Even you have agreed that the Final NEP is ALWAYS matched to the recorded vote.
Why, for heaven's sake, is it not yet clear to YOU that matching to the recorded vote count ONLY makes sense IF the vote count is ACCURATE and there is ZERO FRAUD? This should be clear to everyone, even a third grader who cheats on his arithmetic test.
THEREFORE, THE FINAL NEP IS A FRAUD.
When will you accept the FACT that the RECORDED 2004 VOTE was BOGUS and that BushCo used massive FRAUD to STEAL the election? In fact, BushCo has successfully stolen EVERY election since 2000 -except for 2006. They were stopped in 2006 only because of the Democratic TSUNAMI.
The reality-based community must therefore conclude that your “retrospective” exit poll argument HOLDS NO WATER AND IS JUST ANOTHER RUSE TO DEFLECT FROM THE FINAL NEP'S EGREGIOUS MATCHING TO FRAUDULENT, MISCOUNTED VOTES.
If you were a true analytical investigator, you would not employ TWISTED LOGIC TO DEFEND THE FINAL NEP AND CONSTANTLY CRITICIZE THE ACCURACY OF PRE-ELECTION AND PRELIMINARY EXIT POLLS WHICH CLEARLY POINT TO FRAUD.