| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Harry Hope" |
| Date: |
05 Nov 2004 05:56:13 PM |
| Object: |
Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
.
|
|
| User: "Foolcow" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 10:10:31 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:52:49 +0000, David Fabian wrote:
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
WTF???!!! Whose freaking job is it to stop this sort of
criminal behavior?!
Voting is criminal behavior?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Cumference" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
07 Nov 2004 03:21:53 PM |
|
|
Foolcow wrote:
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:52:49 +0000, David Fabian wrote:
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
WTF???!!! Whose freaking job is it to stop this sort of
criminal behavior?!
Voting is criminal behavior?
To the simple minded dummycrat liberal it is if you aren't voting their way.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris the Liberal" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 03:32:34 PM |
|
|
Harry Hope <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:<pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com>...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
Well the morning paper carries news of the Columbus
Ohio precinct which had 4,258 votes for Bush, 260 for
Kerry when there were only 638 voters.
The CEO of Diebold (voting machines) swore that he
would carry Ohio for Bush, and it appears he over-did
it just a bit.
Nobody know in how many precincts he pulled it off
less suspiciously... But this is surely reason for
investigation and and hold-up of the election results
until the TRUE count can be determined.
AND the silly-***** Republicans accuse the Democrats
of voting fraud......
Don't believe it?? read your morning paper.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "bpvh" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 10:09:16 PM |
|
|
Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
As shown below, the counties supposedly showing fraud are historically
Republican counties.
The disputed counties in the picture are:
Bradford
Baker
Calhoun
Columbia
Desoto
Dixie
Franklin
Holmes
In 2000,
Bradford went:
Bush 5416
Gore 3075
Baker went:
Bush 5611
Gore 2392
Calhoun went:
Bush 2873
Gore 2156
Columbia went:
Bush 10968
Gore 7049
Desoto went:
Bush 4256
Gore 3321
Dixie went:
Bush 2697
Gore 1827
Franklin went:
Bush 2454
Gore 2047
Holmes went:
Bush 5012
Gore 2177
A clean sweep for Bush.
In 1996:
Bradford -- Dole
Baker -- Dole
Calhoun -- Clinton
Columbia -- Dole
Desoto -- Dole
Dixie -- Clinton
Franklin -- Clinton
Holmes -- Dole
5-3 for Dole.
In 1992:
Bradford -- Bush I
Baker -- Bush I
Calhoun -- Bush I
Columbia -- Bush I
Desoto -- Bush I
Dixie -- Clinton
Franklin -- Bush I
Holmes -- Bush I
7-1 for Bush I.
In 1988, all for Bush I.
In 1984, all for Reagan.
In 1980, 6-2 for Carter with only Desoto and Holmes for Reagan.
To show any kind of fraud, counties that are not historically
Republican need to be used. From 1980 to 2000, of the 48 county
races, the GOP candidate won 38 times.
Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/
http://www.polidata.us/pub/reports/129601CY.pdf
http://www.polidata.us/pub/reports/129201CY.pdf
http://www.polidata.us/books/FL/default.htm
-bpvh
.
|
|
|
| User: "Igor" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 10:40:37 PM |
|
|
The registration data are made up. Harry cites a table posted on a
website that does cartoon animation not a credible source by anyone's view.
try looking at http://www.rubberbus.com It is a cartoon animation
company. Just the place I would look for hard data on an election. How
about you?
bpvh wrote:
Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
As shown below, the counties supposedly showing fraud are historically
Republican counties.
The disputed counties in the picture are:
Bradford
Baker
Calhoun
Columbia
Desoto
Dixie
Franklin
Holmes
In 2000,
Bradford went:
Bush 5416
Gore 3075
Baker went:
Bush 5611
Gore 2392
Calhoun went:
Bush 2873
Gore 2156
Columbia went:
Bush 10968
Gore 7049
Desoto went:
Bush 4256
Gore 3321
Dixie went:
Bush 2697
Gore 1827
Franklin went:
Bush 2454
Gore 2047
Holmes went:
Bush 5012
Gore 2177
A clean sweep for Bush.
In 1996:
Bradford -- Dole
Baker -- Dole
Calhoun -- Clinton
Columbia -- Dole
Desoto -- Dole
Dixie -- Clinton
Franklin -- Clinton
Holmes -- Dole
5-3 for Dole.
In 1992:
Bradford -- Bush I
Baker -- Bush I
Calhoun -- Bush I
Columbia -- Bush I
Desoto -- Bush I
Dixie -- Clinton
Franklin -- Bush I
Holmes -- Bush I
7-1 for Bush I.
In 1988, all for Bush I.
In 1984, all for Reagan.
In 1980, 6-2 for Carter with only Desoto and Holmes for Reagan.
To show any kind of fraud, counties that are not historically Republican
need to be used. From 1980 to 2000, of the 48 county races, the GOP
candidate won 38 times.
Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/
http://www.polidata.us/pub/reports/129601CY.pdf
http://www.polidata.us/pub/reports/129201CY.pdf
http://www.polidata.us/books/FL/default.htm
-bpvh
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Motor" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 07:31:18 PM |
|
|
If the election was really stolen, what are we to do about it?
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 08:43:17 PM |
|
|
"Motor" <motor@msn.com> wrote in news:cmh9h801mm4@news3.newsguy.com:
If the election was really stolen, what are we to do about it?
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
What can we do about it? Bush controls the justice department - which kind
of makes it the injustice department. He controls the military as well.
The media must get involved if anything is to be done. And they've, thus
far, not uttered a peep. There needs to be outrage and screams from sea to
shining sea. This can only be won in the court of public opinion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Cumference" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 09:29:13 PM |
|
|
Jerry wrote:
What can we do about it? Bush controls the justice department - which kind
of makes it the injustice department. He controls the military as well.
The media must get involved if anything is to be done. And they've, thus
far, not uttered a peep. There needs to be outrage and screams from sea to
shining sea. This can only be won in the court of public opinion.
Got news for you, the court of public opinion has spoken, and the
majority said they have had enough of the lying media crap and enough of
the simple minded dummycrat ultra-liberal left loonies and their crap.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 10:47:39 PM |
|
|
Sir Cumference <me@this.moc> wrote in
news:D8adnbfvdMU-1RHcRVn-hQ@gbronline.com:
Jerry wrote:
What can we do about it? Bush controls the justice department -
which kind of makes it the injustice department. He controls the
military as well. The media must get involved if anything is to be
done. And they've, thus far, not uttered a peep. There needs to be
outrage and screams from sea to shining sea. This can only be won in
the court of public opinion.
Got news for you, the court of public opinion has spoken, and the
majority said they have had enough of the lying media crap and enough
of the simple minded dummycrat ultra-liberal left loonies and their
crap.
LOL, I know we can not expect the Pugs to do the right thing. That's a
given. That's their "Christian" values shining brightly.
Hey, do you plan on serving anytime soon? Or do you just plan on
continuing your crusade to defame those that have?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris the Liberal" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 03:37:19 PM |
|
|
Sir Cumference <me@this.moc> wrote in message news:<D8adnbfvdMU-1RHcRVn-hQ@gbronline.com>...
Jerry wrote:
What can we do about it? Bush controls the justice department - which kind
of makes it the injustice department. He controls the military as well.
The media must get involved if anything is to be done. And they've, thus
far, not uttered a peep. There needs to be outrage and screams from sea to
shining sea. This can only be won in the court of public opinion.
Got news for you, the court of public opinion has spoken, and the
majority said they have had enough of the lying media crap and enough of
the simple minded dummycrat ultra-liberal left loonies and their crap.
Read the newspaper re the Ohio precinct with 638 voters
which gave Bush 4,258 votes.
And tell me now, Sir, how the Republicans pulled that one off.....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Cumference" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 07:59:51 PM |
|
|
Chris the Liberal retard wrote:
Read the newspaper re the Ohio precinct with 638 voters
which gave Bush 4,258 votes.
And tell me now, Sir, how the Republicans pulled that one off.....
You tell me, you seem to think you know everything.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 05:05:35 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 02:43:17 -0000, Jerry <Nospam@here.com> wrote:
"Motor" <motor@msn.com> wrote in news:cmh9h801mm4@news3.newsguy.com:
If the election was really stolen, what are we to do about it?
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
What can we do about it? Bush controls the justice department - which kind
of makes it the injustice department. He controls the military as well.
The media must get involved if anything is to be done. And they've, thus
far, not uttered a peep. There needs to be outrage and screams from sea to
shining sea. This can only be won in the court of public opinion.
Still lies. Over 80% of judges are Democrats, over 90% of lawyers are Democrats.
I really hope the new Bush Administration kicks out many politically biased judges and lawyers that
don't serve their country but only the interests of the Democratic party to generate chaos and help
criminals and terrorists.
I really hope that the new Bush Administration will say no to the Democratic driven Corporations
like MPAA/RIAA/BSA that started using and abusing the justice system to scare people and force them
to buy original products at fraud prices--as part of the New Economy fraud estabilished by
Clinton....
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim D" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 08:41:29 PM |
|
|
Motor wrote:
If the election was really stolen, what are we to do about it?
Are you gullible or desperate?????
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The_Great_NeoCon" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 09:28:41 PM |
|
|
You can ***** and moan that the election was *stolen*, just like you have
been for the last four years.
"Motor" <motor@msn.com> wrote in message
news:cmh9h801mm4@news3.newsguy.com...
If the election was really stolen, what are we to do about it?
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Pretzel" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 01:56:58 AM |
|
|
"The_Great_NeoCon" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KxXid.45584$G15.33132@fed1read03...
You can ***** and moan that the election was *stolen*, just like you have
been for the last four years.
Hey MORON.
We let the bs pass. Some anger came from many dems 'cause of the pop vote then.
Not ME. You can Google NG's all you want.
Here are the two screen names I've used:
Skyliq
The Pretzel.
The problem was the Supremes voting 5-4 and interfering with Florida. ALL votes
should have been counted but were not. We're not going to take it sitting down
this time. We want a fair election. YOU DON'T. If you REALLY believe majority of
Americans are in your camp, you don't have anything to worry about do you?
"Motor" <motor@msn.com> wrote in message
news:cmh9h801mm4@news3.newsguy.com...
If the election was really stolen, what are we to do about it?
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
.
|
|
|
| User: "All Patriots All" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 06:24:48 AM |
|
|
I don't have to judge, I know it was because I paid good money for it, but
less than some liberals who tried to buy you all off.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Harrison" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 04:04:10 PM |
|
|
It doesn't really matter if it was stolen or not -- it's not like
Kerry was any different from Bush anyway, they both have the same
puppet masters -- Skull and Bones.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "NoPlutocracyUSA" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 07:20:06 PM |
|
|
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in this
election. Is this public record data?
"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:pm4oo05ij3d6ajun2nl0lt3a0c0jnmsr52@4ax.com...
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Cumference" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 10:01:47 PM |
|
|
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in this
election. Is this public record data?
Go look at this where this "data" comes from:
http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm
How can can anyone think the data is correct when they use terms like
"expected dem votes"? Just how do you calcuate the "expected dem votes"?
That number, since it really does not exists, can be made to be what
ever one wishes to make the numbers come out the way one wants. The
whole thing is flawed, the "expected dem vote" is not a real number,
just a fantasy.
If will give Harry the Hopeless credit for keeping on trying.
.
|
|
|
| User: "NoPlutocracyUSA" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 10:52:44 PM |
|
|
"Sir Cumference" <me@this.moc> wrote in message
news:UIWdnfU7rbHQzBHcRVn-jQ@gbronline.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in this
election. Is this public record data?
Go look at this where this "data" comes from:
http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm
How can can anyone think the data is correct when they use terms like
"expected dem votes"? Just how do you calcuate the "expected dem votes"?
That number, since it really does not exists, can be made to be what
ever one wishes to make the numbers come out the way one wants. The
whole thing is flawed, the "expected dem vote" is not a real number,
just a fantasy.
How do you calculate the "expected dem votes"? Simply multiply the
percentage of registered democrats times the total number of votes cast.
Not too much voodoo here. Oops, sorry, forgot you were a repug. See if you
can find a liberal somewhere and he can sit down with you and go through the
calculation.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Igor" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 10:14:20 PM |
|
|
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Sir Cumference" <me@this.moc> wrote in message
news:UIWdnfU7rbHQzBHcRVn-jQ@gbronline.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in this
election. Is this public record data?
Go look at this where this "data" comes from:
http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm
How can can anyone think the data is correct when they use terms like
"expected dem votes"? Just how do you calcuate the "expected dem votes"?
That number, since it really does not exists, can be made to be what
ever one wishes to make the numbers come out the way one wants. The
whole thing is flawed, the "expected dem vote" is not a real number,
just a fantasy.
How do you calculate the "expected dem votes"? Simply multiply the
percentage of registered democrats times the total number of votes cast.
Not too much voodoo here. Oops, sorry, forgot you were a repug. See if you
can find a liberal somewhere and he can sit down with you and go through the
calculation.
Wrong. This is inaccurate it assumes that all the dems and republicans
show up to vote. An expected democrat vote should be the number
registered times the PROBABILITY OF THESE VOTERS VOTING.
.
|
|
|
| User: "NoPlutocracyUSA" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
07 Nov 2004 09:26:20 AM |
|
|
"Igor" <jjweatherby@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:wihjd.26221$tL5.19490@fe2.texas.rr.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Sir Cumference" <me@this.moc> wrote in message
news:UIWdnfU7rbHQzBHcRVn-jQ@gbronline.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in this
election. Is this public record data?
Go look at this where this "data" comes from:
http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm
How can can anyone think the data is correct when they use terms like
"expected dem votes"? Just how do you calcuate the "expected dem votes"?
That number, since it really does not exists, can be made to be what
ever one wishes to make the numbers come out the way one wants. The
whole thing is flawed, the "expected dem vote" is not a real number,
just a fantasy.
How do you calculate the "expected dem votes"? Simply multiply the
percentage of registered democrats times the total number of votes cast.
Not too much voodoo here. Oops, sorry, forgot you were a repug. See if
you
can find a liberal somewhere and he can sit down with you and go through
the
calculation.
Wrong. This is inaccurate it assumes that all the dems and republicans
show up to vote. An expected democrat vote should be the number
registered times the PROBABILITY OF THESE VOTERS VOTING.
Totally wrong you typical brain-dead repug. This calculation does not
assume that all the dems and republicans show up to vote. Read it again
(repugs, please remember you need to read something several times to at
least give it a chance to make it through the fat layers). The most logical
method of estimating the expected dem votes is to multiply the percentage
(tip: look that up in a dictionary, it's that book with all the words in
it) of registered dems times the total number of votes cast. The equated
value is totally quantitative, straightforward and involves no assumptions.
Your suggestion that this value should be based on some abstract calculation
full of absurd assumptions to determine the probability of dem voters voting
is utter nonsense. Junk math. Standard repug lunacy. Let me guess: you
have a mathematics degree from Jerry Falwell's Liberty University?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Igor" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
07 Nov 2004 12:53:14 PM |
|
|
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Igor" <jjweatherby@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:wihjd.26221$tL5.19490@fe2.texas.rr.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Sir Cumference" <me@this.moc> wrote in message
news:UIWdnfU7rbHQzBHcRVn-jQ@gbronline.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in this
election. Is this public record data?
Go look at this where this "data" comes from:
http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm
How can can anyone think the data is correct when they use terms like
"expected dem votes"? Just how do you calcuate the "expected dem votes"?
That number, since it really does not exists, can be made to be what
ever one wishes to make the numbers come out the way one wants. The
whole thing is flawed, the "expected dem vote" is not a real number,
just a fantasy.
How do you calculate the "expected dem votes"? Simply multiply the
percentage of registered democrats times the total number of votes cast.
Not too much voodoo here. Oops, sorry, forgot you were a repug. See if
you
can find a liberal somewhere and he can sit down with you and go through
the
calculation.
Wrong. This is inaccurate it assumes that all the dems and republicans
show up to vote. An expected democrat vote should be the number
registered times the PROBABILITY OF THESE VOTERS VOTING.
Totally wrong you typical brain-dead repug.
No I have statistical training that means I KNOW WHAT AN EXPECTED VALUE IS.
The most logical
method of estimating the expected dem votes is to multiply the percentage
(tip: look that up in a dictionary, it's that book with all the words in
it) of registered dems times the total number of votes cast. The equated
value is totally quantitative, straightforward and involves no assumptions.
No. You assume that the same percentage of registered democrats is the
same percentage of the voting population who votes. IT DOES MATTER HOW
MANY REGISTERED. IT MATTERS HOW MANY SHOW UP. You could have a 2:1 ratio
of registered democrats to republicans and a 2:1 ratio of Republican
voters to Democratic voters show up to the polls. That is why an
expected number of democrat votes is the number of registered democrats
multiplied by the probability of these people showing up to the polls.
Your suggestion that this value should be based on some abstract calculation
full of absurd assumptions to determine the probability of dem voters voting
is utter nonsense. Junk math.
Really pick up an statistic text and look in the index for the term
EXPECTED VALUE. You may be surprised to see the definition.
Standard repug lunacy. Let me guess: you
have a mathematics degree from Jerry Falwell's Liberty University?
No mathematics degree but a degree in an area that requires a lot of
statistical training and from a reputable school.
None the less the data is junk. No credible source has verified this.
Harry posted a link to a table kept on a CARTOON ANIMATION COMPANY'S
WEBSITE. Hardly a credible source for data.
.
|
|
|
| User: "NoPlutocracyUSA" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
07 Nov 2004 06:25:07 PM |
|
|
"Igor" <jjweatherby@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:uaujd.27898$tL5.5384@fe2.texas.rr.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Igor" <jjweatherby@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:wihjd.26221$tL5.19490@fe2.texas.rr.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Sir Cumference" <me@this.moc> wrote in message
news:UIWdnfU7rbHQzBHcRVn-jQ@gbronline.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in
this
election. Is this public record data?
Go look at this where this "data" comes from:
http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm
How can can anyone think the data is correct when they use terms like
"expected dem votes"? Just how do you calcuate the "expected dem
votes"?
That number, since it really does not exists, can be made to be what
ever one wishes to make the numbers come out the way one wants. The
whole thing is flawed, the "expected dem vote" is not a real number,
just a fantasy.
How do you calculate the "expected dem votes"? Simply multiply the
percentage of registered democrats times the total number of votes
cast.
Not too much voodoo here. Oops, sorry, forgot you were a repug. See
if
you
can find a liberal somewhere and he can sit down with you and go
through
the
calculation.
Wrong. This is inaccurate it assumes that all the dems and republicans
show up to vote. An expected democrat vote should be the number
registered times the PROBABILITY OF THESE VOTERS VOTING.
Totally wrong you typical brain-dead repug.
No I have statistical training that means I KNOW WHAT AN EXPECTED VALUE
IS.
Statistical training. Ooh, sounds fancy. They taught you the meaning of
the "expected value", eh? Then show us how you would calculate the
probability of democrats in a given county voting. What random variables
would be used and what are their probability functions?
The most logical
method of estimating the expected dem votes is to multiply the
percentage
(tip: look that up in a dictionary, it's that book with all the words
in
it) of registered dems times the total number of votes cast. The
equated
value is totally quantitative, straightforward and involves no
assumptions.
No. You assume that the same percentage of registered democrats is the
same percentage of the voting population who votes. IT DOES MATTER HOW
MANY REGISTERED. IT MATTERS HOW MANY SHOW UP. You could have a 2:1 ratio
of registered democrats to republicans and a 2:1 ratio of Republican
voters to Democratic voters show up to the polls. That is why an
expected number of democrat votes is the number of registered democrats
multiplied by the probability of these people showing up to the polls.
Yes, the assumption is that the percentage of voters who vote democratically
in a county is the same as the percentage of registered democrats in that
county. What other assumption is more reasonable than that you repug moron?
What justification could be given to deviate from this method of
calculation? What absurd assumptions would be necessary in order to
estimate the probability of people from one party voting. Same question I
asked before that you cannot seem to focus on.
Your suggestion that this value should be based on some abstract
calculation
full of absurd assumptions to determine the probability of dem voters
voting
is utter nonsense. Junk math.
Really pick up an statistic text and look in the index for the term
EXPECTED VALUE. You may be surprised to see the definition.
Big deal, population norm, they teach it in high school. Show your
calculation instead of talking around it.
Standard repug lunacy. Let me guess: you
have a mathematics degree from Jerry Falwell's Liberty University?
No mathematics degree but a degree in an area that requires a lot of
statistical training and from a reputable school.
None the less the data is junk. No credible source has verified this.
Harry posted a link to a table kept on a CARTOON ANIMATION COMPANY'S
WEBSITE. Hardly a credible source for data.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bpvh" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
07 Nov 2004 09:05:56 PM |
|
|
"NoPlutocracyUSA" <person332XFG400201@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:XbmdndqNQc5FIRPcRVn-qw@adelphia.com...
"Igor" <jjweatherby@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:uaujd.27898$tL5.5384@fe2.texas.rr.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Igor" <jjweatherby@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:wihjd.26221$tL5.19490@fe2.texas.rr.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Sir Cumference" <me@this.moc> wrote in message
news:UIWdnfU7rbHQzBHcRVn-jQ@gbronline.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was
certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance
between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially
in
this
election. Is this public record data?
Go look at this where this "data" comes from:
http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm
How can can anyone think the data is correct when they use
terms like
"expected dem votes"? Just how do you calcuate the "expected
dem
votes"?
That number, since it really does not exists, can be made to be
what
ever one wishes to make the numbers come out the way one wants.
The
whole thing is flawed, the "expected dem vote" is not a real
number,
just a fantasy.
How do you calculate the "expected dem votes"? Simply multiply
the
percentage of registered democrats times the total number of
votes
cast.
Not too much voodoo here. Oops, sorry, forgot you were a repug.
See
if
you
can find a liberal somewhere and he can sit down with you and go
through
the
calculation.
Wrong. This is inaccurate it assumes that all the dems and
republicans
show up to vote. An expected democrat vote should be the number
registered times the PROBABILITY OF THESE VOTERS VOTING.
Totally wrong you typical brain-dead repug.
No I have statistical training that means I KNOW WHAT AN EXPECTED
VALUE
IS.
Statistical training. Ooh, sounds fancy. They taught you the
meaning of
the "expected value", eh? Then show us how you would calculate the
probability of democrats in a given county voting. What random
variables
would be used and what are their probability functions?
The most logical
method of estimating the expected dem votes is to multiply the
percentage
(tip: look that up in a dictionary, it's that book with all the
words
in
it) of registered dems times the total number of votes cast. The
equated
value is totally quantitative, straightforward and involves no
assumptions.
No. You assume that the same percentage of registered democrats is
the
same percentage of the voting population who votes. IT DOES MATTER
HOW
MANY REGISTERED. IT MATTERS HOW MANY SHOW UP. You could have a 2:1
ratio
of registered democrats to republicans and a 2:1 ratio of
Republican
voters to Democratic voters show up to the polls. That is why an
expected number of democrat votes is the number of registered
democrats
multiplied by the probability of these people showing up to the
polls.
Yes, the assumption is that the percentage of voters who vote
democratically
in a county is the same as the percentage of registered democrats in
that
county. What other assumption is more reasonable than that you
repug moron?
What justification could be given to deviate from this method of
calculation? What absurd assumptions would be necessary in order to
estimate the probability of people from one party voting. Same
question I
asked before that you cannot seem to focus on.
Regardless of the statistics, the counties supposedly showing fraud
are historically Republican counties.
The disputed counties in the picture are:
Bradford
Baker
Calhoun
Columbia
Desoto
Dixie
Franklin
Holmes
In 2000,
Bradford went:
Bush 5416
Gore 3075
Baker went:
Bush 5611
Gore 2392
Calhoun went:
Bush 2873
Gore 2156
Columbia went:
Bush 10968
Gore 7049
Desoto went:
Bush 4256
Gore 3321
Dixie went:
Bush 2697
Gore 1827
Franklin went:
Bush 2454
Gore 2047
Holmes went:
Bush 5012
Gore 2177
A clean sweep for Bush.
In 1996:
Bradford -- Dole
Baker -- Dole
Calhoun -- Clinton
Columbia -- Dole
Desoto -- Dole
Dixie -- Clinton
Franklin -- Clinton
Holmes -- Dole
5-3 for Dole.
In 1992:
Bradford -- Bush I
Baker -- Bush I
Calhoun -- Bush I
Columbia -- Bush I
Desoto -- Bush I
Dixie -- Clinton
Franklin -- Bush I
Holmes -- Bush I
7-1 for Bush I.
In 1988, all for Bush I.
In 1984, all for Reagan.
In 1980, 6-2 for Carter with only Desoto and Holmes for Reagan.
To show any kind of fraud, counties that are not historically
Republican need to be used. From 1980 to 2000, of the 48 county
races, the GOP candidate won 38 times.
Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/
http://www.polidata.us/pub/reports/129601CY.pdf
http://www.polidata.us/pub/reports/129201CY.pdf
http://www.polidata.us/books/FL/default.htm
-bpvh
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Igor" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
07 Nov 2004 09:53:36 PM |
|
|
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Igor" <jjweatherby@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:uaujd.27898$tL5.5384@fe2.texas.rr.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Igor" <jjweatherby@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:wihjd.26221$tL5.19490@fe2.texas.rr.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
"Sir Cumference" <me@this.moc> wrote in message
news:UIWdnfU7rbHQzBHcRVn-jQ@gbronline.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in
this
election. Is this public record data?
Go look at this where this "data" comes from:
http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm
How can can anyone think the data is correct when they use terms like
"expected dem votes"? Just how do you calcuate the "expected dem
votes"?
That number, since it really does not exists, can be made to be what
ever one wishes to make the numbers come out the way one wants. The
whole thing is flawed, the "expected dem vote" is not a real number,
just a fantasy.
How do you calculate the "expected dem votes"? Simply multiply the
percentage of registered democrats times the total number of votes
cast.
Not too much voodoo here. Oops, sorry, forgot you were a repug. See
if
you
can find a liberal somewhere and he can sit down with you and go
through
the
calculation.
Wrong. This is inaccurate it assumes that all the dems and republicans
show up to vote. An expected democrat vote should be the number
registered times the PROBABILITY OF THESE VOTERS VOTING.
Totally wrong you typical brain-dead repug.
No I have statistical training that means I KNOW WHAT AN EXPECTED VALUE
IS.
Statistical training. Ooh, sounds fancy. They taught you the meaning of
the "expected value", eh? Then show us how you would calculate the
probability of democrats in a given county voting. What random variables
would be used and what are their probability functions?
One way is to look at the past election and see the percentage of
registered voters who showed up. They look at the percentage of the
voters who showed up and voted democrat. Then you have some information
for determining the probability a democrat will show up to the polls. It
is really easy if you understand what probability is and how to
calculate it.
The most logical
method of estimating the expected dem votes is to multiply the
percentage
(tip: look that up in a dictionary, it's that book with all the words
in
it) of registered dems times the total number of votes cast. The
equated
value is totally quantitative, straightforward and involves no
assumptions.
No. You assume that the same percentage of registered democrats is the
same percentage of the voting population who votes. IT DOES MATTER HOW
MANY REGISTERED. IT MATTERS HOW MANY SHOW UP. You could have a 2:1 ratio
of registered democrats to republicans and a 2:1 ratio of Republican
voters to Democratic voters show up to the polls. That is why an
expected number of democrat votes is the number of registered democrats
multiplied by the probability of these people showing up to the polls.
Yes, the assumption is that the percentage of voters who vote democratically
in a county is the same as the percentage of registered democrats in that
county.
Which there is no evidence to prove. You are assuming that the same
percentage of registered Democrats and registered Republicans actually
vote.
What other assumption is more reasonable than that you repug moron?
Lets see calculating the percentage of registered democrats WHO HAVE
ACTUALLY VOTED HISTORICALLY.
What justification could be given to deviate from this method of
calculation? What absurd assumptions would be necessary in order to
estimate the probability of people from one party voting. Same question I
asked before that you cannot seem to focus on.
I have told you. You can not assume that the percentage of registered
democrats who ACTUALLY VOTE is the same percentage as registered
Republicans who ACTUALLY VOTE. There may be a big difference.
Registering to vote DOES NOT MEAN VOTING. If FA has a similar system to
TX then you are registered to vote when you get your driver's licence.
This in no way means every one with a driver's licence will vote.
AGAIN I REAPEAT THE DATA IS JUNK THAT COMES FROM A WEBSITE THAT MAKES
CARTOONS.
None the less the data is junk. No credible source has verified this.
Harry posted a link to a table kept on a CARTOON ANIMATION COMPANY'S
WEBSITE. Hardly a credible source for data.
.
|
|
|
| User: "NoPlutocracyUSA" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
08 Nov 2004 09:45:35 AM |
|
|
You stupid ignorant repug. I've asked you a very straightforward question
and like all stupid ignorant repugs, you're incapable of answering it.
Instead, you start going off on generalities. Repugs talk and spin and
dance around issues, but when it comes to actually proving a point, they're
incapable; the mental horsepower just isn't there. I've stripped away all
the extraneous lines in the post, and I'll present the question ONE MORE
TIME so everyone can see that you don't know what the hell you're talking
about.
QUESTION: What is the best method to estimate the expected votes for the
democratic candidate in a given county?
CORRECT ANSWER AS PRESENTED BY FLORIDA STATISTICIANS WHO COMPILED THE
SUBJECT DATA: Multiply the percentage of registered democrats in a county
by the number of votes cast in that county.
IGNORANT REPUG'S IDIOTIC ANSWER: Determine an "expected value" that
represents the probability that dem voters would show up and use that number
to calculate the expected votes for the democratic candidate.
Here's what you said:
One way is to look at the past election and see the percentage of
registered voters who showed up. They look at the percentage of the
voters who showed up and voted democrat. Then you have some information
for determining the probability a democrat will show up to the polls. It
is really easy if you understand what probability is and how to
calculate it.
Repug, it's doubtful that data exists in Florida counties denoting
historical percentages of democrats showing up to registered democrats, and
furthermore how they voted. Even given this data existed, why would one
assume that historically less registered democrats showed up at the polls
percentagewise than registered republicans, or that a higher percentage of
registered democrats voted republican than registered republicans voted
democrat . Those are stupid, baseless assumptions, and if the data existed
I'm sure it would show that these percentages are approximately equal for
democrats and republicans. If you contest that point, then prove it by
finding and presenting the data you ignorant moron.
Repug, I'm sick of your generalities and mindless rhetoric. You obviously
don't know what the hell you're talking about, because if you did you would
be capable of presenting the calculation quantitatively. This is simple
high-school math, it's not rocket science. If you reply back with more
rhetorical generalities rather than a probability calculation (which you
will because as an idiot repug, you're incapable of anything else), then
I'll not bother to reply again as you will have made my point.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris the Liberal" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 03:35:07 PM |
|
|
Sir Cumference <me@this.moc> wrote in message news:<UIWdnfU7rbHQzBHcRVn-jQ@gbronline.com>...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in this
election. Is this public record data?
Go look at this where this "data" comes from:
http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm
How can can anyone think the data is correct when they use terms like
"expected dem votes"? Just how do you calcuate the "expected dem votes"?
That number, since it really does not exists, can be made to be what
ever one wishes to make the numbers come out the way one wants. The
whole thing is flawed, the "expected dem vote" is not a real number,
just a fantasy.
If will give Harry the Hopeless credit for keeping on trying.
Read my post about the Ohio precinct which gave Bush 4,258 votes
when there were only 638 voters.
And you call him Harry the Hopeless.....
Just proves Republicans figured out how to jigger the electronic
machines, but in this instance did it so badly everyone knows
they did it.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim D" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 08:38:23 PM |
|
|
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in this
election. Is this public record data?
No it's left wing conspiracy theory propaganda.
.
|
|
|
| User: "NoPlutocracyUSA" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
05 Nov 2004 09:18:44 PM |
|
|
"Jim D" <"molds(nospam)"@ffni.com> wrote in message
news:418C391F.3ADD8F96@ffni.com...
NoPlutocracyUSA wrote:
If this data is correct, that means the vote in Florida was certainly
fraudulent. There's never anywhere near that much variance between a
person's party registration and the vote they cast, especially in this
election. Is this public record data?
No it's left wing conspiracy theory propaganda.
Oh. How informative.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Foolcow" |
|
| Title: Re: Was the election stolen? Judge for yourselves |
06 Nov 2004 10:12:04 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 23:56:13 +0000, Harry Hope wrote:
http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/FloridaChartsMed.jpg
Harry
Oh, so people in rural southern counties vote for Republicans, even if
they're registered Democrats? Who ever would have thought that? <roll>
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
