Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
"autism"....it's "autism"....not "alturism"...Jeeessh..damn spell checker!
Within days of the 2004 Presidential election (before much of the evidence had even surfaced or been investigated), Manjoo wrote ad article where he stated that there was "no evidence that Bush won because of fraud." None. Last week he answered Kennedy's RS article with a big "No." The title of Kennedy's article was a question. Manjoo's answer was a definitive, arrogant, "No."
No one knows absolutely if the last two Presidential elections were "stolen," but anyone with any intelligence knows this: they absolutely tried. Manjoo can shoot holes in Kennedy's article, but he doesn't shoot down all of it. The 2000 and 2004 elections were sewers. Manjoo's attempt so say there is no "there, there" (Conyer's "bull horn in reverse") is irresponsible journalism and an insult to my intelligence. Salon's support of Manjoo and his articles calls into question it's judgement and my faith in being able to trust what else I read on the site. I have been a Salon subscriber for years. I'm cancelling today.
Wow. Farhad Mangoo has spoken. I've been on vacation so I must've missed Salon.com's searching, sweeping investigation. Their call for voters with actual experience of tampering at the polls, I missed that too. In fact, they did such a stunning, effective, unbiased, fantastic job at journalism, where they diligently attempted to dig out the truth - that their now irrevocable, irrefutable conclusion that the votes of 2000, and 2004 were NOT stolen, I have to accept...YOU ARE SO WRONG.
You know, this is infuriating, and perplexing.Pathetic and sad. It is also insulting to all voters. This is Salon.com. At least, you expect higher standards.
Instead you have what appears to be a sloppy job, with no attempt made at investigation and its inevitable result. Did you expect a Nancy Drew "mysterious confession note" from the people who did this????
Here's a challenge. A simple one. Ask people about what went on at the polls. Ask people who had emails about uncounted ballots at polling stations while the vote was called for Bush. Ask people who went to vote and for one reason or another was turned away. Ask the whiz kid crackers who presented their conclusions on how easily the electronic machines could be tampered with. Ask those who had their counts suppressed while Katherine Harris did her little song and dance, and the counts were interrupted again and again. Put out the call now. Ask.
And THEN wow us with your conclusions.
Maadar ghaveh. You are not a serious researcher, but a piece of goh. Dahan-e-to gaaidam Mr. Ayatollah Manjoo pooh pooh. Your parents escapted Iran to get freedom and all you do is defend your Mulla ways.
Look, I was in Ohio during the election and I voted for Kerry. Me and my friends cried and left work. So let me just give my democrat bonafides.
Folks, we lost. Sure, the line was long, but there was no evidence for tampering. Every time someone has the gall to actually laid it on the line, we the left raise our swords and want to behead with those who dare to disagree. It is a nice story that Republicans stole the election. But, have you gone outside of San Fran and New York? The USA that I see in the fly-over states look very different. These people voted for Bush and got him elected.
God, I am so sick of the lack of mental power of the democrats that cannot distinguish between losing and some kind of conspiracy. Really pathetic. And all these racial bull about Manjooo is a really nice comment about the "progressive" politics of the groupthink so nicely illustrated here.
In his June 7, 2006 reply to Kennedy’s rebuttal of his earlier critique Farhad Manjoo citing Mark Blumenthal, claims that:
a) The exit poll margins of error for Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, and Ohio were between 5% to 7%. This is preposterous. Rather than relying on Mark Blumenthal (an unreliable source for quantitative analysis), I urge Manjoo to download the National Election Pool a “Methods Statement” for the Edison Mitofsky (EM) exit polls (produced on Nov. 2 2006) at:
http://www.exit-poll.net/election-night/MethodsStatementNationalFinal.pdf
The second page of this statement sets 95% confidence intervals for these polls (for a “characteristic” held by roughly 50% of those polled, for example a Presidential candidate preference for which there is a close to even split) squarely at 4% for sample sizes of 951-2350 – the range of reported sample sizes for these states. However, as Blumenthal knows, the reported sample sizes (also in the methods statements) are about half of what they really are (see Mitofsky correspondence in Baiman June 5 Free Press AAPOR report). For these true doubled sample sizes of 2351-5250, NEP’s own estimated confidence interval falls to 3%. This clearly puts the Ohio discrepancy of about 4% outside of the margin of error - even using NEP's inflated margins of error. My margin of error calculations (and I believe Freeman’s) find a 2% margin of error with a 30% cluster adjustment factor. As I have stated in my earlier response to Manjoo, this puts Ohio well outside the margin of sampling error with odds of less than 1,900 that Kerry’s reported result is true given the exit poll result. This is not “slight” evidence but rather highly statistically significant, especially one considered with the inexplicable pro-Bush exit poll discrepancies in the two other key battle ground states of Florida and Pennsylvania. As Freeman and I have stated, the odds that these “sampling errors” (in the same direction and of these magnitudes) would occur for these three states simultaneously in less than one in 182,000,000 (i.e virtually impossible - this number is based on doubled sample sizes). Moreover, when one looks at precinct level exit poll data , and not just aggregate state polls, the evidence in even more striking and inexplicable. A fact that Manjoo has not addressed at all.
The question that has to be asked is why are Manjoo (and Blumenthal) trying to dismiss the statistical significance of the exit poll discrepancies when even Mitofsky (in his January report) concedes that they were the largest on record and highly statistically significant?
b) Manjoo’s efforts to dismiss what he calls the “purported rural vote shift” is even more outlandish. As Kennedy points out he doesn’t seem to understand the difference between a popular incumbent who earned more votes statewide than Gore in 2000 and a former Republican judge from Cincinnati who got a “favored son” boost in that region; and an unknown, under funded, very liberal judge from Cleveland, who got 24% less votes than Kerry statewide, inexplicably getting more votes that Kerry in 12 of the most conservative counties (judging by their Bush vote shares) in Ohio!
Moreover, these same 12 counties just happen to be among the only 14 (out of 88 counties) where Bush’s vote is larger than Moyer’s (the incumbent conservative judge) by more than 43%. Moreover, the amount of “excess Bush” vote (more than Bush’s state average of 21% more than Moyer) just happens to roughly match both by county and for entire state the “lost Kerry” vote (what Kerry would have gotten if he had received his state average of 32% more votes than Connally in these counties) without any overall substitution from Moyer to Connally (Moyer’s vote is larger than the state average and Connally’s is smaller than the state average in all but one of these 12 counties).
Farhad, do you understand how absolutely remarkable such a series of “coincidences” is?!!
I challenge you or anyone else to provide a plausible non-vote shifting explanation for these patterns.
Note that the Bush to Moyer ratio is independent of the Kerry to Connally ratio when there is no substitution between Moyer and Connally. It is simply impossible to understand why, out of all the 88 counties, 9 out of 14 cases where Bush does extraordinarily well relative to Moyer, just happen to be in the same counties where Connally does extraordinarily well relative to Kerry?!!!! And it is even more impossible to understand why the relative magnitudes of these impossible undercounts for Kerry and over counts for Bush should so closely match!!!!
I would take this evidence to a trial. Clearly a crime was committed in Ohio. There is simply no other explanation for these patterns other than vote shifting. The only thing we don’t know is who did it and how. And exactly this kind of information is necessary to get serious electoral reform - that you claim to support.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
Salon headlines in your mailbox
