I’m too “tired” to do this properly, so I’m wondering if one of you folks–Karl, maybe?–would like to have some fun with this post where loonbats claim that voting machines were hacked to skew things towards the Republicans, only not enough to affect the outcome of the Midterms, beyond preventing a Democrat landslide. Their evidence? Exit polling.
Clear Evidence 2006 Congressional Elections Hacked
Hoo boy! Chock Full O’ Nuts.
Karl did the fisking (the links are in the comments)
Ummm… I had a detailed analysis of why EDA’s analysis is a pantload, including a fair amount regarding the suspect 11.5 perecent average spread in party ID in the pre-election polling. Some polls had it in the 13-16% range, others in the 4-7% rangeâ€â€a discrepancy that explained by the way different orgs screen and weight likely voters in polls taken at the end of a cycle. Gallupâ€â€generally considered the most reliable over decadesâ€â€had the spread at almost exactly the same as the spread reported from the actual vote.
… and EE ate the comment. As it’s now 3:41 local time, I’ll go straight to the kickerâ€â€and without links, though I’ll be glad to dig them out of my cache if anyone doubts the following:
This EDA group is relying on screenshots from CNN. It’s a PDF file at the EDA site. If you compare those screen shots to the actual source documentâ€â€a PDF file you can find at Fox (but which was distributed to the pool of networks)â€â€you’ll find that the 11.5% spread EDA thinks was the House vote was actually a question about party ID. Moreover, the 11.5% figure appears in neither document. EDA calculated it from subgroups. That matters because EDA makes a big deal out of the exit poll’s 1% MoE, when in reality the MoE will be larger for the subgroups.
In sum, EDA did a lot of fuzzy math.
Here’s those CNN screenshots. Here’s the source document. Note that the first question does not actually ask for whom the respondent voted, but breaks down the demographics by party ID.
Indeed, I would bet that the the networks never saw any topline numbers on the House per se. You may recall that the nets actually made a point of stating that they were not going to call House races on the basis of exit poll data, as they never have. What EDA and you are looking at are the demographic data that the nets talked about before they were even calling races.
Ummm… I had a detailed analysis of why EDA’s analysis is a pantload, including a fair amount regarding the suspect 11.5 perecent average spread in party ID in the pre-election polling. Some polls had it in the 13-16% range, others in the 4-7% range—a discrepancy that explained by the way different orgs screen and weight likely voters in polls taken at the end of a cycle. Gallup—generally considered the most reliable over decades—had the spread at almost exactly the same as the spread reported from the actual vote.
… and EE ate the comment. As it’s now 3:41 local time, I’ll go straight to the kicker—and without links, though I’ll be glad to dig them out of my cache if anyone doubts the following:
This EDA group is relying on screenshots from CNN. It’s a PDF file at the EDA site. If you compare those screen shots to the actual source document—a PDF file you can find at Fox (but which was distributed to the pool of networks)—you’ll find that the 11.5% spread EDA thinks was the House vote was actually a question about party ID. Moreover, the 11.5% figure appears in neither document. EDA calculated it from subgroups. That matters because EDA makes a big deal out of the exit poll’s 1% MoE, when in reality the MoE will be larger for the subgroups.
In sum, EDA did a lot of fuzzy math.
Here’s those CNN screenshots. Here’s the source document. Note that the first question does not actually ask for whom the respondent voted, but breaks down the demographics by party ID.
Indeed, I would bet that the the networks never saw any topline numbers on the House per se. You may recall that the nets actually made a point of stating that they were not going to call House races on the basis of exit poll data, as they never have. What EDA and you are looking at are the demographic data that the nets talked about before they were even calling races.
– A trial run, gearing up for ‘08? I think they just like to take to the streets, period. You get that rush, and all, and there’s always an outside chance something, anything in a skirt, will get wasted, and even they might get lucky.
Well, based upon Karl’s analylsis it appears we have a template for this crowd.
Reach a conclusion before there is sufficient evidence, a conclusion that conveniently matches your ideological mores.
Scour the intertubes and cherry pick just the information that can be shown to support your pre destined conclusions.
Massage said data to make a seamless fit and hide the fact part of the data doesn’t fit and declare fraud, even if your ideological side won the election.
Rinse and repeat above for 2008.
They should add that author to the team, as he has a bunker and is heavily armed.
– Absolutely nothing can deter me today, not even actass, and monkeypoop. Today my Ohio State Buckeye’s, numero uno, meet the Michigan Wolverines, #2, in the biggest rivalry in collegate sports, and the first time they’ve met as 1 and 2, in this long standing fued for “best team in football”. With Bo’s passing just yesterday, it makes it all bitter-sweet, since he was also an Ohioan, and an assistant coach at OSU under Woodie Hayes in the Glory years, but still “the” event of this college football season.
– The only thing that could surpass this game, would be if it’s a close score, in which case, they could meet yet once more for the National title, which would be a second “first” for this remarkable long standing battle. Bet that would put a smile on both Woodie and Bo’s faces, where ever they are, no doubt looking down, and watching, while they argue with each other in that great Rose Bowl in the sky.
I can’t equal the sheer, steeling midwestern beauty of your missive, BBh, much less surpass it’s emotional appeal to the gods of autumn; as the wisps of vapor hover over freezing fields, as the gales of November rage on the mighty Lakes, as hearth and home beckon anew in the familiar ritual of turkey and yam.
As those familiar staccato snares and searing brasses seek skyward under the thin, bright Sun during this, the real War of the Roses.
I won’t even try, noble heartlander. This clash is titanic. The earth shakes and the very heavens tremble.
So. Instead. “Oh how I hate Ohio State.”
So. Instead. “Oh how I hate Ohio State.â€Â
– Spoken like a true Warrior of the fall gridiron…I hear you 6G….
Let the games commence…Let not a single man jack of us be left standing, yet that one shall still struggle mightily to hoist the flag of victory in this vainglorious triumph of might over intelligence…
– In other words: BRING IT ON!!!!!!
TW: after53 ….OSU can let up a little – gotta be gracious in victory…No need for Troy to pile it on….
Ahhh, guys, perhaps this isn’t the best thread title to post those comments…
Just saying.
lee – Whenever theres a post talkin’ about the lefturd fantasy game of “can we chad-vote this”, you might as well side chat on something that’s at least real. Otherwise they might get the idea anybody takes their sour loser crap serious.
– Jess sayin’
BBh,
I understand.
It’s just that those comments were much too elegant and classy to be posted under “Fuckhead Alert”!
At least they didn’t appear under a picture of Jocelyn Elders, that would have been criminal.
No worries, lee. We just haven’t gotten to the part in the early 4th quarter when I spew warm beer from my nose and embrace you firmly into the big M painted on my chest in reflective highway marker yellow.
And here I sit sipping my Jim Beam, AFTER OHIO STATE SQUEAKED OUT A VICTORY.
And it doesn’t mean squat in the greater scheme of things, does it?
Hey 6g – It just proved they are the two top teams in America, probably by a lot, and the difference between them is probably the 3 point diff. in the result. I would imagine, watching them play each other, you could come back 3 years from now, and the game would be 17342 to 17339, with either side ahead when the whistle blew, ending the game.
– The shame is the commitees that decide such things will probably not rematch them again in another final. I’d love to see it, even if Ohia State lost in the end, because good football is really what it’s all about, not just winning.
– Michigan showed they can play ball every step of the way against OSU. They’re probably a tad more rounded than the Ohio squad, but OSU has the more experienced QB, which showed when Ohio didn’t fold in spite of sloppy 2nd half play.
– The only thing I saw that temporizes the overall play of Michigan, was those two rather marginal calls in the first half, when it looked like OSU was about to run away. But it was a great game. That was probably because the Michigan players were feeling down because of BO. I suspect that provided some of Michigans 2nd half momentum to win one for the gipper.
– In any case, neither side would have anything to feel down about in losing. They’re both great teams.