I'm happy that a publication as widely circulated as USA Today carried a story on the Conyers hearing. But the writer seems to go out of his way to trivialize the possible importance of the poll data sought by Rep. Conyers, and to minimize the entire subject matter of the hearing.
An excerpt:
<snip>
Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said Wednesday that he doesn't know whether the information would answer questions about whether problems at the polls led to miscounts in the presidential election. ***Most polling experts who have studied exit polls doubt the data would be of use.***
But, Conyers maintained, “if we can compare that data to some of the other information we have, it has the potential to be of significance” if it sheds more light on voters' intentions. He plans to ask for the information within a week.
The media organizations that paid for the information are expected to turn down such a request. ****Though the media publish information, “they don't have to give anybody their notes or reveal all their methods,” said Jack Shafer, media critic and editor at large for Slate, an online magazine.*****
*****The polling firms that produced the exit poll data have declined a similar request from Conyers.********
Because Republicans control Congress, Conyers will likely only be able to call attention to the issue. His effort has been spurred in part by charges that in some states, particularly Ohio, shortages of voting machines and other problems may have been discouraged minority voters from casting ballots for Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. Conyers held a hearing on the Ohio allegations Wednesday. <snip>
**********
*****RE: Polling experts not believing there is any use for the early poll data: "Polling experts" are not the people to answer this question. They are not necessarily aware of the fraud issues, and do not necessarily know the purpose and importance of the raw exit poll data as it was periodically updated throughout the day on Nov. 2. As outlined in this excellent Orlando Weekly article, the raw data is critical to an analysis of the fraud issue.
http://www.orlandoweekly.com/news/Story.asp?ID=4688
<snip>Center for Research on Globalization's Michael Keefer states, "The National Election Pool's own data – as transmitted by CNN on the evening of November 2 and the morning of November 3 – suggest very strongly that the results of the exit polls were themselves fiddled late on November 2 in order to make their numbers conform with the tabulated vote tallies."
How do we know the fix was in? Keefer says the total number of respondents at 9 p.m. was well over 13,000 and at 1:36 a.m. it had risen less than 3 percent – to 13,531 total respondents. Given the small increase in respondents, this 5 percent swing to Bush is mathematically impossible. In Florida, at 8:40 p.m., exit polls showed a near dead heat but the final exit poll update at 1:01 a.m. gave Bush a 4 percent lead. This swing was mathematically impossible, because there were only 16 more respondents in the final tally than in the earlier one. </snip> In judging whether election fraud played a role in voting results, exit polls are highly relevant. In the context of other countries' elections, e.g. Ukraine, exit poll data was exhibit A re the probability of vote fraud. Why is it deemed of no relevance in Ohio, Florida and elsewhere?
**** RE the quote from Slate--No one is asking for the notes of any pollster or reporter, nor is anyone being asked to reveal any polling methods that have not already been made public. It is only the raw data that is being requested-- data that was already posted on the CNN website for many hours, I understand. The information is to be published in January, the article states. A natural question, then, is what could possibly be the objection to providing the information in order to assist a congressional investigation. This question was not asked, however.
*****RE the purpose of the Hearing--The article says that the hearing was to look into the "shortages of voting machines and other problems may have discouraged minority voters from casting ballots." The "OTHER PROBLEMS" are entirely skipped over in the article. Little things like votes mysteriously changing from Kerry to Bush, spoilage of Dem votes, missing poll tapes, highly partisan SOS's and county clerks, lockdowns, unexplained participation of voting machine technicians in the vote tabulation process, and so on and so on.
I was definitely underwhelmed by this article, and I am in the process of sending USA a letter to this effect. We need to demand full and fair reporting from the media on this absolutely critical issue.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
