I have a very simple question that can be answered yes or no.....

[Not a Sheep]

Below is a link which is supposedly the election exit polls.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/pdfs/Mitofsky4zonedata

Yes or no: Has it been confirmed and do we know for a fact that this data is the actual exit polls.

From what I know, I believe the answer is no. We do not know for a fact that this data is correct. Note: Obviously it might be correct, but I'm not asking wouldn't it be great for us if this was the correct data or do you think this could be the correct data.

[mattclearing]

1. As far as I know, that data is accurate.

You state no basis for your assertion that it is inaccurate. There are several threads here that show the degree and extent to which the data is "accurate."

The question is not whether or not it is accurate, but whether or not it is of any use in its current form.

I want to see the precinct totals. They could provide true evidence of fraud by allowing us to see the exit polls at a particular location and then compare and contrast with the official count. That is why we will never get the raw data.

[Not a Sheep]

3. Read my post again.....

I didn't make an "assertion that it is inaccurate". Read my post again. I said that from what I knew I didn't believe it had been confirmed as the actual exit poll data.

If someone says to me, "here is the exit poll data", I would ask are you sure that is the actual data? Either they are sure or they aren't. If they can't confirm to me that it's the actual data, then I'm just left assuming they are right without confirmation.

[mattclearing]

Read your post again...

"From what I know, I believe the answer is no. We do not know for a fact that this data is correct."

You said "we." There are people on this board who do know how accurate the data is, like althecat, for example, who posted it.

[TruthIsAll]

2. I have a very simple question that can be answered YES or NO.

Can Mitofsky tell us? YES or NO?

Do you think the MSM is hiding something? YES or NO?

[Not a Sheep]

4. I'll answer your questions, you answer mine....(more)

Can Mitofsky tell us? YES or NO?

Yes, he can (and should in my opinion).

Do you think the MSM is hiding something? YES or NO?

Yes, I think they've failed us miserably and won't begin to list the complaints I have with them.

So, your turn TruthIsAll:

Yes or no: Has it been confirmed and do we know for a fact that this data is the actual exit polls.

You previously said yes, we know it was leaked but I think you may want to clarify that statement.

[Not a Sheep]

19. Got an answer TruthIsAll? /eom

[burned]

21. please

stop baiting him. if he is going to answer he will.
this is just rude.

[Not a Sheep]

22. Just bumped the thread hoping for a straight answer. /eom

[MelissaB]

23. Give it up!

Holy sh*t! This is the first/only time I've ever step into a thread like this.

IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO REPLY, HE/SHE WILL! You are being unreasonable.

[Not a Sheep]

24. Maybe I'm missing something, how am I being "unreasonable"? /eom

[MelissaB]

27. You keep

asking the same question. Surely once is enough.

[Not a Sheep]

31. I asked ....

......a simple question to everyone and TruthIsAll replied by asking me questions. I answered him and asked if he would answer what I originally asked.

I then bumped the thread for TruthIsAll, and someone told me to "stop baiting". I pointed out to that person that I was just bumping the thread.

You then told me to give it up that I was being "unreasonable".

So after I asked TruthisAll twice for a reply in this thread I got scolded for baiting, you tell me I'm being unreasonable and someone else jumps in to claim I'm "spinning" (what I'm supposedly spinning, I don't know). All of that does seems VERY reasonable to me.

[MelissaB]

33. You had your answer a while back!

tasteblind (930 posts) Sun Jan-02-05 11:50 AM
Original message
Read your post again...


"From what I know, I believe the answer is no. We do not know for a fact that this data is correct."

You said "we." There are people on this board who do know how accurate the data is, like althecat, for example, who posted it.


BTW---this is posted at the top of this thread.

[Not a Sheep]

36. Hmmm, TruthIsAll must have been wrong then....

.... he said seemed to be sure it was correct and had been leaked. So I'm sure how you can see how I was confused as to what the truth really was. That was my intention in starting this thread- to get a straight answer. I didn't think it was going to be this hard.

The Truth Is All I was looking for.

[mamalone]

116. icky

I'm pretty new here, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about..but it seems you are more interested in taking rather nasty little jabs than in looking for the "truth".
Not very productive.

[keepthemhonest]

42. mellissab

the original poster is a spinner. You say something then poster attempts to requote.
:freak:

Thanks for sticking up for TIA, this poster tries to attack the crediblity of motivated Duer's.This is not the posters first attempt.

[fooj]

49. you've got that right-

Can we forget to mail his invitation?B-) PEACE and HAPPY 2005!!!


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING????:think:

[keepthemhonest]

51. yes

and how long can they hide it?

[MelissaB]

50. I know that.

I'm just missing my 8th grade students. :)

[keepthemhonest]

53. I see

then you will get fulfillment from this thread then.


Yes Happy New Year to the ones with vision .

[fooj]

55. Greetings fellow educator!!!

I miss my high school kids, too!!! PEACE!!


What are they hiding???:think:

[keepthemhonest]

56. do your eigth

grade students say things like

"all I said was this and then he said that and I did not even do anything teacher."

:cry:

[fooj]

59. I teach HS English and...

yes, some freshmen can behave that way...but as they grow, develop and mature they are fairly straightforward and honest. It's always refreshing to see that emotional change!:)


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???:think:

[keepthemhonest]

66. Oh ,great there is hope, for one in particular on this thread.

and HOW LONG CAN THEY HIDE IT?

[MelissaB]

78. Hiya fooj!

:hi:

Nice to meet ya!

[fooj]

83. Right back at you, girlfriend!!!

Are you as exhausted as I am? I fully BELIEVE in our dissent!!! This is a right and just cause!! However, that doesn't mean that it isn't one hell of a long, grueling ride!!! I'm up for it...it sure is nice to make some friends along the way! Helps the sanity factor- catch my drift?:toast: To all the tireless warriors at DU...

"If you lose hope, somehow you lose the vitality that keeps life moving, you lose that courage to be, that quality that helps you go on in spite of it all. And so today I still have a dream..."MLK Jr.

I believe in the power of the people!


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING????:think:

[fooj]

47. something's up...

Happy 2005! I've had a lovely experience with NAS (ty) myself... this was my response-.

whatever...

you continue to harp on the promo. Still doesn't explain the orange hair and orange scarfs!! "Faith is believing in things when common sense tells you not to."- Miracle on 34th Street

And that, Not A Sheep, is what FAITH is all about! I respect your viewpoint- just asking that you respect mine. PEACE!!

WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???


It's all about respect!!!

[stepnw1f]

26. whatever (nt)

[keepthemhonest]

25. it is another

spin thread anyway.The poster tries to requote and puts a spin on it.

Rude in deed.It attempts at disruption.

[Not a Sheep]

28. I just asked a simple question. Please tell me what I'm spinning. /eom

[katinmn]

13. Exit Polls are powerful and will play a major role in exposing

the fraud.

In Aug 2004, US News World Report says exit polls are a "weapon against such 9election) fraud" when writing about the Venezuela election. http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_040820.htm

The article is about the recall in Venezuela where the exit pollster was Warren Mitoksky. In August, the mainstream media was convinced that exit polls do not lie.

But then, on 11/4, the US News columnist reversed himself, saying that our US exit polls were wrong (again handled by Mistofky) but it was because the Dems cheated. Just proves once again that if you're a bushbot you can have it any damn way you want it. God I hate them.

Excerpt:http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_041103.htm

My own suspicion is that some Democrats—at the command level, or
somewhere below—had an election-day project of slamming the results. New Hampshire, Minnesota and Pennsylvania initial exit poll results had huge margins for Kerry—much larger percentages than he won in any pre-election poll. If somebody had slipped some Democratic operative the list of exit poll sites—40 to 50 sites in each critical state—he or she could have slipped several hundred operatives into the polling places to take the exit poll ballots and vote for Kerry. The results would have shown Kerry much farther ahead than he actually was and, broadcast through drugdereport.com and other sources, could have heartened Kerry supporters during the afternoon and disheartened Bush supporters. When I was active in Democratic politics, in 1964-80, it would have occurred to us to do no such thing. But Democrats these days are so filled with a sense of grievance and with a feeling of justification for employing any dirty tactics to win, that this is not unthinkable. If people can game the exit polls, there's not much point to having exit polls any more.

[Not a Sheep]

14. True...just looking for a yes or no confirmation that we have them. /eom

[Clark2008]

45. Here's your answer

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x219264#219274

Geesch. Read the threads and you'll get it.

[Jo March]

91. TIA! Hooray! Nice to see you back.

I might have to do a happy dance!

[BeFree]

5. Another simple question

Do you believe the election data offered up by over 4,000+ different ways of counting is correct?

(The 4,000+ different ways being the number of precincts involved)

If you think that somehow, someway, the 4,000+ different ways of keeping 'Books' is accurate, then we can't help you.

[Not a Sheep]

7. I agree with you that the system is a total mess and......

... needs a serious overhaul.

So back to my question. Got an answer?

[BeFree]

20. Yes

The data we are working with is the best available data we have.

Considering that the other data sets we have are not scientifically sound, and what we have is a continuation of what was offically posted during election day, then yes: It is accurate enough for now.

Eventually, we will get the raw data from Mitofskty, et al. Then, you won't have to wonder, eh?

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Not a Sheep]

72. How is asking a simple question.......

..... having a "anatgonistic mentality"?

Being anatgonistic means actively expressing opposition or hostility. So I ask if the data has been confirmed and somehow I'm hostile and the opposition? I try to get to find out if anyone knows the truth about the data and so I'm an aggressive jerk?

PLEASE, reread the posts above and tell me where I was hostile and an agreesive jerk. Then please look at the response to my posts and you'll see who was really hostile.

[DeepGreen]

6. Some info on Mitofsky ,,

Assuming this is the same Mitofsky that is part of the link
http://www.mitofskyinternational.com/

http://www.exit-poll.net/

The above links lead to some credibility but
unfortunately, the following link (if info is valid)
states that Mitofsky does not believe there
was any fraud,,, so,,, we are up in the air again.

http://www.command-post.org/2004/2_archives/017712.html

:(

[euler]

40. Not only has he ruled out fraud, but...

... he is also on record saying that the raw exit poll numbers can't be used to prove election fraud, and he'll say it again under oath if it comes to that.

It won't matter what we think about him. He will be recognized as the preeminate exit poll expert on the planet by congress, the courts and MSM.

All this focus on exit polls is futile, if not misguided.

[Helga Scow Stern]

93. Yes, but the reason Mitofsky is saying (semi-privately) that the raw exit

poll data can't be used to prove fraud is that he is claiming that it is no longer raw. That all of it has already been weighted.

So, if anything, your point is misguided, since we are focusing on raw exit poll data, while Mitofsky is claiming releasing anything else won't do us any good because it is no longer pure.

He is simply trying to cover himself. Otherwise,

What has he got to hide?

[fooj]

95. REALLY? I BELIEVES THAT WAS THE PREMISE POWELL USED...

to dispute and question the authenticity of the Ukraine vote. You can't have it both ways..or maybe you can...now. Rules aren't rules anymore... manipulated BS to suit the needs of an elite few...:cry: I want my country back!!!! We want OUR country back!!! It is that simple.



WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???:think:

[merh]

106. Smoke & mirrors, smoke & mirrors!

All this focus on exit polls is futile, if not misguided. Don't look in this drawer, nothing there.

What are they hiding?
What are they afraid of?

[fooj]

111. THANKS MERH...you are right!! I'm outta here...

:hi: Bye-bye!!!


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?:think:

[sam sarrha]

8. Those are EXIT POLS.. They Prove Nothing !! not taken under oath

I dont know what your point is

but it cannot be made with such data.. we need to RECOUNT the ACTUAL VOTES... which in many cases we cant

Because, the machines did not have a hard receipt backup to count

The democratic precincts didn't have enough machines to record the votes and people didn't get to vote, some people waited 9 hours in line in the rain.

democratic precincts were put in hideous neighborhoods behind unlighted labyrinths of narrow pathways with no direction signs, no one was going into a dangerous area

power was cut off in the buildings

the horror stories go on and on...

what you ask is not possible to answer with the provided data..

even the correct data wouldnt tell you anything Real.. its an Exit pol.. and the volunteers probably didnt go into the bad neighborhoods

[Not a Sheep]

9. Really just looking for an answer to the data's legitamacy. /eom

[TruthIsAll]

18. Just ask Mitofsky and the media, not us. n/t

.

[tx_dem41]

10. What good are exit polls?

Has anyone done a study on past elections comparing exit poll results and actual results? (I'm sure someone has since I'm definitely jumping way late into this topic).

[Darkhawk32]

15. THEY ARE EXTREMELY ACCURATE!!!

There are a ton of countries who announce winners of national elections solely based on exit poll numbers. The counting afterward is just a formality.

Ukraine's voting scandal was almost solely based upon the accuracy of the exit polling versus the erroneous vote count.

[tx_dem41]

16. My question was more rhetorical than literal....

BTW, its usually the news services that announce the results based on exit polling not the individual governments.

Now, do you know the answer to any comparisons between exit polls and actual results in past U.S. Presidential elections?

[keepthemhonest]

17. Yes and

they used to be accurate with the outcome of the elections until Bush started running.

[euler]

41. No they aren't

Stop listening to TIA and start using google to see what real exit poll experts say. It's easy to do.

[Darkhawk32]

44. I've known the accuracy of exit polls before I even knew who TIA was...

Notice the number of posts?

[fooj]

101. AND WHO VEHEMENTLY DENOUNCED FRAUD DUE TO EXIT POLLING IN THE UKRAINE?

The US Government, that's who! What planet are you people living on? I'm disgusted!:mad:


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???:think: :think: :think:

[understandinglife]

107. And, who paid for those exit polls in the Ukraine?

"The U.S. state department last week said it had spent $65m over the past two years financing groups in support of democracy in Ukraine, part of the $1bn spent for the same purpose globally each year.

"Our money doesn't go to candidates. It goes to the institutions that it takes to run a free and fair election," said a spokesman, Richard Boucher.

The U.S. embassy said it - together with seven other western embassies, including Britain's - had funded an exit poll which showed Viktor Yushchenko was ahead in the first run-off by 11 points, and helped to spark the mass protests." (more at links)

As quoted from:

Inquiry Sought into Claims of U.S. Funding

By Nick Paton Walsh
The Guardian U.K.

Monday 13 December 2004

Ukrainian MPs are seeking a parliamentary investigation into allegations that money from the U.S. government was used to help fund the opposition during the recent electoral campaign.

Links:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/ukraine/story/0,15569,1372536,00.html

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121404C.shtml

oh, and you can google and find others...

Peace.

"Who bought the green shoes: daddy or Karl?"

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[k8conant]

12. These are not raw data. They are reports of the exit polls...such as

what was released to ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN ad nauseum. That's why they are in percentages rather than raw numbers...

However, they say in each the number of respondents on each question which is what we are using to infer the raw numbers at that time.

On edit: some of these data are still posted at media sites or as screenshots from election night.

[Carolab]

29. Ask althecat

they came from him

[VTGold]

30. All I know is that on Election Day people who had access to the exit polls

...into the evening, KNEW that Kerry was winning in a landslide.

And that apparently includes Karen Hughes.

[sickinohio]

38. Hmmm - Where is Hughes? Where is Rice? Where is Uncle Dick?

Why are they all hiding????

[Not a Sheep]

39. Yes, I heard the Karen Hughs story also....

... I was told that those were the actual exit polls and shown an analysis based on them. My question was simply trying to validate the legitimacy of the data as I was told it was correct.

I guess there's no use in anaylzing data we can't confirm as accurate.

Oh well, we all make mistakes.

[BarbinMD]

32. You know...

...this thread would have been pretty funny if everyone had just answered yes or no. :P (Sorry, late night ;))

[Not a Sheep]

34. Actually, that's what I asked for. But most people have either....

avoided the question entirely or brought up other issues that have nothing to do with the question.

Seems really hard to get an answer to that question doesn't it? I was thinking someone would say, "yes" it's been confirmed, because I don't want to assume that people know it's not been verifed and are avoiding answering the question "no".

[BarbinMD]

81. Okay...

...lighten up. I made a joking post, period. I didn't need the repeat of the lecture you've given over and over in this thread. That might be why some are calling you antagonistic and/or going in circles.

What do you want? An affidavit swearing to the accuracy of the confirmation of the validity and assurance that these are the election night exit polls? </sarcasm> If TIA offered up his/her first born, would that be enough? Sheesh! Give it a rest. The answer is no. But this isn't Bushworld and things aren't black and white...this appears to be legitimate and matches the numbers that were originally given on 11/2.

[keepthemhonest]

46. it still is a hilarious

thread as one poster attempts to knock te credibility of a valued DU poster and this in not the first time. thread should be called "let's talk in circles. "Original poster is good at that.

[BarbinMD]

54. I guess I'm too new...

...to catch that. :P I just thought fifty responses of "yes, yes, no, no, no, yes, yes, no..." would be pretty funny. My mother always did said I was my own best audience. ;)

[keepthemhonest]

58. i think it was pretty funny too. n/t

[BarbinMD]

67. Be afraid...

...be very afraid. :P

[fooj]

57. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND...

Thursday is only a few days off...I'm sure nerves are raw in Theftville...catch my drift?


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???:think:

[keepthemhonest]

70. Yes I am sure that they are getting very nervous.

Ironically, the poster is trying to knock others credibility only to lose his own. The poster continues to talk circles and also claims to prove someone was wrong based on the fact that one other poster agreed with him. Hmmmm. I would like to know the credentials of the poster that is so able to influence the circle poster.i guess the poster is finally able to agree once the answer one wants is the one one gets.




HOW LONG CAN THEY HIDE IT?

[Not a Sheep]

65. Sorry but you're wrong.....

I tried getting a straight answer as to whether numbers had been confirmed as the actual exit poll data and in the process was attacked time and again for the question. It seems some people here have a big problem when something is questioned. To me, that sounds like the Bush administration.

Somehow you see this as an attempt "to knock the credibilty of a valued DU poster". If TruthIsAll knew that the data had been NOT BEEN confirmed as real he should have simply said so. He could have easily said, I believe it's real and here is the conclusions I've come to if it is in fact legit. Did he do that? NO. Instead, we went in circles (as you put it) as I tried to get a straight answer. TIA initially said the data had ben leaked but then when the question was put directly to him as to the proof of it's legitimacy, he wouldn't reply and everyone started attacking me.

WHY?

It seems that when I ask a legitimate question on these forums, some people immeditely scream I'm pro-Bush. Afterall, I must be if I question anything a fellow forum member says. How incredibly closed minded is that?

Why is it that if someone on this Forum makes a mistake and is questioned some people get very defensive and start attacking?


I think some people need to take a long look in the mirror. However, I'm afraid just as pro-Bush supporters will never see any fault in their candidate, some people here will never see the error of their ways.

[fooj]

86. Ok- everyone is misinterpreting your motives...

:nopity:



WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???:think:

[keepthemhonest]

90. yes everyone.apparently n/t

:cry:

[Mistwell]

35. Answer - No, no confirmation actual exit polls

We know for a fact that some polls during the day that were reported to be "official exit polls" on several blogs turned out instead to be data from a DNC poll that was confused as an official exit poll (though this was not intentional as far as I can tell, just an innocent mistake.)

We know for a fact that some polls were taken early in the day and do not reflect the complete electorate.

We know for a fact that the final exit poll analysis released by the company that took the poll shows Bush could have won within the margin of error.

We know for a fact that the final exit poll analysis released by the company that took the poll was "adjusted" post election in a manner not fully known by anyone other than the exit poll company, but which may include some sort of adjustment based on actual votes themselves.

We know for a fact that the final exit poll does not have any raw data open to the public, and the company that took that exit poll has not released the raw data, making it impossible for us to verify the analysis of the exit poll company.

We know for a fact that many people claim to have the final raw data, but none can show any amount of evidence or proof that it actually tracks back to the official data, or describe how they got the data from the source. Indeed, most of the sources are anonymous.

So, no matter how much I want the answer to be yes (and I DO want the answer to be YES), I cannot in clear conscience say that we have ever seen enough to show that the final exit polls indicated that Kerry won beyond the margin of error, and likely we never will see the raw data necessary to show it one way or the other.

[Not a Sheep]

37. Thanks. I seem to have been originally misled then. /eom

[euler]

43. It's been going on for some time now n/t

[Igel]

48. It's been said that one exit poll is worse than none.

For example, when the exit polls wildly mispredicted a California gubernatorial election back in the late 80s or 90s, the California Poll got it right. Mitofsky missed the absentee vote, and knew it; various and sundry folks argued with the TV people, who wanted to call the election for Feinstein based on the strong exit poll numbers, but the skeptics won, and apparently nobody botched the on-air calls.

And when Mitofsky actually miscalled the NJ governor's race a few years later, there was no backup poll. Fortunately, nobody cared that Mitofsky said the loser had a decidedly large victory.

[ClassWarrior]

60. I have a very simple question that can be answered yes or no.....

Is it honest to make a statement like the one above when answering simply yes or no to the question amounts to stepping into a trap?

Well? Yes or no?

NGU.

[Not a Sheep]

68. How is it a trap.......

The question: Yes or no: Has it been confirmed and do we know for a fact that this data is the actual exit polls.

So you're saying that was a trap?

Either the data is confirmed as the actual exit poll numbers or it hasn't been. Yes, maybe you don't know but if the answer is "I don't know" if it's been confirmed then the answer is no.

How such a simple question can be turned into something so complicated is a mystery to me.

[pointsoflight]

69. Hasn't been officially confirmed OR disconfirmed...

As has been the case all along, Mitofsky refuses to cooperate. HE is the one who refuses to give a simple yes or no answer to the question you pose.

It's obviously your perogative to remain skeptical, but the fact that the reports PERFECTLY match those posted on numerous mainstream media sites on election night, and the fact that Mitofsky won't DISCONFIRM them, tells me all I need to know.

[Not a Sheep]

73. Yes, that seems to be the bottom line......

...... but for some reason, some people here don't seem want to say that it hasn't been confirmed.

[pointsoflight]

74. But if you want to be fair...

...shouldn't you say that the reports haven't been confirmed OR disconfirmed? Isn't is important for people to know that despite huge numbers of e-mails to Mitofsky, he has not DISCONFIRMED them either? If the reports are wrong, wouldn't one expect an immediate disconfirmation?

[keepthemhonest]

76. the poster only wishes

to discredit any credible DU'ers that is the goal of this thread and one he started yesterday. Would have been the day before that too but has only been a member since DEC 30 or 29th





HOW LONG CAN THEY HIDE IT?

[euler]

77. Mitofsky has confirmed that analysis such as the ones posted...

...on DU are flawed and useless.

[keepthemhonest]

80. link Please euler

whenever you say something like that you need to have a link.Please.

[Not a Sheep]

87. You mean you want confirmation of what someone said here? .........

Hmmm, that's what got me in trouble to start with. Interesting enough, I agree with you. People should try and back up what they say and be honest. It would have caused a lot less headache with this thread.

[keepthemhonest]

94. nevermind euler

I jsut realised that Mitofsky is not forthcoming with his exit polls so why should I believe in his opinion anyway.


HOW LONG CAN THEY HIDE IT?

[keepthemhonest]

98. deleted

self deleted wrong thread

[Not a Sheep]

84. I agree with you. .........(more)

A full and complete answer could be that it hasn't been confirmed or disconfirmed.

When I originally asked about the data (in another thread), I said has this been confirmed?. So the answer could have easily been no, or we don't know yet, or it hasn't been been confirmed or disconfirmed. Either way you answer the fact is the data hasn't been proven legit.

Originally however, I was told that it had been leaked. It looks like that is wrong because in fact we still don't know.

It's interesting to see how I am continually attacked for questioning the data. I wish we could get the true data. I wish Conyers could get ahold of it. But no matter how hard I wish, or want to assume something, I can't make it happen.

[ClassWarrior]

103. So then you admit the question is a trap?

You only gave respondents the option to answer yes or no. But then you say, "So the answer could have easily been no, or we don't know yet, or it hasn't been been confirmed or disconfirmed." I may have just fallen off the turnip truck, but that sounds to me a whole lot different than yes or no.

Nonetheless - and here's the trap part IN YOUR OWN WORDS - "Either way you answer the fact is the data hasn't been proven legit."

QED.

NGU.

[keepthemhonest]

112. still ROFLMAO n/t

[seito]

89. I believe it was a "yes or no" question Not a Sheep

LMAO

[keepthemhonest]

114. I wonder if said poster could make it as an actor? n/t

[ClassWarrior]

117. LOL

NGU.

[keepthemhonest]

71. ROFL MAO

class warrior you are a riot.

thanks for the laugh.



HOW LONG CAN THEY HIDE IT?

[Bill Bored]

61. Good Grief, can't we all just get along?

The polls are "real" but the question is, were they adjusted, weighted, or not? Only Mitofsky (and I guess The Shadow) knows.

And here's a link, posted yesterday to the almost-final "unadjusted" poll which Althecat said he also has from his own source, right Al?:

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/elections/2004/graphics/exitPolls.html>

They don't print the totals here, but Kerry got 50.78% based on the Male/Female percentages. The question is, did this poll oversample Dems or is there some other reason for the flip in the adjusted version?

Now let's go back to playing nice in the sandbox people, OK???

[Bill Bored]

62. Oh, and to save us all a lot of time

I think it might be better to try and limit the number of "Mitofsky Exit Poll" threads to 1 a day if at all possible. It's hard to make and post arguments on 3 or 4 fronts at a time, just to keep everyone who's interested up to date.

Anyone second the motion?

[missouri dem 2]

63. Why won't the media release the raw data? What do they know and

what are they hiding? Mitofsky should release the numbers if they back up his conclusions. The fact that he won't just confirms that the numbers show that Kerry won.

[corbett]

118. Their White House Access Is Gone If They Provide The Data And * Prevails

The reason they won't release the exit polls is the same reason why they wouldn't report on Kitty Kelly's book even though her facts were verified and reverified: Karl Rove has put them on notice that if they ask the wrong question, their White House access is gone. They are worried that if they contribute to the looming constitutional challenge and the shrub prevails (ain't gon' happen), their White House access will evaporate, which will cost them millions in ratings revenue.

[pointsoflight]

64. Well, these reports perfectly match the numbers posted on election night.

[loudsue]

75. That's a pretty good indication that the answer to the orig. question is

YES.

I'm kind of disappointed in some of the responses on this thread. Actually, I was going to ask the same thing on several threads last night, because everyone was seeming so sure that what had been passed to althecat was the true data.

I not only love :loveya: althecat, but I have a secret crush on him... well, not THAT secret. And I also think the world of TIA, and threw a forum tantrum when he got tombstoned the other day. I was one of those bad girls who wasn't standing up for the mods' decision. A day w/out TIA is a day without sunshine!! :)

I didn't have the opportunity to ask althecat if he felt pretty certain that what had been leaked to him (this polling data) was the actual data we had been looking for from Mitofsky (sp?)'s original exit polls that he & the media refused to release. It's entirely possible that the accuracy of this data was dissected on a thread I didn't read, so I was wondering the same thing that Not A Sheep asked about.

Now that I've witnessed what a lynch mob :nuke: he/she has been confronted with, I'm glad I didn't ask!!! Even though I had the same question, and almost DID ask.

:kick:

[MelissaB]

79. I agree.

I've wondered the same thing, but I think we would gone about the process of finding out differently. This whole "thing" started this morning in another thread with the op of this thread *seeming* to hound TIA. I didn't want a repeat of the other day with a tombstoned member. :)

[loudsue]

85. I haven't seen that thread yet & didn't know about it.

I'm REALLY sick of folks hounding TIA....HOWEVER!!!...That's a real good sign he's onto something big, isn't it?

I know for a fact that some of TIA's analysis has found its way into the minds of some Democratic Senators... and they see what he's getting at only too well. Guns smokin' all over the place!

Keep up the good work, Truth Is All!! :yourock:

:kick::kick:

[keepthemhonest]

88. exactly.

We are just watching out for TIA.That is all.

Loud sue I am sure If TIA or someone like told you the answer you would believe what they said, but the original poster had no intention of getting a legit answer ,only wanted to discredit TIA.

Hence, our motive to discredit the original poster ,right back. The poster just goes in circles.Sorry about the negative thread but it has got to be done.

[Not a Sheep]

102. You are so out of line it is ridiculous.....

I have no idea where you are getting this bs that I was trying to discredit TIA. Somehow you got that in your minds and started attacking me for an honest question and you're too stubborn and blinded by emotion to see it and admit maybe you were wrong.

You even say above "hence, our motive to discredit the original poster". What is that about?

[fooj]

110. POST# 102 is what is ridiculous! YES or NO and you continue to taunt...

102 posts later!!! Not a lynch mob- just defending the credibility and integrity of a patriotic warrior!!! TIA has put alot of positive energy into this fight...constant badgering is unwarranted! This type of juvenile behavior creates problems...this assertion proved by the HUGE response in posts.

DIVIDE AND CONQUER=Rovian Theory of Democratic Principles!!!


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???

[Not a Sheep]

104. I'm glad someone else see's what happened here for what it is..........

all that had to be said was something like we don't have confirmation for the data but think it's true. Instead, you are right loudsue, it was a lynch mob because someone asked a question that apparently was on other people's minds.

[seito]

82. It seems, not a sheep, that you are not looking for answers

I do not normally "enter the fray" with silliness such as this. However, your posts seem to establish a pattern of behavior that leads me to question the innocence of "your question"

Case in point: In answer to your question "What are we going to win?" I posted this reply. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=218288&mesg_id=220518

If the question was so important to you, why did you not reply?

Instead of accepting the my answer, or even debating the answer, you went on to post another question. hmmm...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x220507

Lots of deleted messages in that post...

Now, we have another "innocent question"

I am sorry, but it looks like bait to me.

[keepthemhonest]

92. Yes seito

first TIA, then me, then TIA who is next I ask?

How do we get said poster banned?

[seito]

97. Friend, do not play into the trap

Just stand by what you believe. Truth is always exposed in the end. My only fear is that good people get pulled into traps. I have already lost one friend here, in a similar manner.

I Believe

[Not a Sheep]

96. Don't know why you want to keep talking about that but.........

Yeah, in that thread I asked what you were referring to that we were going to win beause it sounded vague and I didn't know what you were referring to. Of course, after I asked, I got smart as*ed answers like "the effin lottery".

So then I asked if you guys were saying "win" meant Kerry was going to take office and I received this:

Keepthemhonest
Let me guess you voted for Bush and were you not pleasantly surprised on Nov 3 when you woke up to find Bush had won.

I replied that that wasn't true and asked of someone could explain the process by which Kerry could take office.

Then I was really attacked. I was told my questions were off topic, a reply to mee wasted DU bandwidth, and told to go find the answers myself. How is that ANY WAY to teart someone? Seriously, go back and read it if you don't believe me.

I did get a resonse from Keepthemhonest which outlined a plan for Kerry to take office which included:

"Someone else takes office until they can prove the legitimacy of the election."

I asked what this was based on (like Keepthemhonest just asked euler where his/her Mitofsky info was from above). And then I was attacked again.

So yes, your right, I started my own thread to get an answer to what Keepthemhonest told me. And by the way, the deleted psost in that thread are other people's not mine).


SO EXPLAIN to me why I'm attacked and treated like the enemy for asking simple questions. And Please go back and read what I said and what people said to me and tell me who was being rude and making unfair assumptions.

[seito]

99. My point

I gave you a very thoughtful answer to your question, and you did not even bother to reply.

If the question weighed so heavy on your mind, it would have been nice to acknowledge a serious answer to your question.

[keepthemhonest]

105. don't you love how the poster just

regurgitates what other people have said and attempts to quote them?

like that substantiates what his point was. UH oh I better be careful using big words that others may not understand.


How are you doing today seito? All is well here.

Not to worry seito,in reference to above post.

[Not a Sheep]

109. Seito......

.....I apologize for not acknowleging your post. Frankly, I was so fed up with trying to be understood that I stopped reading everything on that thread.

I'm really impressed with some people on these forums and have tried to learn some new things by reading and posting. But I am very disppointed at the way some people have constantly attacked me and made ridiculous and false assumptions. I honestly felt that people here would be above that.

As I've said before, if you go back into this thread and the one you mentioned and reread how it all went down from my perspective, I think you'll see things a little differently.

[KnowerOfLogic]

100. Another simple question: do we know that bush won fairly? NO. nt

[understandinglife]

108. Another ? -- Who bought the green shoes: daddy or karl? (nt)

[Imagevision]

113. It won't matter if a Senator (s) don't step forward Jan. 6th.

[Mojorabbit]

115. No

While it is one thing in the arsenal, if it is proven to be bogus info.. the press will be all over it. I can see the headlines. Dems used bogus info to contest vote. EVerything else would be forgotten in the spin of how were they deceived etc... So I think it is something to be listed as part of the pkg it should not the the be all end all.