Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Are you all familiar with the rBr (Reluctant Bush Responder) hypothesis?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 05:34 PM
Original message
Are you all familiar with the rBr (Reluctant Bush Responder) hypothesis?
Edited on Sat Jun-11-05 05:40 PM by TruthIsAll
The line is: The exit polls were wrong, because Bush voters refused to talk to the exit pollsters, so they were never counted.

The canard is that this "bias" worked in Kerry's favor to the tune of 56 Kerry voters responding for every 50 Bush voters who did.

The alpha ratio = 56/50 = 1.12 is the bogus measure of this "reluctance".

That's it. It's the only possible explanation, according to Edison-Mitofsky, to account for the discrepancy. Kerry won the exit poll by 51-48%. Bush won the vote by almost the same 51-48%.

They never once considered the only plausible explanation:
Bush stole the election.

Here is the output of an optimization model which shows why rBr is an insult to our collective intelligence.

Yes, Kerry voters responded at a 56/50 ratio - because that is in fact how they voted.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x377029
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. People don't like to talk about it when they are doing something
they know is bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. These idiots were proud of their votes for the turd
why would they deny it?

Repubs seem to take pride in their ignorance, or total denial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. kick.nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. double kick.nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
5. rBr 101. Finally, we have the intro level course to this theory that
is comprehensive and easily understood in its entirety.

TIA, the harder you've worked, the easier it's become for the layperson to hear what you're saying.

THAT is a crowning achievement on top of all of your other accomplishments.


:toast:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melissa G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
6. kick for truth! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
7. "Bush stole the election."
Well, in my newly acquired dialectical skills while sitting with the virtual Vienna Circle, I must say TIA, can you prove this statement beyond a legal doubt?

What, you say you want an investigation?

Well why don't you look at Mitofsky's numbers, which are owned by the networks.

What, you say that they won't let you look at the data? Well, why don't you ... well, well, well.

Isn't this an interesting dialectic. The only way we will accept "Bush stole the electing" as arguable is if you actually look at the original Mitofsky data. We won't give you that access, therefore Bush did not steal the election.

Am I making sense?

Will you please stop making sense, as David Byrne says.

It so inconvenient to so many people!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melissa G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
8. TIA , You absolutely ROCK! Nice verbiage!
Edited on Mon Jun-13-05 10:37 PM by Melissa G
:loveya: :loveya::loveya::loveya::loveya::yourock::loveya: :loveya::loveya::loveya::loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-05 02:46 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. KICK.NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-05 02:56 AM
Response to Original message
10. rBr falls to Cinderella Man...loses on a TKO in the 3rd round
As Jim Braddock said to Corn Griffen in Cinderella Man:

"Welcome to New York."

:kick:ing the $%#& out of the bullies!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 05:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC