Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [POLITICS] Was the 2004 Election Stolen?

["Vern Green" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

> 2) There was something very deeply wrong with the correspondence
> between the exit polls and the actual vote count.  What was news to me
> was some of the analysis of the exit polling versus the actual results
> from the exit-polled precincts.  That report might be more worth
> reading than this account.

This is the important report. How far off were the exit polls from the
actual vote counts in the precincts? I can see a scenario where the
national media would get the exit polls wrong. Look at it this way.
Most exit polling is performed in the urban areas where there are
media outlets available to ask the questions. It would make sense that
it looked like Kerry would win the election as he performed rather
well in urban areas. But when the rural numbers started flowing in,
then the exit polls start missing the mark.

The other problem with exit polls is the time of day the questions are
being asked. If you were to poll people through the course of the day,
I think you would find considerably more Democrats voting during the
daytime hours than republicans.

I still think the number one problem with straw polling is the sheer
size of the United States though. Face it, when a National election is
underway, Polls on the east coast are closing just as California's
polls are getting into full swing.


> I used to live in California, and I'm guessing that there are probably
> too many illegal immigrants voting.  (By "too many", I mean more than
> one should see with a reasonable but not burdensome voting policy.)
> But I think people on the right are exaggerating this possibility.
> Most of the illegals I remember from San Diego were actually not that
> eager to draw attention to themselves, since they *know* their
> situation is precarious.

I am not sure this is accurate anymore. When you see thousands of
illegals walking through the streets proclaiming their illegality. The
latest round was just at the beginning of May. With the California
senate just passing another bill to grant driver's licenses to
illegals, I don't see too many illegals concerned with getting caught
anymore. There is no such thing as internal enforcement anymore.

> At the same time, it's easy to make a policy
> of identity checks and voting challenges into a system to slow down
> the process and make it less likely that people will get to vote in
> the precincts you target.
And of course we don't have to mention that those precincts targeted
just happen to be the precincts where it is most likely that this type
of voter fraud is taking place.

Let's not forget, a lot of the problems with disenfranchised voters in
this country was a result of the 2000 elections. The federal
government mandated a lot of election changes, many of these changes
were still trying to be ironed out. Take the electronic voting thing,
it is still something not entirely worked out yet as is evident by
recent threads on this message board.

Was their fraud in this last election? without a doubt, where people
not allowed to vote, yes, it is a flawed system, I think the best good
that comes out of this article is not to try and undermine President
Bush as having once again stole an election that the democrats clearly
lost. A better use would be to draw attention to the areas we need to
fix for the future.

I can't help but feel Mike's motives for posting this has more to do
with bashing Bush and the republicans than pushing for any substantive
change.
--
Thanks
F Vernon Green

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion