2004 Presidential Election: Compendium of Attempts to Dismiss Vote Fraud
Rebuttal to All Arguments to Dismiss Vote Fraud in 2004 Election
Date: Monday, May 22, 2006
Release: "2004 Presidential Election – Compendium of Attempts to Dismiss Vote Fraud"
By: National Election Data Archive
http://ElectionArchive.org
Contact: Kathy Dopp, kathy@uscountvotes.org,
435-608-1382
The National Election Data Archvie publicly released a paper "2004 Presidential Election – Compendium of Attempts to Dismiss Vote Fraud" which solidly rebuts, in 6 short pages, the academic arguments which claim to have shown that there is no vote fraud/miscounts in U.S. elections.
The short compendium of academic attempts to dismiss vote fraud includes claims made by the Democratic National Committee and pollster Warren Mitofsky among others:
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
Every argument that Mitofsky, Election Science Institute, the Democratic National Committee, and others have made which purports that there is no evidence of vote miscount in U.S. elections is refuted in a page or less in this short compendium by the National Election Data Archive's volunteer statisticians and mathematicians.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
150 copies of this compendium were prepared for and handed out at the May 17 - 21st AAPOR conference in Montreal, in particular during a session on "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?".
Warren Mitofsky is very well respected within AAPOR due to his past work and leadership. Consequently Mitofsky's postion, that exit poll discrepancies were caused by partisan response bias rather than vote miscounts is given great weight within AAPOR. However, the National Election Data Archive, describes recent Mitofsky analyses which were presented by Mitofsky and Fritz Scheuren at recent ASA.org and AAPOR.org conferences, as "sophistry" rather than mathematically valid analyses.
The National Election Data Archive points out that the National Election Pool (NEP) and Mitofsky have not yet released any exit poll data or analysis publicly that supports this response bias hypothesis. Yet all the data regarding pollster conditions which Mitofsky claims they analyzed would not pose any risk to voter confidentiality to release.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
The National Election Data Archive invites everyone to read its concise paper which solidly rebuts all the arguments made to date which claim to demonstrate a lack of evidence of vote fraud in U.S. elections.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
Kathy Dopp, President of the National Election Data Archive says that "I find it harder every day to see why anyone imagines that the U.S. vote counts are accurate when only a few states conduct any random independent audits of vote counts to check accuracy and when every county in America without exception releases its vote count data in a manner that covers up the evidence of tampering! (See http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/election_officials/Audits_Monitoring.pdf and recent articles in the New York Times and Newsweek regarding evidence that touchscreen voting machines are wide-open to electronic tampering.)
The creation of a National Election Data Archive is vital if we are to restore "one person, one vote" in America.
In the only two states where detailed vote count data were obtained following the November 2004 election (Washington and New Mexico), steps have since been taken to eliminate the use of unauditable electronic voting systems and to require voter verifiable paper ballots as a result of the obvious evidence of vote tampering that the detailed vote count data provided. (See History of the Academic Debate: http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/Presidential-Election-2004.pdf)
The National Election Data Archive, an underfunded nonprofit organization, is looking for help to obtain funding to pay for programming staff to complete its national election data archive in time for the November 2006 elections. NEDA also needs volunteers from every state to help obtain the detailed vote count data via open records requests, and we need volunteer(s) immediately to write the open records request letters specific to every state's open records laws.
NEDA is a 501(c)(3) that depends on donations: http://electionarchive.org/fairelection/donate.html
Volunteers may sign up to obtain the data for their own county or state: http://electionarchive.org/fairelection/statesubscribe.html
Volunteers are also needed to complete open records requests letters for each state (yours): http://electionarchive.net/public/ucv_select_info.php
The national election data archive is a tool which there is no question can be built and used to ensure that correctly elected candidates are sworn into office. To make it happen in time for November, 2006, we need funding now. Just $4,000/month would enable us to complete a public Internet archival tool!
Best Regards and Thanks again to donors to the National Election Data Archive who made it possible for us to attend the Montreal AAPOR conference and to Steve Freeman and Ron Baiman for volunteering for America to present papers at the Montreal AAPOR conference and for doing such a great job.
Kathy Dopp
http://electionarchive.org
National Election Data Archive Dedicated to Accurately Counting Elections
Rebuttal to All Arguments that Dismissed Vote Fraud
This short paper refutes all of the arguments that have incorrectly been used to dismiss the evidence of vote fraud/miscounts in the November 2004 election:
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
Every argument that Mitofsky, Election Science Institute, Liddle, Lindeman, and even the Democratic National Committee have made is refuted in a page or less in this short handout.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
AAPOR conference in Montreal
Ron Baiman and Steve Freeman did a terrific job at the AAPOR conference. Both were incredibly convincing speakers and answered a lot of questions, which all seemed to be directed at them rather than at Liddle and Lindeman.
The fact that Ron and Steve did such a great job speaking and answering questions was important because the organizers of the seminar on whether the 2004 election was stolen, stacked the deck against our side by having three speakers on the other side who they let speak after Ron and Steve spoke first. I was angry when I tried to make several comments to respond to the nonsense on the other side and was interrupted and prevented from finishing during the question and answer period.
It was also unfair that the entire conference fee was waived for Liddle who has contributed more sophistry (plausible sounding but fallacious argumentation) to the analysis of exit polling than any other person and who has recevied payment for her sophistry by Mitofsky, but Ron Baiman and I who have worked as unpaid volunteers and who have contributed valid work in this field were not helped, so that Ron was only able to attend the session that he spoke at.
In speaking to AAPOR members I found that there was a great deal of bias towards believing everything that Mitofsky told them. Mitofsky is very well respected within AAPOR due to his past work and leadership.
I was surprised to learn that even after listening to Ron and Steve, David, one of the people in charge at the conference, was convinced that Mitofsky had already released all the exit poll data that did not risk voter anonymity!! Luckily I had an opportunity to have a nice long talk with him and he "said" that he would ask Mitofsky to ask NEP to release more data - specifically the data regarding pollster conditions which Liddle claims they analyzed and which proves their case, but which they have thus far kept secret.
The passion, informativeness, and speaking ability of both Ron and Steve was impressive. We may publicly post Ron Baiman's PPT presentation when I have time to fix it up.
I stayed at the conference for four days and spoke with many people one on one. I handed out 150 of my handouts which rebut all of the arguments which purport that there is no evidence of vote fraud in the 2004 election, which is publicly posted here: http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
I don't know if we were successful or not in making the AAPOR leadership aware of the truth of the matter, but I know we convinced a few people. It was frustrating at times, but the majority of people were very nice, very polite, and listened, and a few people thanked me and wished us well, and seemed quite surprised and edified by what I was telling them one on one.
I met Mark Blumenthal, the Mystery Pollster and he arrogantly informed me that he had a different opinion than mine and he was uninterested in anything I had to say and he refused to politely listen to even one sentence from me. Mark Blumenthal seems to be entirely closed-minded to anything that alter his own opinion, but perhaps he is only deficient and afraid of mathematics so is apt to fall prey to any sophistry. He is an opposite to me in the sense that it is like a religion to me to always be open to change my position to match newly developing facts..
Please see if you can get people to read this concise paper which solidly rebuts all the arguments made to date which claim to show lack of evidence of vote fraud.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
I find it harder every day to see why anyone imagines that the U.S. has accurate vote counts when we conduct virtually no random independent audits of vote counts to check their accuracy on election day and when every county in America releases its vote count data in a way that covers up the evidence of tampering! (See http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/election_officials/Audits_Monitoring.pdf)
The creation of the National Election Data Archive is vital if we are to restore "one person, one vote" in America.
In the only two states where detailed vote count data were obtained following the November 2004 election (Washington and New Mexico), steps have been taken to eliminate the use of unauditable electronic voting and require voter verifiable paper ballots as a result of the obvious evidence of vote tampering that the detailed vote count data provide.
Please help us obtain funding or donate to help us pay the programming fees to complete the national election data archive in time for the November 2006 elections. We urgently need funds now in order to finish implementing the system. We also need volunteers from every state to help obtain the detailed vote count data via open records requests, and we need a volunteer now to write the open records request letter specific to every state's open records laws.
Donate: http://electionarchive.org/fairelection/donate.html
Sign up to obtain the data for your county or state: http://electionarchive.org/fairelection/statesubscribe.html
Help us complete open records requests letters for each state (yours): http://electionarchive.net/public/ucv_select_info.php
While I wish all the luck in the world to those who are attempting to get public exit polls (which we would incorporate into our election data archive) and election reform legislation passed in time for November, it remains true that the national election data archive is a tool which there is no question that we have the opportunity to build and use to ensure that correctly elected candidates are sworn into office. To make it happen in time for November, 2006, we need funding now. Just $4,000/month would do it!
Best Regards and Thanks again to all our donors who made it possible for us to attend the Montreal AAPOR conference and to Steve Freeman and Ron Baiman for volunteering for America and for doing such a great job.
Kathy Dopp
http://electionarchive.org
National Election Data Archive Dedicated to Accurately Counting Elections
Date: Monday, May 22, 2006
Release: "2004 Presidential Election – Compendium of Attempts to Dismiss Vote Fraud"
By: National Election Data Archive
http://ElectionArchive.org
Contact: Kathy Dopp, kathy@uscountvotes.org,
435-608-1382
The National Election Data Archvie publicly released a paper "2004 Presidential Election – Compendium of Attempts to Dismiss Vote Fraud" which solidly rebuts, in 6 short pages, the academic arguments which claim to have shown that there is no vote fraud/miscounts in U.S. elections.
The short compendium of academic attempts to dismiss vote fraud includes claims made by the Democratic National Committee and pollster Warren Mitofsky among others:
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
Every argument that Mitofsky, Election Science Institute, the Democratic National Committee, and others have made which purports that there is no evidence of vote miscount in U.S. elections is refuted in a page or less in this short compendium by the National Election Data Archive's volunteer statisticians and mathematicians.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
150 copies of this compendium were prepared for and handed out at the May 17 - 21st AAPOR conference in Montreal, in particular during a session on "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?".
Warren Mitofsky is very well respected within AAPOR due to his past work and leadership. Consequently Mitofsky's postion, that exit poll discrepancies were caused by partisan response bias rather than vote miscounts is given great weight within AAPOR. However, the National Election Data Archive, describes recent Mitofsky analyses which were presented by Mitofsky and Fritz Scheuren at recent ASA.org and AAPOR.org conferences, as "sophistry" rather than mathematically valid analyses.
The National Election Data Archive points out that the National Election Pool (NEP) and Mitofsky have not yet released any exit poll data or analysis publicly that supports this response bias hypothesis. Yet all the data regarding pollster conditions which Mitofsky claims they analyzed would not pose any risk to voter confidentiality to release.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
The National Election Data Archive invites everyone to read its concise paper which solidly rebuts all the arguments made to date which claim to demonstrate a lack of evidence of vote fraud in U.S. elections.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
Kathy Dopp, President of the National Election Data Archive says that "I find it harder every day to see why anyone imagines that the U.S. vote counts are accurate when only a few states conduct any random independent audits of vote counts to check accuracy and when every county in America without exception releases its vote count data in a manner that covers up the evidence of tampering! (See http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/election_officials/Audits_Monitoring.pdf and recent articles in the New York Times and Newsweek regarding evidence that touchscreen voting machines are wide-open to electronic tampering.)
The creation of a National Election Data Archive is vital if we are to restore "one person, one vote" in America.
In the only two states where detailed vote count data were obtained following the November 2004 election (Washington and New Mexico), steps have since been taken to eliminate the use of unauditable electronic voting systems and to require voter verifiable paper ballots as a result of the obvious evidence of vote tampering that the detailed vote count data provided. (See History of the Academic Debate: http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/Presidential-Election-2004.pdf)
The National Election Data Archive, an underfunded nonprofit organization, is looking for help to obtain funding to pay for programming staff to complete its national election data archive in time for the November 2006 elections. NEDA also needs volunteers from every state to help obtain the detailed vote count data via open records requests, and we need volunteer(s) immediately to write the open records request letters specific to every state's open records laws.
NEDA is a 501(c)(3) that depends on donations: http://electionarchive.org/fairelection/donate.html
Volunteers may sign up to obtain the data for their own county or state: http://electionarchive.org/fairelection/statesubscribe.html
Volunteers are also needed to complete open records requests letters for each state (yours): http://electionarchive.net/public/ucv_select_info.php
The national election data archive is a tool which there is no question can be built and used to ensure that correctly elected candidates are sworn into office. To make it happen in time for November, 2006, we need funding now. Just $4,000/month would enable us to complete a public Internet archival tool!
Best Regards and Thanks again to donors to the National Election Data Archive who made it possible for us to attend the Montreal AAPOR conference and to Steve Freeman and Ron Baiman for volunteering for America to present papers at the Montreal AAPOR conference and for doing such a great job.
Kathy Dopp
http://electionarchive.org
National Election Data Archive Dedicated to Accurately Counting Elections
Rebuttal to All Arguments that Dismissed Vote Fraud
This short paper refutes all of the arguments that have incorrectly been used to dismiss the evidence of vote fraud/miscounts in the November 2004 election:
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
Every argument that Mitofsky, Election Science Institute, Liddle, Lindeman, and even the Democratic National Committee have made is refuted in a page or less in this short handout.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
AAPOR conference in Montreal
Ron Baiman and Steve Freeman did a terrific job at the AAPOR conference. Both were incredibly convincing speakers and answered a lot of questions, which all seemed to be directed at them rather than at Liddle and Lindeman.
The fact that Ron and Steve did such a great job speaking and answering questions was important because the organizers of the seminar on whether the 2004 election was stolen, stacked the deck against our side by having three speakers on the other side who they let speak after Ron and Steve spoke first. I was angry when I tried to make several comments to respond to the nonsense on the other side and was interrupted and prevented from finishing during the question and answer period.
It was also unfair that the entire conference fee was waived for Liddle who has contributed more sophistry (plausible sounding but fallacious argumentation) to the analysis of exit polling than any other person and who has recevied payment for her sophistry by Mitofsky, but Ron Baiman and I who have worked as unpaid volunteers and who have contributed valid work in this field were not helped, so that Ron was only able to attend the session that he spoke at.
In speaking to AAPOR members I found that there was a great deal of bias towards believing everything that Mitofsky told them. Mitofsky is very well respected within AAPOR due to his past work and leadership.
I was surprised to learn that even after listening to Ron and Steve, David, one of the people in charge at the conference, was convinced that Mitofsky had already released all the exit poll data that did not risk voter anonymity!! Luckily I had an opportunity to have a nice long talk with him and he "said" that he would ask Mitofsky to ask NEP to release more data - specifically the data regarding pollster conditions which Liddle claims they analyzed and which proves their case, but which they have thus far kept secret.
The passion, informativeness, and speaking ability of both Ron and Steve was impressive. We may publicly post Ron Baiman's PPT presentation when I have time to fix it up.
I stayed at the conference for four days and spoke with many people one on one. I handed out 150 of my handouts which rebut all of the arguments which purport that there is no evidence of vote fraud in the 2004 election, which is publicly posted here: http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
I don't know if we were successful or not in making the AAPOR leadership aware of the truth of the matter, but I know we convinced a few people. It was frustrating at times, but the majority of people were very nice, very polite, and listened, and a few people thanked me and wished us well, and seemed quite surprised and edified by what I was telling them one on one.
I met Mark Blumenthal, the Mystery Pollster and he arrogantly informed me that he had a different opinion than mine and he was uninterested in anything I had to say and he refused to politely listen to even one sentence from me. Mark Blumenthal seems to be entirely closed-minded to anything that alter his own opinion, but perhaps he is only deficient and afraid of mathematics so is apt to fall prey to any sophistry. He is an opposite to me in the sense that it is like a religion to me to always be open to change my position to match newly developing facts..
Please see if you can get people to read this concise paper which solidly rebuts all the arguments made to date which claim to show lack of evidence of vote fraud.
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/IncorrectElectionDataAnalysis-06.pdf
I find it harder every day to see why anyone imagines that the U.S. has accurate vote counts when we conduct virtually no random independent audits of vote counts to check their accuracy on election day and when every county in America releases its vote count data in a way that covers up the evidence of tampering! (See http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/election_officials/Audits_Monitoring.pdf)
The creation of the National Election Data Archive is vital if we are to restore "one person, one vote" in America.
In the only two states where detailed vote count data were obtained following the November 2004 election (Washington and New Mexico), steps have been taken to eliminate the use of unauditable electronic voting and require voter verifiable paper ballots as a result of the obvious evidence of vote tampering that the detailed vote count data provide.
Please help us obtain funding or donate to help us pay the programming fees to complete the national election data archive in time for the November 2006 elections. We urgently need funds now in order to finish implementing the system. We also need volunteers from every state to help obtain the detailed vote count data via open records requests, and we need a volunteer now to write the open records request letter specific to every state's open records laws.
Donate: http://electionarchive.org/fairelection/donate.html
Sign up to obtain the data for your county or state: http://electionarchive.org/fairelection/statesubscribe.html
Help us complete open records requests letters for each state (yours): http://electionarchive.net/public/ucv_select_info.php
While I wish all the luck in the world to those who are attempting to get public exit polls (which we would incorporate into our election data archive) and election reform legislation passed in time for November, it remains true that the national election data archive is a tool which there is no question that we have the opportunity to build and use to ensure that correctly elected candidates are sworn into office. To make it happen in time for November, 2006, we need funding now. Just $4,000/month would do it!
Best Regards and Thanks again to all our donors who made it possible for us to attend the Montreal AAPOR conference and to Steve Freeman and Ron Baiman for volunteering for America and for doing such a great job.
Kathy Dopp
http://electionarchive.org
National Election Data Archive Dedicated to Accurately Counting Elections
rudkla - 22. Mai, 23:04
