Reply With Quote
In other news, GEORGE BUSH STILL WON.
Yahoo NewsIn a stunning admission, an elections manager for NBC News said national news organizations overestimated President George W. Bush's support among Latino voters, downwardly revising its estimated support for President Bush to 40 percent from 44 percent among Hispanics, and increasing challenger John Kerry's support among Hispanics to 58 percent from 53 percent. The revision doubles Kerry's margin of victory among Hispanic voters from 9 to 18 percent. Ana Maria Arumi, the NBC elections manager also revised NBC's estimate for Hispanic support for Bush in Texas, revising a reported 18-point lead for Bush to a 2-point win for Kerry among Hispanics, a remarkable 20-point turnaround from figures reported on election night.
The NBC announcement came during a forum with the William C. Velasquez Ins ute's president, Antonio Gonzalez, and other Hispanic analysts at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., sponsored by Hispanic Link Newsletter and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.
Talk about too little, too late by NBC. Maybe they missed this report from the SA based Willie Valaquez Center
SignonSanDiego"We want to set the record straight," Antonio Gonzalez, president of the Willie C. Velazquez Ins ute, said yesterday. "I think it's good for Latinos to be able to leverage both parties, but that should be based on the facts."
He presented figures showing Bush received 34.2 percent of the Hispanic vote, while Sen. John Kerry received 64.6 percent.
So W lost every major demographic except caucasion men making more than $40,000 per year and still won? Can anyone say voter fraud?
In other news, GEORGE BUSH STILL WON.
At this point they came in sight of thirty or forty windmills that are on that plain.
"Fortune," said Don Quixote to Sancho Panza, "is arranging matters for us better than we could have hoped. Look there, friend Sancho Panza, where thirty or more monstrous giants rise up, all of whom I mean to engage in battle and slay, and with whose spoils we shall begin to make our fortunes."
"What giants?" said Sancho Panza.
"Those you see there," answered his master, "with the long arms, and some have them nearly several miles long."
"Look, your worship,'' said Sancho. "What we see there are not giants but windmills, and what seem to be their arms are the vanes that turned by the wind make the millstone go."
"It is easy to see," replied Don Quixote, "that you are not used to this business of adventures. Those are giants, and if you are afraid, away with you, while I engage them in fierce and unequal combat." "Fly not, cowards and vile beings," he shouted, "for a single knight attacks you."
A slight breeze at this moment sprang up, and the great vanes began to move.
With lance braced and covered by his shield, he charged and attacked the first mill that stood in front of him. But as he drove his lance into the sail, the wind whirled it around with such force that it broke the lance to pieces. The wind from the sail swept away with it horse and rider, and they were sent rolling over the plain, in sad condition indeed.
LOL... Clever way of wording it, but as with most of your interpretations, it's misleading and illogical. Bush won Caucasians AND Men AND people making more than $40,000. That's THREE demos. And each represents a substantial, if not a majority, portion of the population.So W lost every major demographic except caucasion men making more than $40,000 per year and still won? Can anyone say voter fraud?
- 58.5% make $35,000 or more
- 49.1% are male
- 75% are white
Good to see you're still fighting the fight Dan!
Does Dan remind anyone else of Neidermeyer in Animal House. I can just see him sitting around with his liberal buddies screaming "all is well! all is well!" as the election returns came in late that night.
Why am I not surprised that the Rethugs on this board enjoy being lied too? They do so enjoy Fox News.
Also, I guess the integrity of the Press means nothing to them. It's no wonder they salivated like starved dogs over what was left of Dan Rather's carcus after Rove pulled his chinanigans.
Thats a real knee slapper Dan! Que paso hombre?
Why am I not surprised Dan enjoys FEELING lied to?
It would be nice to see NBC's explanation of why their data was off, rather than having to rely on a self-congratulating Press Release from the William C. Velasquez Ins ute.
its not niedermeyer, its kevin bacon's character.
Doh! Sorry, it was late. Meant Chip Diller.
Still, Dan, I don't give a damn because I am smart enough to realize that polls/stats/surveys/etc. are inherently flawed and inaccurate.
Once you realize this you sleep a lot better at night.
Dan does not sleep at night. Thats when he spams the forum with his black helicopters.
Yeah, they are so 'inaccurate' that they are used to monitor the integrity of world-wide elections by the U.N. and other agencies. They are so 'inaccurate' that until W ran in 2000 they were always with the margin of error. They are so 'inaccurate' that they recently overturned the election in the Ukraine.Still, Dan, I don't give a damn because I am smart enough to realize that polls/stats/surveys/etc. are inherently flawed and inaccurate.
And to think we have to wait till the morning for these little bit of charm from Hookdem.Dan does not sleep at night. Thats when he spams the forum with his black helicopters.
Why in the do we have elections then? Why don't we just run voters through a drive through restuarant and ask them who they voted for? Let's just amend the fricken laws so we elect our officials through exit polls. Damnit! Dan you nit pick all of these results with blah blah about chads, and then computers, and now hackers. You think there is so much fraud and corruption at the polls, well what the do you think is going to happen OUTSIDE the polls where anybody can walk up and pretend they voted. Gee atleast it's a little difficult to throw votes at the actual polling places. How accurate do you think a phone survey is? I bet if you surveyed men in this forum 99% would say they're having sex regularly(+/-Dan). Is that the perfect results you're striving for?
Gee Dan! Thanks!!!!!!! I thought you were ignoring me for a while.And to think we have to wait till the morning for these little bit of charm from Hookdem.
Say what you will about exit polls, but as I have have said, they have had a long history of accuracy up until the 2000 Presidential election. Make of that what you will.Why in the do we have elections then? Why don't we just run voters through a drive through restuarant and ask them who they voted for? Let's just amend the fricken laws so we elect our officials through exit polls. Damnit! Dan you nit pick all of these results with blah blah about chads, and then computers, and now hackers. You think there is so much fraud and corruption at the polls, well what the do you think is going to happen OUTSIDE the polls where anybody can walk up and pretend they voted. Gee at least it's a little difficult to throw votes at the actual polling places. How accurate do you think a phone survey is? I bet if you surveyed men in this forum 99% would say they're having sex regularly(+/-Dan). Is that the perfect results you're striving for?
I prefer my elections 100% transparent. That means no paper-less ballots. All state central tabulators audited by independent, non-partisan accounting or law firms (over-looked by a bi-partisan congressional committee). No other firms, including the providers of balloting boxes, would have access to the machines within 30 days of a general election or for 30 day after. All priority software in ballot boxes would become open software, i.e. Redhat, so it can be checked for weaknesess and vulnerabilities. Enforce, and re-enforce laws already in the books about who can be at polling places and what conduct will not be tolerated. Precient chiefs in each district would make sure that paper ballots totals matched those reported by its machines to central tabulators before officially reporting it's numbers to the state. Hey, if the election takes three or four days for official totals, its still better than what we have now.
I don't think that this is asking much, huh?
Its amazing you will take exit polls over actual ballots.
Exit polls: small sample of voters
ballots: 100% of voters
Actually, I'm more of a popular-vote kinda guy. This is why it is sometimes hard for me to argue about fraud in Ohio, Penn, Florida, New Mexico, Colorado and every other state that has optical ballots when I'm lookin at W with a 3.5 million vote win in the election. Of course, he never would have had the chance to run because Gore would have won in 2000.Its amazing you will take exit polls over actual ballots.
No it's not too much to ask. But guess what? That's not how the system is set up. And guess what #2? Democrats are just as much a part of how it is setup as the Repubs. Your argument about exit polling and polling in general is REDICULOUS! They are guesses, samples, surveys, and not 100% accurate as the event they are meant to PREDICT! That being the ACTUAL election. So in 2008 your argument about polling is now mute since we now know they are not 100% accurate. Of course you will say there was fraud and they were right after all.
oh yeah lest we forget local and state goverments set the rules for elections in their states... doh!... you want to effect change in politics .. get involved in local politics...
nuff said....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
