Slashdot Mirror
Berkeley Researchers Analyze Florida Voting Patterns
empraptor writes "Researchers at UC Berkeley have crunched numbers and determined that 130,000-260,000 excess votes went to Bush in Florida. They have held a conference and posted their findings online. You can find articles on their research from CNet, Wired News, and many other sources. While the research used statistical analysis based on past elections and demographics, how else do you verify that a paperless voting system is working properly?"
What the hell? UC Berkeley publishs papers with typos in it?
In our research we used ordinary least squares and more sophisticated linear modeling approaches to assess the statistical properties of e-voting. In particular we develop models that predict both the percentage of the votes registered for the incumbent - President Bush - and the amount that percentage changed between 2000 and 2004.
English majors these guys are not!
What is your penile percentile?
This was the highest turnout election in decades, and contrary to Democratic expectations (one might almost consider it an article of faith) the increase didn't favor them. This, according to exit polls.
Something is funny about this last election no matter how you slice it.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Nothing, that's what. The whole premise has holes you could drive a truck through. If statistics are so good at measuring voter sentiment, then why do we bother having elections?
Hint: Because they aren't effective!. They don't capture voter sentiment and they don't explain why people voted as they did. They're just old numbers rehashed.
It's a bunch of partisan bullshit from one of the most left-wing schools in the country. They can't figure out why less people in Florida voted for Kerry than voted for Al Gore. Could it have something to do with his attitude? Naah. It's not like it's a Southern state or anything.
I hope they like being marginalized, because that is what is about to happen.
It's not like the lameass attempt to delegitimatize the President is not clearly seen. This isn't 2000. Dig your hole again if you wish...i'll be happy to win another election or three on the back of this idiocy.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Is this just an attempt to ride on the coat tails of the problems in Florida in the last election? (Which by the way were blown WAY out of proportion by the media. Other states had similar voting issues in 2000, but since Florida was the only state that had enough electoral votes to make a difference, the entire state became an election time whipping boy.) Bush clearly won Florida this time around. Ohio was a much closer call.
I didn't mention it in my original message, but my favorite conspiracy theory is that John Kerry's campaign probably decided that even though there was widespread fraud and that Bush likely "stole" the election with e-voting machines, he decided that it was "best for the country" to concede, because any accusations of fraud wouldn't be met very kindly by Bush supporters, and those in power in the government.
Or, an alternate version: the Democrats conceded even though Bush stole the election so that Hillary (and Bill) could run in 2008.
The journalists all said they'd kill for a juicy election fraud story, but there was none to be found...not even one that might exist but have no "proof".
My favorite retort for this one is that all of the corporate media (i.e., all mainstream newspapers, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, FNC, etc.) are all in Bush's "pocket", and that even though there is widespread proof of election fraud, the corporate press has ordered all of its staff to "lock the story down" and not speak of it further. (Of course, Common Dreams, dailykos, truthout, etc., have the "real" story.)
The thing about conspiracy theories is that their tautologies: everything can be neatly explained away, no matter how absurd it is, and you can still believe what you want to believe.
The election was not stolen. Bush won. (I didn't vote for Bush.) Get over it.
And I voted for Kerry. I didn't like him, I just wanted to have an orange Frankenstein monster in the White House, and I really really really wanted to see the "sensitive" war on terror. If I have any real disappointment, it's that. And I've got my my career and assets so freaking Administration-Proofed at this point that I could care less about the guy's economic delusions.
But the Bush win is working out better. The whiney little pussy crybabies of the Blue Realm are priceless theater. God, I love real world political drama queens! Look at Vincient D'Onofrio passing out from stress. It's classic. And now we have Democrats and their supporters actively tossing rude insults at anyone who deviated from their preeeccciioussssssss ideology by even a couple needle ticks. Hey, great strategy guys! Maybe if you try hard enough, you can marginalize yourself right out of physical corporeality! Go team Democrat! I'll supply the Bush action figures upon which you can so bravely trod. Maybe I can make a killing selling "Bush voters are poopieheads" shirts.
Heh heh heh. Dumbasses. :-)
As for this "number crunching" study, we learned all about this in Six Sigma Green Belt training. It's bullshit. Hey, I have a Green Belt. Do not question me.
--- Ban humanity.
That depends on what that "criticism" is and the effect it has.
There has been a lot of stuff going on that has been labelled "criticism" and thus "patriotic". Such as, Kerry meeting in Paris with representatives of the Hanoi government, while he was still in the military. That's not "criticism", that's treason. Such as, Kerry's famous testimony in front of Congress in which he branded every soldier as a rapist and thug. That's not criticism, that's lying.
Such as, the city councils of a number of cities meddling in foreign policy before the start of the war by passing "no war" resolutions, which cut the legs out from under the authorized foreign policy official (Pres. Bush). These resolutions were reported heavily on Iraqi TV, controlled by Sadam, to help him keep control prior to the start of the war.
Let's be blunt: this "news" dissuaded his own people from acting against him and supported the terrorists, because it made the US look weak and unwilling to act. That's not patriotic, that's pathetic. If it allowed Sadam to stay in power longer, then it cost lives; something that these meddling city councils will certainly not accept responsibility for. That meddling certainly made the threat of war less usefull as a negotiation tool -- and the same people who made negotiation harder are the ones who are whining that negotiation should have been tried!
If people would stop beeing greedy, self-serving, corrupt, bribe-taking ballot-stuffing country-hating FUCKS, you wouldn't have these problems. Of course, that's just my idea. It could work. We'll never know.
I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
Stop arguing about conspiracy theory. It is unlikely that there is a conspiracy large enough to mess with hundreds of thousands of voting machines around the country, or that they would spend that much time if they wanted to. Yes, there are problems. No, they are most likley not someone out to screw us all. The odds are that the machines are just poorly made, but that does not mean that someone is hacking the system.
All your
'My Pet Goat', Flights of Saudis, Bin Laden not caught and 'not a priority', Supreme Court in Florida 2000, Diebold campaign donations/memos, leaked source code, paperless machines with no backup, WMD, anthrax, terror level = 'elevated'. Shunning of 'Unpatriotic' reporters, the PATRIOT act, the 'war president' who failed military obligations vs. a 'weak on terrorisim' multi-decorated veteran. Lower taxes for the wealthy, social programs cut, insane spending levels on war, no economic plan in sight.
Lies, lies, lies, lies, lies.
What, exactly, will be the straw that breaks the camels back? Stop gazing lovingly at your constitution and have another fucking revolution already.
"A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
And I could explain about Tommy losing, but clearly it would be lost on most folks here.