Daily Kos :: Census Statistics Indicate Vote Count Was Significantly Off

Census Statistics Indicate Vote Count Was Significantly Off
by davidgmills

Fri May 27th, 2005 at 17:50:02 CDT

And if we didn't have enough statistics already:

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/voting/004986.html

Where did 3.4 million votes go?

If the census bureau's statistics can be trusted, this is just more evidence that the count was off.

The official tabulation on November 2, was 122.3 million voters.

The census bureau predicted post-election that 125.7 million people (thought they) had voted.

Why when we have so much evidence that the count was off and could have been easily manipulated by the corporate computers of Diebold and ES&S, which counted 80% of the vote, including 30% with no paper trail whatsoever, why are not more people questioning the validity of this election?

Diaries :: davidgmills's diary :: :: Trackback ::

A bit of background is in order here for the uninitiated. The exit polls predicted a Kerry win until Edison/Mytofsky, the exit poll consortium, in the early hours of November 3, 'conformed' the exit polls to match the purported tabulation. Until this time, Kerry was ahead by nearly 3% in the exit polls.

The official hypothesis Edison/Mytofsky gave for the discrepancy between the 'pre-conformed' exit polls and the official tabulation was that the exit polls must have been wrong because people who voted for Bush were reluctant to respond to exit pollsters and avoided them, thus giving Kerry an unwarranted lead in the exit polls.

The legitimacy of these so called 'reluctant Bush responders,' or 'rBr' as they are called on exit poll cites and blogs, and their effect on the outcome of the exit polls, has been the subject of much statistical criticism and some downright scorn as some refer to 'rBr' as a liepothesis not a hypothesis.

Now comes some post-election census data that is sure to fuel the fire and is further indicative that the 'un-conformed' exit polls were correct.

Some very pertinent stats from above census bureau cite:

Women Voters -- 67,269,000

Men Voters -- 58,485,000

Total -- 125,754,000

Women % of total -- 53.4%

Men % of total -- 46.6%

These statistics bode grim for the proponents of the 'rBr' hypothesis because 'rBr' requires a huge number of men as non-responders to have plausibility."

Daily Kos :: Census Statistics Indicate Vote Count Was Significantly Off:

Daily Kos :: Poll: Bush is out of touch

Poll: Bush is out of touch
by kos
Thu May 26th, 2005 at 11:18:06 CDT

It took people this long to figure it out?
Four months into his second term, President Bush is increasingly viewed as being out of touch with the American people, according to a CBS News poll.

Six in ten Americans say the president does not share their priorities, while just 34 percent say he does - the lowest numbers for Mr. Bush since the eve of his first inauguration. If there's any solace for Mr. Bush, it's that even fewer people, just 20 percent, say Congress shares their priorities.
The congressional numbers can't be solace to Bush, since it means his congressional majorities are in serious jeopardy. And a Democratic-led chamber would be the final nail on the Bush coffin. Just think 'subpoena power'.

Full poll results are here. While Bush's approval/disapproval ratings have improved slightly from last month, the numbers are still bleak. Only 26 percent approve of Bush's handling of social security -- a reminder to straying Democrats to stay unified on the issue. People are increasingly disattisfied with war progress - 41 percent think it's going well, compared to 57 percent who think it's going poorly (it was 48/50 last month). And only 34 percent think the country is headed in the right direction.

Update: New Q-Poll as well. They've got Bush's approval/disapproval at 44/50. "

Daily Kos :: Poll: Bush is out of touch: "

Daily Kos :: Embryo Adoption = White Baby Production

I didn't want to believe in this inflamatory title but when I found out about the "snowflake" adoption program.... A white man's jerk off byproduct is more worthy of adoption than a living breathing (and suffering in a foster home) kid ?!?!?


Embryo Adoption = White Baby Production
by KenD

Wed May 25th, 2005 at 06:53:37 CDT

As a father of an adopted African-American son, I was startled to see the picture this morning of President Bush using a white baby that was produced was embryo adoption as a prop to stop stem cell research that can save lives.

These children that were exploited as props for yesterday's event were produced by "The Snowflakes Program" a program of "Nightlight Christian Adoptions."
TWENTY ONE OF OUR SNOWFLAKES CHILDREN JOINED HIM IN ORDER TO PUT A FACE TO THESE EMBRYOS UNDER DISCUSSION.

To put a white face that is.

The Religious right and President Bush have chosen to ignore not only those who suffer from diseases that might be cured by stem cell research, but also the millions of living children without families or homes.

Diaries :: KenD's diary :: :: Trackback ::

There is only one possible reason why someone would produce these children for the purpose of adoption - to produce white ("snowflake") babies.

There are plenty of children who need homes, but with embryo adoption the parents get a designer baby. The majority of the orphans in the US and in the world that need homes are not white babies, but African-American, African (literally millions due to the AIDS crisis), Hispanic, mix-raced, etc..

Embryo adoption follows in the tradition of eugenics - trying to manipulate the next generation of the human species through letting the living die while designing adopted children.

Daily Kos :: Embryo Adoption = White Baby Production

Daily Kos :: White House Retracts Newsweek Accusations

White House Retracts Newsweek Accusations
by Louise at Kos

Tue May 24th, 2005 at 23:09:59 CDT

In yesterday's presser with Karzai, McClellan had the following exchange:

Q: One other question. Karzai was quite definite in saying that he didn't believe that the violence in Afghanistan was directly tied to the Newsweek article about Koran desecration. Yet, from this podium, you have made that link. So --

McCLELLAN: Actually, I don't think you're actually characterizing what was said accurately.

So far, the response to this has been: Look! McClellan lied to the press! But this exchange shows exactly how badly the Bush facade is slipping.

Diaries :: Louise's diary :: :: Trackback ::

From E&P:

At a White House press briefing Monday, Press Secretary Scott McClellan, pressed by reporters and with Afghan President Karzai in disagreement, retreated on claims that Newsweek's retracted story on Koran abuse cost lives in Afghanistan.

He also claimed that he had never said it did, even though a check of transcripts disputes that. On May 16, for example, he said, "people have lost their lives." On May 17, he said, "People did lose their lives," and, "People lost their lives" due to the Newsweek report.

McClellan also stated, "As I said last week, and as President Karzai said today, and as General Myers had said previously, the protest may well have been pre-staged."

In other words, Scott, and the White House, have had to back down on their charges against Newsweek because the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, as well as the Afghani President, have stated that the charges are essentially wrong. The White House knew that the charges were lies, but made them anyway.

And then yesterday, the White House again lies to the very same people - the press corps - that it had originally lied to. The only response that McClellan can make is simply to repeatedly deny that he ever said that Newsweek was responsible for deaths. But the people that he is making these denials to know exactly what he is doing - lying directly. And he knows that they know.

We aren't talking about a lie that was about statements made a year or two ago - we are talking about about statements that were made last week.

Facts on the ground are so bad that the Bush administration is now forced to utter lies that are patently obvious on their face. There are two possibilities for why they would do this. Either they know that no one will believe them, but have no other alternative but to muddle ahead with their SOP. or they themselves believe that they can fool the public, in which case they are delusional and the majority of the public will see it.

Either way, there is no plausible facade of explanations for them to hide behind anymore. And apparently the press is beginning to realize that the cover stories are simply not going to work.

Daily Kos :: White House Retracts Newsweek Accusations