--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gibson Jonathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Charlie, > I've read over RFK's piece in Rolling Stone, " Was the 2004 > Election Stolen?" > http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/ > was_the_2004_election_stolen and it seems pretty damning against > an honest election this last go around.
Kennedy's article has been pretty thoroughly debunked: http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2006/06/is_rfk_jr_right.html Well, let me clarify that - RFK is hardly alone in pointing out that ou electoral system in this country is broken, that it is an embarassment to democracy, and incredibly poorly run. (As an aside, is there a non-partisan organization tha has been set up to lobby for electoral reform?) With that being said, Kennedy's assertion that the available evidence effectively proves the existence of pro-Republican voter fraud in 2004 is not supported by the evidence. I strongly encourage reading the full multi-part article from Mystery Pollster (which is one of the best blogs out there), but for those who don't, in a nutshell here is the scoop: 1) There is much past evidence of exit polls favoring Democrats, and favoring supporters who were much more "fired up" about their candidate. 2) Statistical error is hardly the only source of error in an exit poll. In many cases, exit pollsters are unable to stand as close as desirable to a polling place's exit. Exit pollsters are often inexperienced, they may accept volunteers (which is inapprorpiate), or may otherwise fail to conduct a random sample. In addition, non-response error in exit polls may be very significant. JDG _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
