TruthIsAll
12-03-2009, 09:37 PM
A Conversation about False Recall
Analyst
I see that you are still using False Recall to explain the 2004 Final National Exit Poll 43/37% returning Bush/Gore voter mix as well as the 2008 Final 46/37% returning Bush/Kerry mix. You have agreed that the mixes are mathematically impossible. They imply millions more returning Bush voters than were alive in 2004 and 2008.
Naysayer
Correct. They cannot be literally true. But False Recall on the part of returning Gore and Kerry voters explains the mix. Returning voters are more inclined to misreport their past vote in favor of the previous winner – Bush in both cases.
Analyst
Even if Bush had 48% approval in 2004 and 22% in 2008?
Naysayer
Yes. That is what NES surveys have consistently shown.
Analyst
You implied that the weights (and vote shares) are the results of actual samples, including those returning Gore and Kerry voters who misreported their vote at an 8% higher net rate than returning Bush voters.
Naysayer
That is correct. The Final NEP returning voter mix and corresponding vote shares are based on actual sampled results.
Analyst
Let’s compare the preliminary 12:22am NEP (13047 respondents) to the Final (13660 respondents), assuming that they were based on actual sample results. Kerry won the preliminary by 51-48%. Bush won the Final by 51-48%.
Naysayer
Fair enough.
Analyst
You are aware that only 3168 respondents were asked how they voted in 2000 but that all 13047 were asked whom they just voted for - and Kerry won the total sample by 51-48%? How do you explain that?
Naysayer
The exit poll was not complete at 12:22am. The Final indicated Bush won by 51-48%.
Analyst
But there were only 613 additional respondents after 12:22am. It is mathematically impossible for the mix to change from 41/39 to 43/37 with just a 4.6% increase in respondents. It was also impossible that Kerry’s share of female voters could decline from 54% to 51%.
Naysayer
That is not the way to look at it.
Analyst
Why not?
Naysayer
The exit pollsters had to re-adjust the mix and vote shares based on voter turnout, among other things.
Analyst
So you are now saying that the NEP was adjusted to force a match to the incoming vote count.
Naysayer
That is correct. It's SOP.
Analyst
But you previously stated that the Final 43/37% Bush/Gore returning voter mix was a sampled result, even though Gore voters misstated their vote and told the pollsters that they voted for Bush in 2000. You have contradicted yourself. You now agree that the pollsters forced the Final National Exit Poll to match the recorded vote.
Naysayer
You just don’t get it, do you? You have never contradicted the NES study which indicates that voters misreport their past vote.
Analyst
You are changing the subject. You have just conceded that the 43/37 mix was not a sample; that it was an artifice to match the Final NEP to the recorded vote - along with implausible increases in Bush shares of returning and new voters. When are you going to give up the false recall canard?
Naysayer
And when are you going to stop trying to convince everyone that Kerry won the election and that the early exit polls were correct? You are setting back the cause of election reform. Your work is an embarrassment. That’s why I have been debunking your posts since 2005. It's my job to expose your crappy analysis.
Analyst
Your job? I see. But it's not just my "crappy" analysis that you find fault with. You have also tried to debunk the analysis of scores of researchers who have determined that the election was stolen. But you agree with Farhad Manjoo of Salon, who tried to debunk the RFK Jr. Rolling Stone article. "Was the 2004 Election Stolen"?
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen/print
RFK presented powerful evidence that Ohio was stolen - along with a number of other key battleground states. Farhad claimed authoritatively that the election was NOT stolen. If only he knew what he was talking about. His "analysis" was full of factual errors which only betrayed his ignorance. And you have defended it. It's almost as if he relied on your input in writing that hit piece.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/index.html
Does it even matter what the voters said about their past vote?
We know the recorded Gore and Bush vote. We know that 5% of Election 2000 voters passed on before the 2004 election. Therefore, the maximum number of returning Bush voters was 48 million – assuming 100% of LIVING Bush 2000 voters turned out in 2004. The maximum returning Bush 2000 voter share of the 122 million recorded in 2004 was 39.2% (48/122).
So why do we even care what returning voters said about their past vote? We only want to know how they voted in 2004. We can test different turnout scenarios. We can even assume 98% returning Bush voter turnout and 90% Gore turnout. Kerry still wins by 7 million votes assuming 12:22am vote shares. Assuming equal 98% turnout, he wins by 10 million.
You do realize that assuming a feasible turnout of returning voters, the Final NEP Bush vote shares which were already forced to match the recorded vote need to be increased to ridiculous levels.
New voters: from 41% at 1222am to 46% (2% MoE).
Bush voters: from 90% to 92% (1% MoE).
Gore voters from 8% to 15% (1% MoE).
So which argument are you making: MASSIVE GORE DEFECTION or GORE VOTER FALSE RECALL?
1) GORE DEFECTION: You require IMPLAUSIBLE Bush vote shares (far beyond the MoE) applied to a FEASIBLE return voter mix. This means that you must also believe that at 12:22am (13047) and in the Final (13660) NEP, respondents must have MISREPORTED their 2004 vote when they said they voted for Kerry.
2) FALSE RECALL: Returning GORE voters MISREPORTED their PAST VOTE when they said that they voted for Bush. Yet they told the TRUTH about their 2004 vote.
You have also agreed that the 43/37% mix is LITERALLY MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE based on the following FACTS:
a) For returning Bush voters to comprise 43% of the 122 million who voted in 2004 meant there was a MINIMUM of 4.6 million PHANTOM returning Bush voters.
b) The change in the returning Bush/Gore voter mix from 41/39% at 12:22am to 43/37% in the Final was also MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE since 13047 (95.5%) of the 13660 respondents were already counted at 12:22am. Again, this is based on the apparent premise that the returning voter mix was based on an actual SAMPLE of the 3168 who were asked who they voted for in 2000. It's the basis of your FALSE RECALL argument You ignore the fact that the exit pollsters themselves state that it is Standard Operating Procedure to FORCE the exit poll to MATCH the recorded vote. It was also MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE that Kerry's share of FEMALES could decline from 54% at 12:22am to 51% in the Final.
And one final point needs to be stated. There were nearly 6 million uncounted votes in 2000 and more than 4 million in 2004. Gore and Kerry had 70-80% of them. The NES studies you constantly refer to are based on the bogus RECORDED vote - which does NOT include UNCOUNTED votes. When total votes CAST is used, the average NES response matches the TRUE vote within 1% over the past 11 elections
It appears that False Recall is your primary canard, since that is the one that you constantly refer to. Perhaps it's easier to sell that myth than the ridiculous Gore defection rates that would be required to match the vote assuming equal turnout. But you continue to promote both myths. You switch from one to the other depending on which is contextually most appropriate for misleading your diminishing audience.
Naysayer
Right. See you in 2010 when I will once again kick your ass.
Analyst
I see that you are still using False Recall to explain the 2004 Final National Exit Poll 43/37% returning Bush/Gore voter mix as well as the 2008 Final 46/37% returning Bush/Kerry mix. You have agreed that the mixes are mathematically impossible. They imply millions more returning Bush voters than were alive in 2004 and 2008.
Naysayer
Correct. They cannot be literally true. But False Recall on the part of returning Gore and Kerry voters explains the mix. Returning voters are more inclined to misreport their past vote in favor of the previous winner – Bush in both cases.
Analyst
Even if Bush had 48% approval in 2004 and 22% in 2008?
Naysayer
Yes. That is what NES surveys have consistently shown.
Analyst
You implied that the weights (and vote shares) are the results of actual samples, including those returning Gore and Kerry voters who misreported their vote at an 8% higher net rate than returning Bush voters.
Naysayer
That is correct. The Final NEP returning voter mix and corresponding vote shares are based on actual sampled results.
Analyst
Let’s compare the preliminary 12:22am NEP (13047 respondents) to the Final (13660 respondents), assuming that they were based on actual sample results. Kerry won the preliminary by 51-48%. Bush won the Final by 51-48%.
Naysayer
Fair enough.
Analyst
You are aware that only 3168 respondents were asked how they voted in 2000 but that all 13047 were asked whom they just voted for - and Kerry won the total sample by 51-48%? How do you explain that?
Naysayer
The exit poll was not complete at 12:22am. The Final indicated Bush won by 51-48%.
Analyst
But there were only 613 additional respondents after 12:22am. It is mathematically impossible for the mix to change from 41/39 to 43/37 with just a 4.6% increase in respondents. It was also impossible that Kerry’s share of female voters could decline from 54% to 51%.
Naysayer
That is not the way to look at it.
Analyst
Why not?
Naysayer
The exit pollsters had to re-adjust the mix and vote shares based on voter turnout, among other things.
Analyst
So you are now saying that the NEP was adjusted to force a match to the incoming vote count.
Naysayer
That is correct. It's SOP.
Analyst
But you previously stated that the Final 43/37% Bush/Gore returning voter mix was a sampled result, even though Gore voters misstated their vote and told the pollsters that they voted for Bush in 2000. You have contradicted yourself. You now agree that the pollsters forced the Final National Exit Poll to match the recorded vote.
Naysayer
You just don’t get it, do you? You have never contradicted the NES study which indicates that voters misreport their past vote.
Analyst
You are changing the subject. You have just conceded that the 43/37 mix was not a sample; that it was an artifice to match the Final NEP to the recorded vote - along with implausible increases in Bush shares of returning and new voters. When are you going to give up the false recall canard?
Naysayer
And when are you going to stop trying to convince everyone that Kerry won the election and that the early exit polls were correct? You are setting back the cause of election reform. Your work is an embarrassment. That’s why I have been debunking your posts since 2005. It's my job to expose your crappy analysis.
Analyst
Your job? I see. But it's not just my "crappy" analysis that you find fault with. You have also tried to debunk the analysis of scores of researchers who have determined that the election was stolen. But you agree with Farhad Manjoo of Salon, who tried to debunk the RFK Jr. Rolling Stone article. "Was the 2004 Election Stolen"?
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen/print
RFK presented powerful evidence that Ohio was stolen - along with a number of other key battleground states. Farhad claimed authoritatively that the election was NOT stolen. If only he knew what he was talking about. His "analysis" was full of factual errors which only betrayed his ignorance. And you have defended it. It's almost as if he relied on your input in writing that hit piece.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/index.html
Does it even matter what the voters said about their past vote?
We know the recorded Gore and Bush vote. We know that 5% of Election 2000 voters passed on before the 2004 election. Therefore, the maximum number of returning Bush voters was 48 million – assuming 100% of LIVING Bush 2000 voters turned out in 2004. The maximum returning Bush 2000 voter share of the 122 million recorded in 2004 was 39.2% (48/122).
So why do we even care what returning voters said about their past vote? We only want to know how they voted in 2004. We can test different turnout scenarios. We can even assume 98% returning Bush voter turnout and 90% Gore turnout. Kerry still wins by 7 million votes assuming 12:22am vote shares. Assuming equal 98% turnout, he wins by 10 million.
You do realize that assuming a feasible turnout of returning voters, the Final NEP Bush vote shares which were already forced to match the recorded vote need to be increased to ridiculous levels.
New voters: from 41% at 1222am to 46% (2% MoE).
Bush voters: from 90% to 92% (1% MoE).
Gore voters from 8% to 15% (1% MoE).
So which argument are you making: MASSIVE GORE DEFECTION or GORE VOTER FALSE RECALL?
1) GORE DEFECTION: You require IMPLAUSIBLE Bush vote shares (far beyond the MoE) applied to a FEASIBLE return voter mix. This means that you must also believe that at 12:22am (13047) and in the Final (13660) NEP, respondents must have MISREPORTED their 2004 vote when they said they voted for Kerry.
2) FALSE RECALL: Returning GORE voters MISREPORTED their PAST VOTE when they said that they voted for Bush. Yet they told the TRUTH about their 2004 vote.
You have also agreed that the 43/37% mix is LITERALLY MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE based on the following FACTS:
a) For returning Bush voters to comprise 43% of the 122 million who voted in 2004 meant there was a MINIMUM of 4.6 million PHANTOM returning Bush voters.
b) The change in the returning Bush/Gore voter mix from 41/39% at 12:22am to 43/37% in the Final was also MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE since 13047 (95.5%) of the 13660 respondents were already counted at 12:22am. Again, this is based on the apparent premise that the returning voter mix was based on an actual SAMPLE of the 3168 who were asked who they voted for in 2000. It's the basis of your FALSE RECALL argument You ignore the fact that the exit pollsters themselves state that it is Standard Operating Procedure to FORCE the exit poll to MATCH the recorded vote. It was also MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE that Kerry's share of FEMALES could decline from 54% at 12:22am to 51% in the Final.
And one final point needs to be stated. There were nearly 6 million uncounted votes in 2000 and more than 4 million in 2004. Gore and Kerry had 70-80% of them. The NES studies you constantly refer to are based on the bogus RECORDED vote - which does NOT include UNCOUNTED votes. When total votes CAST is used, the average NES response matches the TRUE vote within 1% over the past 11 elections
It appears that False Recall is your primary canard, since that is the one that you constantly refer to. Perhaps it's easier to sell that myth than the ridiculous Gore defection rates that would be required to match the vote assuming equal turnout. But you continue to promote both myths. You switch from one to the other depending on which is contextually most appropriate for misleading your diminishing audience.
Naysayer
Right. See you in 2010 when I will once again kick your ass.