 |
|
|
|
|
"Kerry-Bush 2004 Election Determined By The "Margin of Systemic Vote Fraud" Vancouver, B.C. (November 2, 2004 @ 9:07 PM PT) - The systematic gap in vote totals between exit polls which show Kerry leading, for example, by 2 or 3 points, followed by the "actual" vote totals, which show Bush winning by 3 or 4 points, is the actual "margin of systemic vote fraud" via Diebold chip or other systemic fraud. GW Bush's apparent electoral victory appears to be the result of "the margin of systematic vote fraud" rather than actual, physical vote totals. This is the first email which this reporter received today, from a knowledgeable source: ----- Original Message -----
thought i'd pass this on, don't know the reality of it. xa -------- Original Message --------
Subject: FW: FW: heads up
Hey all, just forwarding a message
sent to me
similar incident and that they are
looking into it.
The same result via "the margin of systematic vote fraud" may have occured occured in the 2002 mid-term U.S. elections, when the exit polls were "cancelled." There was a large "margin of systematic fraud" between the expected vote outcome and the actual vote outcome in that election, benefiting the party of GW Bush. Voter testimonials like this one, which document the basis for "the margin of systematic vote fraud" are not being reported over the mainstream media as of November 2, 2004 @ 9 PM PT. The mainstream media are not reporting the effects of the "margin of systemic vote fraud" in describing the outcomes of the 2004 U.S. Presidential election. By default or complicity, the mainstream media appear to bear responsibility for transmitting an incomplete picture of the basis of the apparent electoral vote margin of GW Bush. For
daily Updates, please visit:
Update: EcoNews Service analysis ["Kerry-Bush 2004 Election Determined By The "Margin of Systemic Vote Fraud"], published at 9:07 PM PT on Election Day, November 2, 2004, Now Confirmed! "Editor's Note | How could the exit polls in this year's presidential election have diverged so drastically from the results that election officials and the media announced? Professor Steven Freeman, a statistician at the University of Pennsylvania, offers a disturbing answer. Looking at the exit polls and announced results in Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania, he concludes that the odds against such an accidental discrepancy in all three states together was 250 million to one. "As much as we can say in social science that something is impossible, it is impossible that the discrepancies between predicted and actual vote counts in the three critical battleground states of the 2004 election could have been due to chance or random error." Read Dr. Freeman's well-reasoned, well-written argument, and make up your own mind. -- sw "The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy"
By Steven F. Freeman
http://truthout.org/unexplainedexitpoll.pdf
Related Issues: http://www.ecologynews.com/cuenews43.html
Links: Update: November 3, 2004 11:06 PM PT Wednesday, November 03,
2004 commentary:
Was the Ohio Election
Honest and Fair?
Surprising Pattern of
Florida's Election Results
Exit polls and ‘actual’
results don’t match; Evoting states show greater discrepancy
Diebold's Political Machine
Possible evidence of voter
fraud in Ohio
Copyright 2004-5
|