Obama's chances of winning!

[bk1983]

Brian Adams, a mathematics and computer science professor at Franklin & Marshall College, reports that there's a 99.98% chance that Sen. Barack Obama will win the presidential election on Tuesday.
Adams has developed a simulation model that involves running 50 million simulated state-by-state races, using the late-October poll results for each state. He ran his simulation 50 million times to allow him to calculate all the different combinations of electoral votes that might result, even long shots. While the number of possible outcomes is very large, the result is always the same. Obama receives 270 or more electoral votes 99.98% of the time. Using intervals of electoral vote results, there is a 95 percent chance that the outcome will have Obama winning between 303 and 381 electoral votes.

Simulation Shows Obama Will Win -- Political Wire

FiveThirtyEight.com: Electoral Projections Done Right believes Obama has a slightly lower chance around 94% chance of winning. Either way, not good news for you Obama haters.

 

[Modbert]

Brian Adams, a mathematics and computer science professor at Franklin & Marshall College, reports that there's a 99.98% chance that Sen. Barack Obama will win the presidential election on Tuesday.
Adams has developed a simulation model that involves running 50 million simulated state-by-state races, using the late-October poll results for each state. He ran his simulation 50 million times to allow him to calculate all the different combinations of electoral votes that might result, even long shots. While the number of possible outcomes is very large, the result is always the same. Obama receives 270 or more electoral votes 99.98% of the time. Using intervals of electoral vote results, there is a 95 percent chance that the outcome will have Obama winning between 303 and 381 electoral votes.

Simulation Shows Obama Will Win -- Political Wire

FiveThirtyEight.com: Electoral Projections Done Right believes Obama has a slightly lower chance around 94% chance of winning. Either way, not good news for you Obama haters.

That's if every vote counts. However, it won't.

 

[bk1983]

That's if every vote counts. However, it won't.

What are you insinuating?

 

[Caligirl]

Electronic vote stealing, silly.

 

[bk1983]

Electronic vote stealing, silly.

Anything's possible, but electronic vote stealing to give McCain a win is even lower then the 6% chance fivethiryeight gives him.

 

[DavidS]

He will only win if every single one of us go out on Tuesday and do three things:

VOTE! VOTE! VOTE!

 

[Caligirl]

In 2004, the odds of the tallied results actually having occured (Bush winning 2004 legitimately, no electronic vote tampering) was something like 1 in 30,000.

In other words, Diebold delivered the election.

Start here for all the linked references:

Evidence of Electoral Fraud in the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election: A Reading List

THere is no reason to think that there is not a fix this time as well. No reason at all. If the public swallows a 1 in 30,000 chance they'll swallow about anything. It'll be called "Bradley effect."

 

[dilloduck]

In 2004, the odds of the tallied results actually having occured (Bush winning 2004 legitimately, no electronic vote tampering) was something like 1 in 30,000.

In other words, Diebold delivered the election.

Start here for all the linked references:

Evidence of Electoral Fraud in the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election: A Reading List

THere is no reason to think that there is not a fix this time as well. No reason at all. If the public swallows a 1 in 30,000 chance they'll swallow about anything. It'll be called "Bradley effect."

And the Democratic leadership just sits on their hands and watch ? CMON.

 

[Caligirl]

Well, on Maddow two nights ago a Florida Congresswoman said that revoking HAVA (or retooling it to make it work) was high on the agenda for the next congress.

We'll see.

Since they can't even get their act together on something trivial like cafe standards, I don't think being unable to fix vote machines is proof that there isn't fraud, or proof that the dems are in on it. it's just proof they haven't fixed it yet.

If dem pres with a dem congress doesn't adress it, I'll view it differently.

 

[bk1983]

In 2004, the odds of the tallied results actually having occured (Bush winning 2004 legitimately, no electronic vote tampering) was something like 1 in 30,000.

In other words, Diebold delivered the election.

Start here for all the linked references:

Evidence of Electoral Fraud in the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election: A Reading List

THere is no reason to think that there is not a fix this time as well. No reason at all. If the public swallows a 1 in 30,000 chance they'll swallow about anything. It'll be called "Bradley effect."

So was the polling results fixed? The last polls before the election showed Bush up an average of 2 points. He won by 2.5 points, reallly close to public opinion prior to the vote. Democrat party is full of lawyers, the voting locations this year will have an infantry of lawyers with a keen eye on whats going on. Kerry a fine senator was to slow to respond to the gop attack party. He was painted as flip flopping liberal and the public bought it. Simply put Bush campaign outperformed the Kerry campaign. Kerry lost fair and square/ 2004 and 2008 are not anything alike, the electoral map is completely different and favorable to democrats.

 

[dilloduck]

Well, on Maddow two nights ago a Florida Congresswoman said that revoking HAVA (or retooling it to make it work) was high on the agenda for the next congress.

We'll see.

Since they can't even get their act together on something trivial like cafe standards, I don't think being unable to fix vote machines is proof that there isn't fraud, or proof that the dems are in on it. it's just proof they haven't fixed it yet.

If dem pres with a dem congress doesn't adress it, I'll view it differently.

It's been 8 years now that we have heard this complaint--8 fricken years !

 

[Missourian]

He will only win if every single one of us go out on Tuesday and do three things:

VOTE! VOTE! VOTE!

Yeah...vote three times each and Obama's sure to win. Do you work for ACORN ?

 

[Mad Scientist]

Rigged voting machines, grassy knoll, UFO's, Loch Ness Monster, remote viewing.
What is it about you liberals that drives you away from reality?

 

[Caligirl]

So was the polling results fixed? The last polls before the election showed Bush up an average of 2 points. He won by 2.5 points, reallly close to public opinion prior to the vote. Democrat party is full of lawyers, the voting locations this year will have an infantry of lawyers with a keen eye on whats going on. Kerry a fine senator was to slow to respond to the gop attack party. He was painted as flip flopping liberal and the public bought it. Simply put Bush campaign outperformed the Kerry campaign. Kerry lost fair and square/ 2004 and 2008 are not anything alike, the electoral map is completely different and favorable to democrats.

Nah, what was weird was stuff like all the machine flips favoring Bush and ballots that were dem all down ticket except for Pres, and glitches occuring way disproportionately in swing states, and memos from the CEOs and whisteblowers and proven hacks and machine sleepovers and hotel minibar keys opening the machines and huge unexplained losses of democratic votes and the Government Accountability Office finding that the machines are seriously flawed and well you get the idea.

It is technically possible that Bush won legitimately, but the odds of everything that happened, happening by chance was something like 1 in 30,000.

Ex:

Among other things, the GAO confirms that:

1. Some electronic voting machines "did not encrypt cast ballots or system audit logs, and it was possible to alter both without being detected." In other words, the GAO now confirms that electronic voting machines provided an open door to flip an entire vote count. More than 800,000 votes were cast in Ohio on electronic voting machines, some seven times Bush's official margin of victory.

2. "It was possible to alter the files that define how a ballot looks and works so that the votes for one candidate could be recorded for a different candidate." Numerous sworn statements and affidavits assert that this did happen in Ohio 2004.

3. "Vendors installed uncertified versions of voting system software at the local level." 3. Falsifying election results without leaving any evidence of such an action by using altered memory cards can easily be done, according to the GAO.

4. The GAO also confirms that access to the voting network was easily compromised because not all digital recording electronic voting systems (DREs) had supervisory functions password-protected, so access to one machine provided access to the whole network. This critical finding confirms that rigging the 2004 vote did not require a "widespread conspiracy" but rather the cooperation of a very small number of operatives with the power to tap into the networked machines and thus change large numbers of votes at will. With 800,000 votes cast on electronic machines in Ohio, flipping the number needed to give Bush 118,775 could be easily done by just one programmer.

5. Access to the voting network was also compromised by repeated use of the same user IDs combined with easily guessed passwords. So even relatively amateur hackers could have gained access to and altered the Ohio vote tallies.

6. The locks protecting access to the system were easily picked and keys were simple to copy, meaning, again, getting into the system was an easy matter.

7. One DRE model was shown to have been networked in such a rudimentary fashion that a power failure on one machine would cause the entire network to fail, re-emphasizing the fragility of the system on which the Presidency of the United States was decided.

8. GAO identified further problems with the security protocols and background screening practices for vendor personnel, confirming still more easy access to the system.

In essence, the GAO study makes it clear that no bank, grocery store or mom & pop chop shop would dare operate its business on a computer system as flimsy, fragile and easily manipulated as the one on which the 2004 election turned.

The GAO findings are particularly damning when set in the context of an election run in Ohio by a Secretary of State simultaneously working as co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign. Far from what election theft skeptics have long asserted, the GAO findings confirm that the electronic network on which 800,000 Ohio votes were cast was vulnerable enough to allow a a tiny handful of operatives -- or less -- to turn the whole vote count using personal computers operating on relatively simple software.

The GAO documentation flows alongside other crucial realities surrounding the 2004 vote count. For example:


The exit polls showed Kerry winning in Ohio, until an unexplained last minute shift gave the election to Bush. Similar definitive shifts also occurred in Iowa, Nevada and New Mexico, a virtual statistical impossibility.

A few weeks prior to the election, an unauthorized former ES&S voting machine company employee, was caught on the ballot-making machine in Auglaize County

Election officials in Mahoning County now concede that at least 18 machines visibly transferred votes for Kerry to Bush. Voters who pushed Kerry's name saw Bush's name light up, again and again, all day long. Officials claim the problems were quickly solved, but sworn statements and affidavits say otherwise. They confirm similar problems in Franklin County (Columbus). Kerry's margins in both counties were suspiciously low.

A voting machine in Mahoning County recorded a negative 25 million votes for Kerry. The problem was allegedly fixed.

In Gahanna Ward 1B, at a fundamentalist church, a so-called "electronic transfer glitch" gave Bush nearly 4000 extra votes when only 638 people voted at that polling place. The tally was allegedly corrected, but remains infamous as the "loaves and fishes" vote count.

In Franklin County, dozens of voters swore under oath that their vote for Kerry faded away on the DRE without a paper trail.

In Miami County, at 1:43am after Election Day, with the county's central tabulator reporting 100% of the vote - 19,000 more votes mysteriously arrived; 13,000 were for Bush at the same percentage as prior to the additional votes, a virtual statistical impossibility.

In Cleveland, large, entirely implausible vote totals turned up for obscure third party candidates in traditional Democratic African-American wards. Vote counts in neighboring wards showed virtually no votes for those candidates, with 90% going instead for Kerry.

Prior to one of Blackwell's illegitimate "show recounts," technicians from Triad voting machine company showed up unannounced at the Hocking County Board of Elections and removed the computer hard drive.

In response to official information requests, Shelby and other counties admit to having discarded key records and equipment before any recount could take place.

In a conference call with Rev. Jackson, Attorney Cliff Arnebeck, Attorney Bob Fitrakis and others, John Kerry confirmed that he lost every precinct in New Mexico that had a touchscreen voting machine. The losses had no correlation with ethnicity, social class or traditional party affiliation---only with the fact that touchscreen machines were used.

In a public letter, Rep. Conyers has stated that "by and large, when it comes to a voting machine, the average voter is getting a lemon - the Ford Pinto of voting technology. We must demand better."

 

[Caligirl]

It's been 8 years now that we have heard this complaint--8 fricken years !

There has been movement on it, Dillo.

 

[Modbert]

Yeah...vote three times each and Obama's sure to win. Do you work for ACORN ?

Well if I worked for the RNC, you wouldn't be able to vote at all.

 

[Caligirl]

Rigged voting machines, grassy knoll, UFO's, Loch Ness Monster, remote viewing.
What is it about you liberals that drives you away from reality?

Believing Bush to be a moron and an embarassment and a crook does not make me a liberal, and in fact I am not. But I do believe in math, independent agencies like the government accountability office, and the ability of politicians to lie and steal in mammoth proportions. How about you?

 

[Missourian]

Well if I worked for the RNC, you wouldn't be able to vote at all.

See how you are.

 

[Modbert]

See how you are.

Well hey, it's all a basis of what will end up winning.

The multiple voting supposedly or the voter purging.

Though really, I like to know how some counties in 2000 came up with negative numbers for Al Gore.

 

[dilloduck]

See how you are.

Robby shows his power envy