Election Reform

Sancho

(9,137 posts)

3. I'm glad to see Richard back...

Reply to Richard Charnin (Original post)

Fri Dec 16, 2011, 08:39 PM

Dec 2011

I don't know the history at DU, but I read his book and I've followed his models. Even though the "legal" proof may not be there, and even though the statistical evidence is post hoc and based on sparse data - Richard presents some discrepancies in the data that defy easy explanations. Some may reject anything unproven as suspect. Some may create ct's. Some may create weird explanations (reluctant responders). Objectively, elections should not have unexplained discrepancies.

One reason that I got involved with DU was when I personally witnessed a DRE apparently flipping votes in Florida. Regardless, I think confidence in our voting is essential for future elections; and Richard clearly advocates a transparent and verifiable process.

Hopefully, the pot shots will be few and the rational discussions will be many.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Unadjusted 2000 State Exit Polls (and the True Vote Model) indicate Al Gore won by 5-7 million votes [View all] Richard Charnin Dec 2011 OP

To those who say, "Get over it!," I say, "No way!" Peace Patriot Dec 2011 #1

Tabulation ecoalex2 Dec 2011 #5

You are so right, ecoalex2, on every point! Peace Patriot Dec 2011 #6

Bob Fitrakis on the latest Ohio evidence: a new court filing Richard Charnin Dec 2011 #7

Correction: Gore won MN and NM Richard Charnin Dec 2011 #2

I'm glad to see Richard back... Sancho Dec 2011 #3

I agree with the points raised in your first paragraph. Wilms Dec 2011 #4