Top 14 "machine error" states all had red shift (pro-Bush surprise)

Wayne Madsen wrote: "According to informed sources in Washington and Houston, the Bush campaign spent some $29 million to pay polling place operatives around the country to rig the election for Bush. The operatives were posing as Homeland Security and FBI agents but were actually technicians familiar with Diebold, Sequoia, ES&S, Triad, Unilect, and Danaher Controls voting machines. These technicians reportedly hacked the systems to skew the results in favor of Bush. ...Some of the technicians are revealing the nature of the vote rigging program."

If true, we might find a correlation between reports of voting machine incidents and the gap between Bush's official vote share and his share in exit polls. Do we?

• 1694 machine problems reported in Bush-shift states (i.e., states where Bush's official vote share exceeded his exit poll share)
  
• 225 machine problems reported in Kerry-shift states
  
• 12.34 machine problems (1694/137249530) per 1 mil pop in Bush-shift states
  
• 4.34 machine problems (225/51808720) per 1 mil pop in Kerry-shift states
  
• 27.78 machine problems (803/28900830) per 1 mil pop in OH, FL, and PA
  
• LA, GA, DC, NM, AZ, OH, PA, FL, NY, and CO had off-the-charts reports of machine errors (13.6-104 vs. 4.35 in other states). 68.5% of machine error reports occurred in these states.
  

The top 14 states, ordered by reported machine problems per population, ALL experienced pro-Bush vote surprises (relative to exit poll data). Here are the top 20 states:

State Kerry shift Reported machine problems per mil people
LA -2.08 104.31
GA -1.59 58.78
DC -0.09 48.13
NM -1.81 42.19
AZ -2.56 29.36
OH -3.1 28.72
PA -3.35 27.47
FL -3.03 27.36
NY -3.82 14.03
CO -1.63 13.57
MI -0.98 9.89
IL -2 9.78
NJ -1.46 9.44
SC -4.59 9.25
VA 0.25 6.52
WI -1.99 6.36
TX 1.38 5.47
NC -4 5.37
CA 1.56 4.81
AL -4 4.54

The graph with all 51 states is astonishing. I would include it here if I could.

Here's the full raw data (someone please confirm my analysis):

State Exit poll Vote Kerry shift Prob >MOE? by Favor Reported machine problems Voting eligible population Reported machine problems per 1 mil people
LA 44.5 42.42 -2.08 8.80% -0.92 Bush 130 1,246,333 104.31
GA 43 41.41 -1.59 15.00% -1.41 Bush 50 850,605 58.78
DC 91 90.91 -0.09 47.60% -2.91 Bush 20 415,549 48.13
NM 51.3 49.49 -1.81 11.90% -1.19 Bush 53 1,256,228 42.19
AZ 47 44.44 -2.56 4.70% -0.44 Bush 36 1,226,111 29.36
OH 52.1 49 -3.1 2.10% Yes 0.1 Bush 240 8,357,632 28.72
PA 54.35 51 -3.35 1.40% Yes 0.35 Bush 251 9,137,942 27.47
FL 50.5 47.47 -3.03 2.40% Yes 0.03 Bush 312 11,405,256 27.36
NY 63 59.18 -3.82 0.60% Yes 0.82 Bush 179 12,755,788 14.03
CO 49.1 47.47 -1.63 14.40% -1.37 Bush 43 3,168,132 13.57
MI 52.5 51.52 -0.98 26.00% -2.02 Bush 71 7,177,100 9.89
IL 57 55 -2 9.60% -1 Bush 84 8,591,897 9.78
NJ 55 53.54 -1.46 16.90% -1.54 Bush 54 5,719,150 9.44
SC 46 41.41 -4.59 0.10% Yes 1.59 Bush 28 3,026,569 9.25
VA 45.2 45.45 0.25 56.60% -2.75 Kerry 34 5,215,501 6.52
WI 52.5 50.51 -1.99 9.60% -1.01 Bush 25 3,928,744 6.36
TX 37 38.38 1.38 81.70% -1.62 Kerry 75 13,717,144 5.47
NC 48 44 -4 0.40% Yes 1 Bush 32 5,962,213 5.37
CA 54 55.56 1.56 84.50% -1.44 Kerry 104 21,604,925 4.81
AL 41 37 -4 0.40% Yes 1 Bush 15 3,306,127 4.54
MS 43.25 40 -3.25 1.70% Yes 0.25 Bush 8 2,078,971 3.85
MT 39.75 39.8 0.05 51.20% -2.95 Kerry 2 678,519 2.95
NV 49.35 48.48 -0.87 28.60% -2.13 Bush 4 1,432,776 2.79
WY 30.9 29.59 -1.31 19.60% -1.69 Bush 1 361,972 2.76
MD 57 56.57 -0.43 38.80% -2.57 Bush 9 3,718,868 2.42
OK 35 34 -1 25.70% -2 Bush 6 2,504,660 2.40
HI 53.3 54.55 1.25 79.20% -1.75 Kerry 2 850,605 2.35
IN 41 39.39 -1.61 14.70% -1.39 Bush 8 4,470,971 1.79
MA 66 62.63 -3.37 1.40% Yes 0.37 Bush 8 4,557,561 1.76
WA 54.95 53.54 -1.41 17.80% -1.59 Bush 7 4,167,093 1.68
AR 46.6 45.45 -1.15 22.70% -1.85 Bush 3 1,956,947 1.53
MO 47.5 46 -1.5 16.40% -1.5 Bush 6 4,123,493 1.46
WV 45.25 43.43 -1.82 11.80% -1.18 Bush 2 1,398,424 1.43
TN 41.5 43 1.5 83.60% -1.5 Kerry 6 4,280,835 1.40
RI 64 60.61 -3.39 1.30% Yes 0.39 Bush 1 735,273 1.36
MN 54.5 51.52 -2.98 2.60% -0.02 Bush 4 3,554,277 1.13
KS 35 37.37 2.37 94.00% -0.63 Kerry 2 1,939,135 1.03
ME 54.75 54.08 -0.67 33.10% -2.33 Bush 1 983,468 1.02
UT 30.5 27.55 -2.95 2.70% -0.05 Bush 1 1,502,926 0.67
KY 41 40 -1 25.70% -2 Bush 2 3,071,048 0.65
AK 40.5 36.08 -4.42 0.20% Yes 1.42 Bush 419,884 0.00
VT 65 60.2 -4.8 0.10% Yes 1.8 Bush 467,720 0.00
ND 34 36.36 2.36 93.90% -0.64 Kerry 471,602 0.00
SD 37.75 39.39 1.64 85.90% -1.36 Kerry 554,959 0.00
DE 58.5 53.54 -4.96 0.10% Yes 1.96 Bush 571,361 0.00
NH 55.4 50.51 -4.89 0.10% Yes 1.89 Bush 935,291 0.00
ID 33.5 30.61 -2.89 3.00% -0.11 Bush 947,688 0.00
NE 36.75 32.32 -4.43 0.20% Yes 1.43 Bush 1,224,648 0.00
IA 50.65 49.49 -1.16 22.50% -1.84 Bush 2,155,725 0.00
CT 58.5 55.1 -3.4 1.30% Yes 0.4 Bush 2,377,109 0.00
OR 51.2 52 0.8 69.90% -2.2 Kerry 2,495,495 0.00

Data sources:

Exit poll, vote, and Kerry shift: DU member TruthIsAll (www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=79036&mesg_id=79036)

Reported machine problems: Election Incident Reporting System - "Machine problems" (https://voteprotect.org/index.php?display=EIRMapNation&tab=ALL&cat=02&start_time=&start_date=&end_time=&end_date=&search=)

Voting eligible population: "Voting-Age and Voting-Eligible Population Turnout Rates" (http://elections.gmu.edu/VAP_VEP.htm)

unless these so-called "informed sources" materialize

passed up by our media.

Are we experiencing "Nov. 22nd" all over again? How do we elevate the discourse?

Surely hundreds of mainstream media read DU and other sites. Why the silence?

My message posted at 10:05 AM, and your reply posted at 10:06 AM. You could NOT have read my post and replied that quickly. Are you just attacking for no reason?

in one of the numerous other threads in which it's already been posted. To me he doesn't appear to be attacking you or the article, just questioning it's veracity. There are plenty of proven irregularities but we have to be careful about believing every unproven claim that comes along (Cybernet, Jeff Fisher, etc.). There's nothing wrong with posting this kind of article, but be prepared for people to question it and ask for proof. That's the only way to get at the truth.

It's another piece of circumstantial evidence that can be analyzed statistically, (calling all statistiicians). Is this range of machine problems/millions people a random process or not.? The one caveat I have is that the distribution of e-machines varies a lot across the states, so that needs to be accounted for as well. Some states have no e-machines at the voting level, but I think all have tabulating machines. There is a website with this data, but I don't remember where.

Once this is accounted for, it should also lend itself to a very nice visual, which can speak volumes. It's different data than the exit poll data, and it posits a correlation between red shift and machine errors,. THAT is an exiciting observation!

I will try to check the numbers, WhoWants oBeOccupied, and make a chart, but I am not a statistician. Can somebody find the e-machines/state data for us?

Also, this post probably should go into Voting Issues, so that the statisticans and numbers crunchers see it.

A :toast: to WhoWantsToBeOccupied :yourock:

Nobody is going to pick up on this. There is too much hearsay and not enough corroborating evidence.

This is an EMPIRICAL analysis. It's not an opinion piece. And I'm not passing along rumors.

You can look up all the voting machine incidents in the Election Incident Reporting System database. Each incident is documented.

Statistical analysis by itself never _proves_ anything. But it can provide evidence inconsistent with or consistent with a theory.

In this case, the data provides highly persuasive circumstantial evidence consistent with the theory that machines were systematically biased in the president's favor. No proof. But it's not "hearsay." And it _is_ corroborating evidence. You're asking for a smoking gun. No, statistical analysis cannot provide that.

in Washington" a red flag should go up. "Reportedly", "apparently", "informed sources"; these statements are far too vague. They are intended to give the story the impression of validity without actually doing so. In fact he doesn't even say he has directly talked to the people that are intimately involved. Nor does he tell us anything about these sources. He shows us no actual evidence that could be used to corroborate the statements of these sources. In the 90's, if you had read a story about Clinton written this way you'd write it off as more conspiracy or at least hyperbole.

Further, 2/3 of the story is just a screed about the dealings of Enron, the CIA, the Saudis etc. While this is interesting, he doesn't credibly connect this to the election or the sources on which his allegations are based.

I don't doubt that this could have happened but this story is too full of holes. He is going to have to show us some hard evidence or this is just more rhetoric. A lot of loose connections, mysterious sources and statistics don't substantiate a claim of systematic fraud.

Facts, we need some facts.

p.s. Madsen also reported in October: "According to White House and Washington Beltway insiders, the Bush administration, worried that it could lose the presidential election to Senator John F. Kerry, has initiated plans to launch a military strike on Iran's top Islamic leadership, its nuclear reactor at Bushehr on the Persian Gulf, and key nuclear targets throughout the country..."

That was a little less than accurate.

The orginal message is not for or against Madsen's story: it just suggests a piece of research that needs to be done, regardless of whether Madsen is kooky or not.

your post and a reply to it made me put 1 + 1 together. Wayne Madsen knows informants and Justice Through Music is offering $200,000 reward for information that leads to conviction. So... I just emailed Madsen to let him know about Justice Through Music. Maybe he'll pass it on...

Also - this is really nice:

If true, we might find a correlation between reports of voting machine incidents and the gap between Bush's official vote share and his share in exit polls. Do we?

1694 machine problems reported in Bush-shift states (i.e., states where Bush's official vote share exceeded his exit poll share)
225 machine problems reported in Kerry-shift states
12.34 machine problems (1694/137249530) per 1 mil pop in Bush-shift states
4.34 machine problems (225/51808720) per 1 mil pop in Kerry-shift states
27.78 machine problems (803/28900830) per 1 mil pop in OH, FL, and PA
LA, GA, DC, NM, AZ, OH, PA, FL, NY, and CO had off-the-charts reports of machine errors (13.6-104 vs. 4.35 in other states). 68.5% of machine error reports occurred in these states.

Please see my earlier post about e-machines/state: you'll be eaten alive if you don;t include that info in the analysis!

PS. I read quickly. :)

Please give a link to your earlier post. Also -- remember that vote fraud at the level of the central tabulators could occur for any state -- whether they have paper ballots, punch cards, opscan or Evote. It is just less likely in places where they have paper ballot, punch cards or opscan because recounts are possible. My hunch is that their strategy for stealing this election was to 'go big' -- make the margin appear so large that no one would think to go back and recount even in places where recounts are possible.

The thread isn't about Madsen's article: it's about whether there is a pattern between the red shift and machine incident reports. My post Number 6 just adds that the number of machines per state must be part of the analysis.
bye

I'm not claiming this proves vote-theft occurred via e-voting machines (though I suspect e-voting machines were hacked). Other machines can be rigged too. My data simply demonstrates an astounding correlation between states where Bush exceeded his exit poll numbers and states with many reports of voting machine problems.

I agree e-voting machines can be rigged absurdly easily. But there are many ways to rig machines. I believe a 2004 recount in NY turned up totally different numbers in the lever machines than were officially recorded. (I read this but now can't find it.)

Many in OH and FL believe machine-rigging was just one arrow in a quiver used to steal states:

• vote suppression in heavily Democratic areas (too few machines, opening late, etc.)
  
• tossing out provisional ballots
  
• having Republicans vote twice (absentee and at the poll)
  
• leaflets scaring people into not voting
  
• tough challenging of those who come to vote in heavily-Democratic districts
  
• bogus voter registration drives that tricked people into falsely believing they had registered
  

I suspect similar correlational analyses would show a similar pattern between the frequency of the above incidents and the gap between Bush's official and exit poll figures.

The top 14 states, ordered by reported machine problems per population, ALL experienced pro-Bush vote surprises (relative to exit poll data).

from the exit polls across the board.

tia

Here's a link for all of the Sec of State Depts across the US

http://www.nass.org/UnitedStates_file/United_States.htm

Listen, we don't have to prove anything. What we have so far is an overwhelming amount of evidence that point to a total hijacking of the electoral process by Bush and a small handful of people who have taken control of our country and are doing everything they can to destroy it.

Please Monday AM, we need to call, write, email everybody and anybody about these stories. This whole mess is beyond ridiculous. It's up to us in whatever way we can make sure that this fiasco can no longer be ignored.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x78528

In this analysis, I decided that rather than look at the states with the highest rate of problems, I'd concentrate on the states with the most votes. These states include, of course, Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania, all states that were high on B*'s list of target states. After all, if there were going to be manipulations of the vote, these would be the prime targets.


The correlation between the size of the red shift and the number of machine problems per million people (shows how machine problems affect the red shift; the higher the negative, the more machine problems hurt Kerry)--

In the top 15 states by population: -.492
In the top 10 states by population: -.5586

The correlation between the probability of the red shift's size to the number of machine problems per million people (shows how machine problems relate to statistically unlikely shifts to B*; higher negatives show machine problems make for less likely results):

In the top 15 states by population: -.456
In the top 10 states by population: -.575

If machine problems favored each candidate randomly, we would expect correlations close to zero.

IMO this is only one part of the whole show; aside from machine problems reported (which are known to the voter who reported them) are the huge issues of central tabulation and votes mis- or unrecorded without the voter's knowledge.