Imho it stretches the bounds of credibility to believe that it's a coincidence that a (critical, and similar in each area) percentage of voters changed their minds in all areas which used one particular type of (non-auditable) voting process, where no such shift took place in any of the nearby areas which didn't use said process.
From what I've read it seems that the exit polls match up to the registered voter affiliation too - so when two sets of numbers match, and a third doesn't, which one do you look suspiciously at?
There are some links to data sources in the article which ciphergoth was quoting the description of, I don't know if they're what you are looking for?
Those percentages show the change between proclaimed intentions of voters when they registered, and the actual outcome of the vote - they're not absolute figures, they're relative. Did you actually read the page? The numbers are generated by a very simple formula which is explained in a single sentence.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-05 06:08 am (UTC)From what I've read it seems that the exit polls match up to the registered voter affiliation too - so when two sets of numbers match, and a third doesn't, which one do you look suspiciously at?
There are some links to data sources in the article which
no subject
Date: 2004-11-05 07:53 am (UTC)Sorry ... I though the data on the referenced page was satire e.g. Calhoun County: Republican 741% Democrat-23%. Verified voting is much better.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-05 09:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-05 10:26 am (UTC)