but wouldn’t ALL 72 additional respondents have to have voted “yes”, in order to change the percentages so dramatically? And the chances of that would be ---?

“Exit polls adjusted to match election results are of limited usefulness”  is a humongous understatement, if it is taken in reference to actually predicting the vote. On the other hand, these exit polls’ usefulness in a court of law might be quite weighty! 

Thanks for posting this, Mark, it's stunning.

by Meryl Ann Butler (70 articles, 82 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 722 comments [29 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 11:41:49 AM

  (0+)

that we should look out for a narrative, one put into place to account for election fraud. The case of Prop H8 could be a textbook example. Before the votes had even been counted, we were told by Mitofsky that black voters had passed this proposition. This one flawed poll was picked up and championed by All the cable channels. Many voters were so upset by this narrative, they forgot to watch the vote counting or to question the poll itself. The total black population in California is only 7%. The Obama "surge" could not account for the passage of H8. It's just numerically not possible when you realize that young people voted against it. But the cable channels trumpeted the "fact" that 70% of black voters approved the proposition and that report went largely unquestioned as a sense of betrayal and outrage was engendered by this narrative. This narrative was, to my mind, an obvious attempt to deflect attention from the Catholic Church (likely by the Catholic Church) that first invited Mormon money into California and then pushed off this "result" on black baptists. It turns out there was a big late Catholic shift, and it turns out that it was the older demographic that seemed to approve the prop, not black voters. Alameda County has a black population of 14% and H8 went down in flames there. The mere propagation of such a provoking and divisive narrative. plopped into place and repeated endlessly -- much as we heard about those ghostly "values voters" in 2004 -- should be a very big red flag.

by Elizabeth Ferrari (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 81 comments) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:38:48 PM

  (0+)

The key was that if they couldn't stop the election of Obama without starting riots and civil unrest and risking their heads, they could, at least, begin to sew discord between progressives (who would support Gay Rights) and blacks by making it look like the black supprters of Obama were against Gay Rights.

Brilliant Rovian tactic.

And, of course, given the unwillingness of the MSM and even the progressive media (THE NATION?) to talk about election fraud, it will work.

by Charlie L (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 747 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 1:12:52 PM

  (0+)

we would be fairly and justifiably certain that the outcomes of our elections were accurate. 

As someone who has personally gathered several hundred affidavits from voters and who has talked with thousands about this issue, I want to relay the sentiments that I hear most often.

First, most people are not aware that our votes are being counted in secret because the media and even many of the "election reform" organizations do not address that issue. Second, when you explain that no one can tell whether any computer counted accurately without checking and that no one is checking, the voters are amazed.

They ask, "why don’t our leaders check to make sure that the computers counted our votes accurately?" Many also mention that all that would need to be done is to randomly check a few precincts to make sure that the computers counted accurately. Most ask why the workers at the precinct don't do it on election night, and they are stunned when they learn that the workers are told that they can't do that. Some even say why don’t we just go back to counting them by hand like we used to do.

The people cannot believe that with all of the problems with computers and voting that nothing has been put in place to check to make sure that the votes are counted accurately. They ask why, "why has nothing been done to make sure that the computers are counting our votes accurately on election day?" I reply with, "what do you think the reason is?" Some come right out and say, "they want to steal the election," but most cannot even imagine that or are too afraid of being attacked as unpatriotic or something if they say it out loud.

In case you don’t understand that computers count votes in secret, see Project Vote Count’s FAQ and yes, Virginia, not only is secret vote counting inherently dangerous, it’s unconstitutional, but no one in power gives a damn! They just want to stay in power by whatever means. If you want to see what the United States Supreme Court has said about our right to make sure that our votes are counted, see Virginia’s Elections Are UNCONSTITUTIONAL?!?!

If you’re not sure that our elections have been rigged, but you’re still wondering why so many members of Congress risked the wrath of the voters and passed the banker bailout while tossing millions of Americans out in to the street, see Have American Elections Really Been Stolen? Part 1 in the "Democracy" in America Series – The Proof It was a Top Scoop on Scoop. See it at http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0810/S00428.htm

If you think that "our" government still follows the rule of law or that it wouldn’t cover up election fraud, see Would Congressional Democrats Cover Up Neo-Con Election Fraud? Part 2 in the "Democracy" in America Series – No Way, Right?!?! This article was also a Top Scoop on Scoop. See it at http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0811/S00030.htm

Let me ask you a couple of questions. Why won't our governors make sure that our votes are counted accurately? Why do we put up with that? Why are the people kept in the dark on this, and why is anyone supporting any "election reform" organization that is not asking these questions? If you want to know which ones I'm talking about, read my articles, and do something to bring about real change, stop supporting the flacks for the powers that be.

Don't forget that Florida also had a marriage amendment on the ballot, and it "passed."  If anyone wants me to find out whether or not it really passed, they can contact me through OpEdNews or Project Vote Count  There are a number of indications that Florida's elections were tampered with, but the evidence will be gone relatively soon, if not already, so act fast. 

by Mark Adams (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 312 comments [39 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 1:15:02 PM

  (0+)

http://wiki.lessig.org/Article_V_Convention

by john de herrera (39 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 165 comments) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 7:19:51 PM

  (0+)

The way the Gay community is currently going after anyone who donated to the "yes on prop 8 cause" doesnt promote the idea of a public ballot. We have to protect the freedom of association and political affiliation better than this if we are to consider such a thing.

by Fred Willard (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Wednesday, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:03:31 AM

  (0+)

...every time Libs encounter election results they don't like?  I was just wondering.  Thanks :o)

by Joe Reeser (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 62 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 3:00:45 PM

  (0+)

It allows them to stay in power while giving some the illusory belief that they have a say in government.  Secret vote counting is completely unreliable and unconstitutional, too.  What part of that do you not understand?  See, Project Vote Count’s FAQ and Virginia’s Elections Are UNCONSTITUTIONAL?!?! and get a clue.

by Mark Adams (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 312 comments [39 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 6:16:47 PM

  (0+)

....are we "Libs" going to have to listen to you RAT-wingers' nasty, oft-misspelled, sarcastic barbs, directed at honest Americans objecting to unscrupulous, fraudulent, manipulated voting results?

Screwy election totals are not new.  There is an alarming number of them.  Most occur, according to my keen calculations, when the Right stands to benefit, and has"won" over rather astonishing odds.  California's Prop 8 is a sterling example. 

Grow up.  If you don't like our attitudes, don't read about them.  Snarky comments are childish; if you can prove us wrong, cite reliable source material and add something viable to the discussion.

by Wisewoman (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments [4 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:08:32 AM

  (0+)

as to why gays want their union to be called a marriage when they dont believe in the bibles laws--dont get me wrong i would like a legal solution to this problem for i am all for gays having their rights as americans and see nothing wrong with people loving their own sex----but i think the problem lies with calling it a marriage,for it clearly cannot be called one as well as anybody being married by a judge should call their union a marriage . so the problem lies with defination ,till then we will watch the waisted time and monies on this easly solved problem--YOU GAYS DONT NEED YOUR UNION CALLED A MARRIAGE--for it can never be,just like a truck can never be called a car!!!!!!!!!

by TRADESMAN (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 335 comments [40 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 7:24:32 PM

  (0+)

Prop 8 election results fradulent...haaaahahahaha! This is such a howler. Yet another example of lefty whining over anything that does not go their way, despite the fact that their guy and their party won big this year.

And it continues with the paranoid lie about how theocrats are trying to take over America. Considering that the percentage of bonafide theocrats in America is probably under 1%, this sounds like a bad acid flashback. Come on, folks, most of these people in California think that marriage means one man and one woman. Why is that so hard to fathom?

by Scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 745 comments [30 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 8:21:50 PM

  (0+)

I too am confused as to how the results were so quickly analyzed by demographics and it was so quickly determined that Prop 8 was passed because of the "black vote". Because the last time I checked voting was anonymous in this country I found it odd that FOX news and so many other media outlets had the statistic that 70% of the "black" demographic has voted for Prop 8. How could they possibly know this?? Or is this purely from the one Exit poll that mysteriously flipped its votes from against to for.

I did think to myself the next day when every cable channel was talking about how the "black" demographic apparently helped pass Prop 8 that this seemed like a very convenient way to dampen and in fact create divisiveness in an otherwise fantastic victory for Obama. It completely smells of Rovian tactics that thrive on dividing the country and creating hatred and intolerance among different racial and religious segments of our country.

by E. Nelson (40 articles, 8 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 511 comments [57 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 9:08:40 PM

  (0+)

Mark~

According to Edison Mitofsky/ AP polls, only 2,200 voters were sampled in only 30 of California's 58 counties.  I'm no expert, but it seems like far too small a sample to be accurate, despite the fact that the MSM picked it up and blasted that 70% of blacks stat all day/ all night long. We don't know how they chose these "random" samples, nor do we know how they phrased the question.

Also, I understand that most of this poll was taken during "early voting"/ not sure what bearing that has on the overall numbers, but I'd love to find out!

by Jeannie Dean (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 16 comments) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 7:16:41 AM

  (0+)

     It is standard practice to question secret vote counting on blackbox elections when the exit polls show discrepancies.    Perhaps a basic course in election monitoring and verification protocol would help those with an inability to understand the statistical significance of exit poll discrepancies.    Mark's reference to the history of blackbox elections in the US and some of the comments suggest  that support for unaccountable voting in America can now easily be identified from a particular bias.

by io (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 100 comments [11 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:05:47 AM

  (0+)

Regardless of whether you, yourself are religious or not is irrelevant to the LAWS of the United States. Our FOUNDING FATHERS made this VERY CLEAR. So what we need to do is to LOBBY Congress every day, through phone calls, letters and e-mails that we want them to write a LAW that NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT ONE SINGLE ONE, initiative forcing any RELIGIOUS DOGMA, whether it be gay rights, abortion, stem cell research, or anything else MAY BE PUT ONTO A BALLOT OF ANY CITY IN ANY STATE IN THE COUNTRY. It's absolutely disgusting that these phony "christian" dictators can make their personal beliefs into law in a supposedly civilized country.

I can understand that all people do NOT have the same beliefs in all things, but no one has the right to FORCE their beliefs on me or anyone other than themselves. 

Now, I DO believe that a "woman" who's decided to physically turn herself into a "man" still wants to bring children into her/his perverted world and be a "daddymom" should have had to have her tubes tied because that is going to cause irrevicable mental damage to those children. As soon as they start school OR, even if they are home schooled they will have to interact with other children sooner or later, they will be horrendously teased, made fun of and called every dirty name in the books because of the perversions of the mother/father. I think it's sick and disgusting that she/he is so selfish that the problems the children will encounter were not considered. And then to put her/himself on display around the WORLD as a "Pregnant MAN" is the heighth of perversion. But that's just MY opinion. 

As far as gay people getting married, that is not hurting ANYONE IN THE WORLD. That should be their personal choice and no one should interfere. The same goes for abortion. The anti abortion fanatics never consider the unwanted children who are abused after they're born and their concern stops at birth. They insist women not have abortions even at the cost of their lives, "PRO-LIFERS" who would have WOMEN die, then turn their backs on the children. Pro-lifers who justify the deaths of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands civilians in an unjustified illegal invasion of another country with a wave and a "They volunteered."

So Congress should reinforce the "Separation of Church and State" with strong laws against putting religious initiatives on ballots across the country BECAUSE it is unconstitutional for pastors, preachers and priests to dictate our laws.

by weslen1 (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 64 comments [8 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:25:25 AM

  (0+)

As for the exit poll difference between early in the evening and later in the evening, I have a more simple explanation.

I spent three hours during the election, at night, near a polling place before it closed.  I was holding up a No On 8 sign, and could judge people's voting intentions by their facial expressions as they reacted to my sign.

I learned a lot, essentially doing an "entrance poll" instead of an exit poll.  My observation:

About 1-2 hours before the polls closed in California, it became evident that Obama had clinched the election, as he won the key East Coast swing states.

Before Obama's news, the friendly (No voters) were more common than the hostile (Yes voters) by about a 4:1 margin.

However, after Obama clinched, this flipped!

Traffic noticeably decreased at the polling place, but what traffic remained, was scarily different.  It's as if my polling place had been teleported from the Bay Area to Fresno.  Suddenly, the hostile voters started outnumbering the friendly voters, by almost the same 4:1 margin!

I'm guessing that the happy Democrats stayed home and began to celebrate, while the disgruntled bitter Republicans decided to go out and vote anyway.

And, as far as computerized voting goes, most polling places in California use paper ballots.  They are read by optical-scan machines.  California doesn't allow those horrible Diebold machines that ate the Ohio vote in 2004!

One encouraging observation: I noticed no correlation between the black vote and the Yes vote, at my polling place.  Alameda County, with the largest black voting population by percentage, voted No On 8 rather convincingly (over 60% No).  I was expecting the margin to be tighter in Alameda County, and was pleasantly surprised.

Too bad it was not to be for the entire state....

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch." -- Benjamin Franklin

by Josh Lehan (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 2:41:30 AM

  (0+)

My Dear,  most adored Mark Crispin Miller~

Jeannie Dean here, of Sarasota/ New Hampshire (BBV) election integrity movement, and your biggest fan.  THRILLED to find your post here on OPED today as I'm now in L.A.--DESPERATELY trying to get out the info you have in this post to the GLBT and the 'no on prop 8' organizers.

I KNEW it! A research friend from Brad Blog and I put together the info re:  Howard F. Ahmanson, Jr.--the billionare nutjob/ financier of ES&S who ALSO happens to be the man behind getting prop 8 on the ballot! This, to me, seems to be (at best) a conflict of interest that the California Supreme Court should be aware of in any upcoming litigation to overturn.

Mr. Miller, it's driving me CRAZY that the well organized grass roots movement has targeted EVERY contributor to the dastardly measure, but remains blind to the PRIMARY source of this atrocity.  The fact that the footprints of fraud are all OVER these election results, that no one I know in CA is looking into it, that the BLACKS and HISPANICS are being (wrongly?) blamed for this fiasco per usual attempts to divide and conquer by the opposition--it's maddening.  Meanwhile, this fascist billionarie bigot (who, from what I understand is all for EXECUTING homosexuals) is slipping by beneath the radar while most of CALIFORNIA voted for or against this proposition on HIS MACHINES! 

Mr. Miller, what can I do?  Once agian, I find myself devastated,  in a year when most are celebrating a "clean-ish" federal election.  

A million thanks for your work, for all you do, and for this most important article re: prop 8.  How can we get this info to BRADBLOG/ RANDI RHODES/ and most importantly, the GBLT community so they are better informed and equipt to fight this?

Yours,

Jeannie Dean

www.videothevote.org

by Jeannie Dean (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 16 comments) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 5:59:39 AM

  (0+)

My Dear,  most adored Mark Crispin Miller~

Jeannie Dean here, of Sarasota/ New Hampshire (BBV) election integrity movement, and your biggest fan.  THRILLED to find your post here on OPED today as I'm now in L.A.--DESPERATELY trying to get out the info you have in this post to the GLBT and the 'no on prop 8' organizers.

I KNEW it! A research friend from Brad Blog and I put together the info re:  Howard F. Ahmanson, Jr.--the billionare nutjob/ financier of ES&S who ALSO happens to be the man behind getting prop 8 on the ballot! This, to me, seems to be (at best) a conflict of interest that the California Supreme Court should be aware of in any upcoming litigation to overturn.

Mr. Miller, it's driving me CRAZY that the well organized grass roots movement has targeted EVERY contributor to the dastardly measure, but remains blind to the PRIMARY source of this atrocity.  The fact that the footprints of fraud are all OVER these election results, that no one I know in CA is looking into it, that the BLACKS and HISPANICS are being (wrongly?) blamed for this fiasco per usual attempts to divide and conquer by the opposition--it's maddening.  Meanwhile, this fascist billionarie bigot (who, from what I understand is all for EXECUTING homosexuals) is slipping by beneath the radar while most of CALIFORNIA voted for or against this proposition on HIS MACHINES! 

Mr. Miller, what can I do?  Once agian, I find myself devastated,  in a year when most are celebrating a "clean-ish" federal election.  

A million thanks for your work, for all you do, and for this most important article re: prop 8.  How can we get this info to BRADBLOG/ RANDI RHODES/ and most importantly, the GBLT community so they are better informed and equipt to fight this?

Yours,

Jeannie Dean

www.videothevote.org

by Jeannie Dean (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 16 comments) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 6:00:31 AM

  (0+)

Something's fishy, all right.  Thanks for the info.

This exit poll tampering is almost disturbing as the actual vote tampering. The only way we have to know if the votes are wrong is with the exit polls.

As it stands, we only know when the Ukraine has a suspicious election, not the US.

And I want to know why, when Bush has had a 24% approval rating for years, McCain took 48% of the vote.

That seems fishy to me, also.

I think that they want us to think that we're more divided than we are, and to give Obama a reason for not improving things for the working class.

Already, we're hearing about lower expectations, non-veto proof Congress, blah, blah, blah.  

Notice that the financial sector has not lowered their expectations at all.  Even on welfare, they give themselves bonuses and junkets. 

by wagelaborer (6 articles, 1 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 311 comments [34 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:36:42 AM

  (0+)

Election Defense Alliance and Project Vote Count along with a few other serious election integrity organizations did exit polls, too.  I wonder whether the ones from CA looked at this referendum and what their results show.

by Mark Adams (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 312 comments [39 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 4:10:01 PM

  (0+)

the results were just too all over the place for a christian controlled outcome.  Parental consent failed and obama won our electoral votes. Truth is more people than the christian right voted against gay marriage.  nice try though.

by Fred Willard (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:32:24 PM

  (0+)

  Contrary to the positions of the partisans, marriage has nothing to do with "Equal rights." The real (and legal) reason for marriage, over history, was and is to endow children with the father's property. Whether a child is a bastard or not, he can always inherit from his mother.

That's ALL marriage was about - joining the property of two families for the benefit of progeny. Which explains "arranged marriages". Wise parents chose the best candidates to procreate grandchildren to endow with their valuable property. Childless marriages were tragic because it made the marriage a nullity.

When two same sex individuals can merge their genes into progeny, we should certainly encourage their marriage for the benefit of their progeny.

But the underlying reason for gay marriage is greed. They want to access the "benefits" granted to married couples under socialism. Without those financial incentives, gay marriage would not be attractive.

Frankly, any gay couple can set up a will to endow the survivor of the union. It doesn't require a marriage, a compact that is a nullity for gays under the common law. See curtesy and dower, in an old legal dictionary, if you're curious for more details.

And, no, a lifelong contract of marriage is not for "love". Two people "in love" don't need a binding legal contract to keep them together for life. The lifelong bonds of matrimony were to keep two people together, who would rather not be, and so preserve the merged family property for the next generation.

by Jet Graphics (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 42 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 18, 2008 at 1:49:44 PM

  (0+)

Naw, there's much more to it than that, and I doubt "greed" has anything in it anyway except among those who are particularly greedy. I don't believe it has been found that greed is particularly a part of the gay/lesbian intrinsic nature any more than any other segregated categorizings.

Then, there's Soc.Sec. and other retirement benefits for a surviving partner......

There are other such little anomalies, which make it ACTUALLY, all about equal rights, human rights, civil rights, Constitutional Rights, but other examples are not at the top of my head right now.

And of course, election integrity is EVERYONE's RIGHT and necessary to our continuance and return to a Constitutional Republic. Take the Constitutional out of that and there really isn't much left of our rights at all as these last 8 years have been so good at demonstrating so clearly! If you deny rights to one, then another will follow, ad infinitum, until it gets to taking out the rights that count in YOUR book too!

ALL rights count for ALL citiizens, every one for ALL!

(First they came for the...............)

(-:G

by G Achin (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 110 comments [9 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 19, 2008 at 7:25:21 AM

  (0+)