Votergate 2004; We Don't Need Paper to
Prove Fraud, But We Do Need Money and Leadership, NOW.
- Since last Tuesday there has been a justifiable uproar about the
major differences between the exit polls in Ohio and Florida and the
actual results. Democrats
and Republicans, who both saw the same exit polls that showed an
electoral landslide in favor of Kerry, have confirmed this.
Investigative reporter Bob Parry confirmed from his sources
that the Bush campaign was convinced they were going to lose.
George H. W. Bush also confirmed this in an interview with The
Today Show. So why have
the exit polls been so wrong in the last two elections?
It is clear that there must have been manipulation in the
While there's been a lot of talk of problems with not having paper
trails, computer fraud is uncovered most of the time without paper trails.
As a former C.P.A and auditor, I have used statistical sampling
throughout my career with great confidence. With electronic record
keeping, it's easy to create a program to falsify the books. But
there are ways to uncover that. Auditors have developed statistical ways
to cut right through corruption in companies. You don't even need a
paper trail. These statistical approaches can be used with almost 100%
accuracy to uncover fraud.
With the votergate 2004 it's a numbers game just like it is with
corporate accounting, even easier. All you're talking about is one
number-- total votes for each candidate.
There's a huge difference between polling what WILL happen and
polling something that has already happened. The reliability of polling
something that has already happened is highly reliable vs. predictive
polls, like Gallup or Zogby, which is very risky. The reliability can be,
not plus or minus 4 percent as we see with predictive poplls, but
rather a much more reliable plus or minus one half or one tenth of
one percent with exit polls, because those are based on asking people who
already voted. I would even
say that if the exit polling were done in the key precincts of Florida and
Ohio, which it was, then these results should be practically “bullet
- It is important that people know how accurate random sampling of
historical events can be in order for them to understand how unlikely
it is that the exit polls were wrong.
So if you want to fight the battle correctly, you must get more
statisticians and forensic accountants involved as well as the
statisticians can show with great credibility the probability of
manipulation within the computer programs used for counting the
ballots. They do this kind
of work all the time to uncover fraud based upon computer manipulation
in commercial and corporate activities.
And these types of expert analyses are admissible in a court of
- The problem with all of this is determining who is going to fund
such an investigation. Where will the
money come from?
- Perhaps the Kerry/Edwards campaign fund has some surplus that can be
used. It is possible that
the DNC has some excess funds. How
about the 527s and PACs who spent millions on ineffective political
ads, coming up with a few million?
In addition, who is going to lead the process of getting this
done? This kind of an
effort requires solidarity along with an organized coordinated effort.
It's easy to come up with the forensic and technical people to
get this done, but we need a strong leader and solidarity. Leadership
and funding-- these are the two real challenges that must be dealt
with in the coming days.
- We have a Watergate story here that could give the media a post
election explosive news story that could make the 2000 Florida vote
debacle look like small potatoes. We need to get the media to see that
votergate 2004 is huge news and we need to quickly fund the
investigation and get Democratic leaders behind it.
Sheldon Drobny is CPA and Venture Capitalist and co-founder of
Air America Radio; email at email@example.com
NEW!! Add your comments below