From Ron Baiman:

In his June 7, 2006 reply to Kennedy’s rebuttal of his earlier critique Farhad Manjoo citing Mark Blumenthal, claims that:

a) The exit poll margins of error for Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, and Ohio were between 5% to 7%. This is preposterous. Rather than relying on Mark Blumenthal (an unreliable source for quantitative analysis), I urge Manjoo to download the National Election Pool a “Methods Statement” for the Edison Mitofsky (EM) exit polls (produced on Nov. 2 2006) at:

The second page of this statement sets 95% confidence intervals for these polls (for a “characteristic” held by roughly 50% of those polled, for example a Presidential candidate preference for which there is a close to even split) squarely at 4% for sample sizes of 951-2350 – the range of reported sample sizes for these states. However, as Blumenthal knows, the reported sample sizes (also in the methods statements) are about half of what they really are (see Mitofsky correspondence in Baiman June 5 Free Press AAPOR report). For these true doubled sample sizes of 2351-5250, NEP’s own estimated confidence interval falls to 3%. This clearly puts the Ohio discrepancy of about 4% outside of the margin of error – even using NEP’s inflated margins of error. My margin of error calculations (and I believe Freeman’s) find a 2% margin of error with a 30% cluster adjustment factor. As I have stated in my earlier response to Manjoo, this puts Ohio well outside the margin of sampling error with odds of less than 1,900 that Kerry’s reported result is true given the exit poll result. This is not “slight” evidence but rather highly statistically significant, especially one considered with the inexplicable pro-Bush exit poll discrepancies in the two other key battle ground states of Florida and Pennsylvania. As Freeman and I have stated, the odds that these “sampling errors” (in the same direction and of these magnitudes) would occur for these three states simultaneously in less than one in 182,000,000 (i.e virtually impossible – this number is based on doubled sample sizes). Moreover, when one looks at precinct level exit poll data , and not just aggregate state polls, the evidence in even more striking and inexplicable. A fact that Manjoo has not addressed at all.

The question that has to be asked is why are Manjoo (and Blumenthal) trying to dismiss the statistical significance of the exit poll discrepancies when even Mitofsky (in his January report) concedes that they were the largest on record and highly statistically significant?

b) Manjoo’s efforts to dismiss what he calls the “purported rural vote shift” is even more outlandish. As Kennedy points out he doesn’t seem to understand the difference between a popular incumbent who earned more votes statewide than Gore in 2000 and a former Republican judge from Cincinnati who got a “favored son” boost in that region; and an unknown, under funded, very liberal judge from Cleveland, who got 24% less votes than Kerry statewide, inexplicably getting more votes that Kerry in 12 of the most conservative counties (judging by their Bush vote shares) in Ohio!

Moreover, these same 12 counties just happen to be among the only 14 (out of 88 counties) where Bush’s vote is larger than Moyer’s (the incumbent conservative judge) by more than 43%. Moreover, the amount of “excess Bush” vote (more than Bush’s state average of 21% more than Moyer) just happens to roughly match both by county and for entire state the “lost Kerry” vote (what Kerry would have gotten if he had received his state average of 32% more votes than Connally in these counties) without any overall substitution from Moyer to Connally (Moyer’s vote is larger than the state average and Connally’s is smaller than the state average in all but one of these 12 counties).

Farhad, do you understand how absolutely remarkable such a series of “coincidences” is?!!

I challenge you or anyone else to provide a plausible non-vote shifting explanation for these patterns.

Note that the Bush to Moyer ratio is independent of the Kerry to Connally ratio when there is no substitution between Moyer and Connally. It is simply impossible to understand why, out of all the 88 counties, 9 out of 14 cases where Bush does extraordinarily well relative to Moyer, just happen to be in the same counties where Connally does extraordinarily well relative to Kerry?!!!! And it is even more impossible to understand why the relative magnitudes of these impossible undercounts for Kerry and over counts for Bush should so closely match!!!!

I would take this evidence to a trial. Clearly a crime was committed in Ohio. There is simply no other explanation for these patterns other than vote shifting. The only thing we don’t know is who did it and how. And exactly this kind of information is necessary to get serious electoral reform – that you claim to support.

No Comments to “Ron Baiman finds more flaws in Manjoo's hit-piece”

  • Dear Farhad,
    In your “No Exit” piece (6/15/2005) you linked to a summary of my DU posts.

    Here’s a more complete, up-to-date, compilation of my pre-election state and national models, which forecast the Kerry 2-party vote (51.1-51.3%). Also included are over 100 pre-election and exit poll analytic threads. If you read the replies, you’ll see how the arguments of responding naysayers and trolls were debunked virtually every time.

    I should have responded to “No Exit” a year ago. But since you have continued your crusade against “fraudsters” with your thrashing of RFK’s Rolling Stone article, now it’s my turn. The pathetic rebuttal to RFK came exactly one year after “No Exit”. in which you claim that “expert” sources debunked USCV and the “fraudsters”. Quite the contrary; they’re down to their last-ditch hypothesis (“false recall”). They are still trying to spread the fiction that the pre-election and early exit polls were wrong; that Bush won the popular vote by a 3 million “mandate”. In so doing, they imply that the FINAL National Exit and state exit polls, which were matched to the “recorded” vote, are correct. Based on the mathematical proof below, you will see why the FINAL NEP is IMPOSSIBLE and OVERSTATES the Bush vote by AT LEAST 4 MILLION.

    You make the fallacious statement that there is no real significance to the 3% deviation from Kerry winning by 51-48% in the National Exit poll to the Bush recorded 51-48% win. That statement alone exposed your lack of understanding of the “margin of error” and mathematical probability. The 1.1% MoE (assuming a 30% cluster effect; 13,047 respondents) means that the 3% deviation is extremely significant. It’s almost 6 standard deviations from the sample mean.

    Let’s calculate the probability of the deviation:
    Prob = 1-NORMDIST(0.51,0.48,0.011/1.96,TRUE) =2.05809E-09
    or 1 in 485,887,838

    It’s apparent to many that your analysis is full of holes. You say that an “amateur mathematician” proved Ron Baiman, Kathy Dopp, Steve Freeman, myself and other analysts wrong. Really? On DU, we have won every online debate with that tag-team naysayer duo from Bard College and Britain. Baiman and Freeman, both PHDs, have had extensive, real world analytical experience. Dopp has a masters degree in mathematics. Their expertise is reflected in the quality of their published work on the Stolen Election. I’m NOT an amateur mathematician. I have two MS degrees in applied mathematics and have been developing financial, investment and engineering models long before you were born. What are YOUR academic credentials? What makes you an expert in polling analysis?

    It’s a FACT that over 3 million votes (the great majority Democratic) are spoiled and never counted in every election? In 2004, 3.6mm votes were lost – just check the Census. I’m sure you would agree that Bush stole the 2000 election, despite having lost by 540,000 votes, 51-50.5mm. Add 75% of the 3 million spoiled votes to Gore and it’s clear that he actually won by 2 million.

    In 2004, the Bush recorded win was 62-59 million. Where did he gain over 13 million new votes (1.75mm Bush 2000 voters died before 2004) to go from 49mm to 62mm? Kerry won between 54% to 61% of those who did not vote in 2000 (depending on the exit poll timeline) and over 70% of 3 million Nader voters.

    Manjoo, I’ve got news for you; rBr is dead. You call the Reluctant Bush Responder theory persuasive, but it was debunked before you even wrote “No Exit”. The Exit Poll Response Optimizer (July 2005) confirmed the USCV simulation model. They both refuted rBr. Here is the Optimizer analysis:

    Many voters went to sleep on election day assuming Kerry won. Jonathan Simon stayed up long enough to spot and download the 12:22am state exit polls. Luckily for us, The Washington Post chose not to delete the corresponding National Exit Poll (13047 respondents at 12:22am) which showed Kerry the 51-48% winner. We also have the earlier NEP timelines at 4pm (8349 respondents) and 7:30pm (11027 respondents) which established the 51-48% Kerry trend. He held the lead until the Final National Exit Poll (13660 respondents), when the numbers magically reverted to a 51-48% Bush win. The numbers (weights and vote shares) were revised to match the vote.

    According to the Final National Exit poll, 43% of the 122.3 million who voted in 2004 were Bush 2000 voters and 37% were Gore voters. These weightings in and of themselves debunk rBr. Now 43% of 122.3 is 52.57 million. And since Bush only got 50.5mm votes in 2000, of whom about 1.75mm died, only 48.7mm (39.8%) could have returned to vote in 2004, so the 43% Final NEP weighting was mathematically impossible. The Bush vote was inflated by 4 million. I have just shown that the Final Poll at 1:25pm on Nov.3 is bogus and that the earlier 12:22am numbers are close to the truth.

    Here’s proof that the Final NEP weights are impossible.

    Here’s the National Exit Poll Timeline. Notice the smooth trend in the first three timelines (4pm,7:38pm,12:22am). Compare it to the discontinuous Bush jump in ALL the demographic weights and/or vote shares in the Final NEP.

    We have proved that the Final NEP weights were mathematically impossible – unless you believe that 4 million Bush voters were reincarnated. Simple logic tells us that if the Final Exit poll was matched to the Bush recorded vote and was overstated by at least 4 million, then the Bush recorded vote must also have been overstated by at least 4 million.

    If you read my related posts, you would already know all this. But since you never mentioned them in your article, one can assume that a) you never read the posts, or b) you read them but chose not to discuss them. If it’s (a), why didn’t you? If it’s (b), why didn’t you? An impartial journalist seeking the truth would have.

    Which do you believe: the Final NEP or rBr? You can’t have both.

    You MUST read the “CLINCHER” thread. Kerry wins all plausible scenarios of 2000 voter turnout in 2004, assuming 100% Bush voter turnout and declining Gore voter turnout (from 100% to 70%) over a range of NEP Kerry vote shares (51-60%) of those who did not vote in 2000.

    As far as the myth of “false voter recall” is concerned, I suggest you read the “GAME” thread. The Bard College professor’s implausible explanation to explain the 3 million Bush “victory” margin (that almost one of 6 Gore voters defected to Bush in 2004 while just one of 16 Bush voters defected to Kerry) requires a leap of faith beyond the pale; the odds against it are astronomical. It’s the naysayer’s last stand. Their case against the “pristine” exit polls is in its “final throes”, having been reduced to a totally implausible hypothesis. Farhad, ask yourself who you voted for in 2004 and 2000. Or did you forget?

    You say you want a simulation? Well, you know…
    We’re doing the best we can.

    11/2/04, 3:59pm 8349 respondents: Kerry 51-Bush 48

    11/2/04, 7:33pm 11027 respondents: Kerry 51-Bush 48


    11/3/04, 12:22am 13047 respondents: Kerry 51-Bush 48

    11/3/04, 1:25pm 13660 respondents: Kerry 48-Bush 51

    Oh, sure, you will probably say: they matched the final exit poll to the vote. They do it all the time. Yes, Farhad, they do, even when the vote is corrupted. How come you never entertained the possibility that the votes were scammed? Or do you trust Bush/Rove to do the right thing and not try to steal the election? Remember Katherine Harris/ Jeb Bush in Florida 2000? Remember Ken Blackwell in Ohio 2004? Remember WMDs, mushroom clouds, Bush reading “My Pet Goat” on 911, domestic spying, torture, stem cells, Diebold, black disenfranchisement, spoiled votes, hacked voting machines, Hava bribes, Plame, the Aug.6, 2001 PDB, clearing Crawford brush,

    These are just a few of those who believe that the election was stolen: RFK Jr., John Conyers, Mark Miller, Robert Koehler, Michael Keefer, Thom Hartmann, Jim Lampley, Greg Palast, Bob Herbert, Steve Freeman, Kathy Dopp, Wayne Madsen, Ron Baiman, pollsters Harris and Zogby. Over 50% of the public believe that the election was stolen – and the percentage is growing daily. In fact, all the cable networks ran polls (except for Fox) which showed that a majority of viewers believe Bush stole it:

    Of course, we still have spineless Democratic politicians who dare not call it “fraud”. And that includes wannabee Al Franken. Well, at least Mike Malloy and Randi Rhodes are not afraid to talk about the stolen election. Unlike Al, they have no plans to run for office.

    Just curious. What is your math background? Specifically, statistical voting trends, polling mathematics, probability theory, Monte Carlo simulation? If you can’t follow the math or logic in my posts, don’t feel bad – the Mystery Pollster didn’t either. You will learn the basics if you download and run the Interactive Election and Monte Carlo polling simulation models. Do you have Excel? Here’s an intro to polling simulation and statistics:

    Link to all of my posts and models at:
    View my recent posts here:

    Finally, I suggest you consider the following in your next piece:
    Considering that Gore won in 2000 by over 540,000 votes and that
    1) Kerry won a solid majority of new voters (57-41%) and
    2) he also won a large majority of Nader voters (71-21%) and
    3) at most 49.2mm Gore and 48.7mm Bush voters turned out in 2004,
    then the discussion should end right here because… assuming a 95% turnout of Gore and Bush voters, Bush needed 19.5% OF GORE VOTERS TO WIN BY 3 MILLION VOTES.


    12:22am (13047 respondents)
    Assume 95% turnout of Gore and Bush voters
    Bush winning margin: 3.1mm

    VOTED IN 2000
    Percentage Votes in Millions
    Weight Votes Kerry Bush Other Kerry Bush Other
    No 21.59% 26.37 57% 41% 2% 15.0 10.8 0.5
    Gore 38.27% 46.75 80% 19.5% 0.5% 37.4 9.1 0.2
    Bush 37.86% 46.26 10% 90% 0% 4.6 41.6 0.0
    Nader 2.28% 2.79 71% 21% 8% 2.0 0.6 0.2

    Total 100% 122.2 48.3% 50.9% 0.8% 59.0 62.1 1.0

    If we assume a 2% MoE, the chances are LESS THAN ONE IN 1.5 QUADRILLION THAT BUSH WOULD GET 16% OF GORE VOTERS!
    PROB = 1- NORMDIST(0.16,0..08,0.01,TRUE)
    or 1 in 1,501,199,875,790,170



    Based on the 12:22am exit poll vote shares and mathematically feasible weightings, Kerry won by over 7 MILLION VOTES!

    VOTED IN 2000
    Percentage Votes in Millions
    Weight Votes Kerry Bush Other Kerry Bush Other
    No 21.59% 26.37 57% 41% 2% 15.0 10.8 0.5
    Gore 38.27% 46.75 91% 8% 1% 42.5 3.7 0.5
    Bush 37.86% 46.26 10% 90% 0% 4.6 41.6 0.0
    Nader 2.28% 2.79 71% 21% 8% 2.0 0.6 0.2

    Total 100% 122.2 52.4% 46.6% 1.0% 64.2 56.8 1.2
    Kerry margin: 7.4mm

    Farhad, I look forward to your next piece. Just be sure to discuss the analysis mentioned above. If you want to try to debunk it, be my guest.


Post comment

Forbidden Bookshelf

Forbidden Bookshelf

“While We Were Sleeping”

While We Were Sleeping is an urgent call to save Greenwich Village from New York University's uncontrolled expansion.

Click here to donate to NYUFASP and receive a copy of "While We Were Sleeping: NYU and the Destruction of New York" (minimum donation to receive a book is $10 plus $8 shipping).

Orwell Rolls In His Grave, featuring MCM – Buy the DVD

About News From Underground

News From Underground is a daily e-news service run by Mark Crispin Miller, a Professor of Culture and Communication at NYU. It is based on his belief that academics, like reporters, have a civic obligation to help keep the people well-informed, so that American democracy might finally work.

If you'd like to receive updates delivered to your inbox daily, sign up for News From Underground Alerts:

Help News From Underground!

Message from Mark: "I am a one-man operation, although assisted greatly by some volunteers, and, now and then, by people paid by others for one-time projects. There is no shortage of skilled, dedicated folks out there who want to help me. There is, however, nothing I can pay them with, unless you decide you can contribute something."

Please donate via the PayPal button above or via PayPal by email to:

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Popular Posts


Need a bigger font size?

Sponsored Links

  • Your link could be here too, contact us for pricing details.