It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nevada Was A Rigged Election - Harry Reid Is A Cheating Scumbag

page: 4
35
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   
 




 



posted on Nov, 4 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Ok...so I guess the biggest source of proof people are looking at are the polls done.

So let's look at some of the polls right up to the election.

All Poll information from here: www.realclearpolitics.com...

PPP Poll (10/30 - 10/31):
Angle +3, margin of error +/- 3.8

And there is also this:

Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting,
may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.


And from this same poll, they aren't even doubting Reid could win


“The Nevada Senate election is really going to hinge on whether thousands of Obama
voters who haven’t been particularly engaged with this year’s election end up turning out
tomorrow or not,” said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. “Reid has a
higher ceiling of support than Angle and will win if enough of those people show up but
whether they will is an open question.”



Next Poll: Fox News Poll (10/30 - 10/31)

Angle +3 with a +/- 3% margin of error


Next poll, LVRJ/Mason Dixon ( 10/25 - 10/27)

This time has Angle at a +4 with a +/- 4% margin of error



Same thing with all the polls. And remember...these are POLLS...they try to be as accurate they can be...but they are still POLLS. They are good at showing trends...they aren't great at predicting results. And they almost always under-represent big cities due to their "random" selection of the likely voters in the whole state.


So there is some actual data for you to look at....nothing Earth shattering or shocking if you keep up with polls.



edit on 4-11-2010 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2010 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Of course you would think this.

Nothing you posted is proof...all speculation...come back with proof.


That of what you ask is in short supply these days on ATS OutKast, speculation though, it is flowing like a river.



posted on Nov, 4 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



Polls are not meaningless.

They are the only check we have against vote fraud by electronic tampering.

RCP is consistently within tight margins of elections.

They are almost never off by more than 5%.

Their track record speaks for itself.


Ok...let's check that record.


California Senate - Boxer vx. Fiorina
RCP Average: Boxer +5.0
Actual Resul: Boxer +9.3
RCP off by 4.3

Illinois Governor - Brady vs. Quinn
RCP Average: Brady +4.7
Actual Result: Quinn +0.5
RCP off by 5.2

Rhode Island Governor - Chafee vs. Caprio vs. Robitaille
RCP Average: Chafee +8.0
Actual Result: Chafee +2.5
RCP off by 5.5

Georgia Senate - Isakson vs. Thurmond
RCP Average: Isakson +24.5
Actual Results: Isakson +18.9
RCP off by 5.6

West Virginia Senate Special Election - Raese vs. Manchin
RCP Average: Manchin +4.5
Actual Result: Manchin +10.1
RCP off by 5.6

New Hampshire Senate - Ayotte vs. Hodes
RCP Average: Ayotte +16.0
Actual Result: Ayotte +23.5
RCP off by 7.5

Nevada Senate - Angle vs. Reid
RCP Average: Angle +2.7
Actual Result: Reid +5.6
RCP off by 8.3

Hawaii Senate - Cavasso vs. Inouye
There is no RCP Average for this one...just two Polls.
Rasmussen Poll: Inouye +13
Daily KOS/PPP: Inouye +36
Actual Result: Inouye +53.2
Polls off by: 40.2 and 17.2
The RCP Average would of been around 24.2...which would of been off by 29


And these were just from THIS election. I'm sure if I went and dug through past election results I could find more examples of RCP being off by more than 5 points...or even off by more than 8 points. It shows that it was a hard state to poll.

Look at the 2008 Presidential polls
Nevada: McCain vs. Obama
RCP Average: Obama +6.5
Actual Result: Obama +12.4
RCP off by 5.9


I like RCP...they do a good job of collection and averaging out the polls...but they aren't perfect. The difference in the poll numbers are not enough to show as proof of election fraud.



posted on Nov, 4 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Thank you.

For compiling evidence, and providing sanity.



posted on Nov, 4 2010 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Although your defense is admirable, I respectfully disagree with your defense.

We know the threads here with how voting can be rigged...

The first step in rigging the computer side is overriding the main program... One of the ways to guarantee this is to reboot the system... Say turn off the power...

channel six- power outage



LAS VEGAS (BNO NEWS) -- All election results from polling stations in Nevada have been significantly delayed because of a power outage, officials said on late Tuesday evening. The power outage happened at approximately 5.45 p.m. PDT at Schofield Middle School in southeast Las Vegas, resulting in long lines of people who wanted to vote before polls closed at 7 p.m. PDT. The power outage has since been resolved, but people were still waiting to cast their vote as of 8 p.m. PDT.


lookie here it is in clark county

????????

Wait till I am running in twenty twelve....

A lot of mysterious blackouts.....



posted on Nov, 4 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


I was addressing your lies and attempts at misinformation. In spite of your ignorance to facts here's another idea about why the polls were wrong:

Did Polls Underestimate Democrats’ Latino Vote?

and

Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly


Moreover, Rasmussen’s polls were quite biased, overestimating the standing of the Republican candidate by almost 4 points on average. In just 12 cases, Rasmussen’s polls overestimated the margin for the Democrat by 3 or more points. But it did so for the Republican candidate in 55 cases — that is, in more than half of the polls that it issued.


The emphasis is mine, the polls were wrong, you were wrong, Harry Reid won and rightfully so. Get over it.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:29 AM
link   
before i get the responses myself....

It was the only oddity I noticed...... the power flux or what ever caused it is very odd...

I am not gripping over who won...

The better of the two crooks won... While pelosi is gone reid is still there



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 


So let me get this straight...the power went out at ONE polling place...and that turned the whole election over to Reid???


BTW...Pelosi is not gone...she was re-elected with 80% of the vote. It's amazing to me that people still think she lost.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:44 AM
link   
Oh of course, because that nutty fruitcake "Second Amendment Remedies" Angle was defeated, it must be fraud.


Or maybe, just maybe, the voters figured that the lesser of two evils in this case wasn't the crazy lady who wanted to start blowing away her fellow Americans.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


...

Reid as Pelosi, and other Dems risked it all for HealthCare. Reid survived. Nancy's bruised and sore. God bless'm both.

Decoy



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1

reply to post by mnemeth1
 



Yeah, I hate Latinos.

I also have swastikas tattooed on my forehead and march around praising Hitler.



edit on 3-11-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/11/10 by masqua because: Uncivil quote removed


do you have the boots too?


are the swats in red or black?


eta, sorry thought it was funny what you said and responded without reading all.
edit on 5-11-2010 by fooks because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Oh please. If Reid is a cheating scumbag, then Bush is the king of all cheats. He should NOT have been elected president in 2000.

And someone mentioned how it's not typical behavior to vote for a republican governor and then put a democrat into the senate. Before mouthing off like that, why don't you look up other states? It's plenty typical for that to happen. North Carolina has had 28 democratic governors since 1877. And three republican governors since then. NC almost always sends republicans to the senate, and until recently (Obama) voted for republican governors. Take off your tinfoil hats, the election wasn't rigged.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Jbalon
 


I agree both sides are crooked...

I really would like more details on the power outage.... It was mentioned then dropped on radio... I found it very odd...



either way I guess I need to add one more phrase... They are all crooked.....



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


wow, that is a passionate post. living in Florida I know elections CAN be rigged.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


There were no lies, nor any misinformation submitted. I've noticed you constantly use the same news web for your sole basis of argument. Not even realizing that your sources are very liberally biased. And thats fine, if you wish to continue your arrogance, that's your prerogative.
I submitted sources throughout this thread that would argue your point on the contrary. I've seen you many times on other threads, not being able to answer the simplest of questions....You do on the other hand, way to much copy and pasting of other peoples comments and statements. I guess some just can't seem to conjure up a thought of their own?



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1

RCP projected Angle to win by a 2.7% margin. They are almost never off that far. I could believe Reid actually won fair and square if the margins were within 5%, but 8% is just too much for me to swallow.


Real Clear Politics is not the best polling source..

Both Angle's and Reid's internal campaign Polls showed reid with the advantage..


In any case, here's the story. Neither side's internal polls in Nevada were showing what the public polls were showing. And they weren't far off: Neck and neck but with at least some advantage to Reid. Both sides internal polling apparently showed results that were pretty consistent with the final result.

www.talkingpointsmemo.com...

Cell Phones count for a bigger and bigger percentage of error in polls these days.

Many younger voters have only a cell phone, no land-line, and if a Poll doesn't account for cell-phone only voters, it can be way off.

In Nevada the pollsters did not compensate for the discrepency.

See here..


But in the case of Nevada at least it looks like the public pollsters really were missing a number of younger voters, Hispanic voters and just voters in general who, for a number of reasons, were much harder to reach. And those voters heavily favored Harry Reid. In theory, a pollster can still overcome some of that sample bias by controlling and 'weighting' for the different underlying demographic groups. But it looks like a lot of the public pollsters just didn't do that as consistently or as aggressively as they should have.

www.talkingpointsmemo.com...



posted on Nov, 10 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by links234
 


There were no lies, nor any misinformation submitted.


Let's try this again:


Originally posted by Whereweheaded
Nevada has been a scene of treachery for a long time! As a former resident of the silver state, I can assure you that questionable actions has occurred. For example, during the general election, the ACORN chapter in Las Vegas was found guilty of election fraud.


False, misinformation addressed in a previous post. No ruling means no one was 'found guilty'.


This chapter shut down for a brief time under the premise of " management changes". The SEIU, was also found performing questionable actions.


No evidence of such action, misinformation or flat out lying?


But many of you argue otherwise, then why did Harry Reid in FACT solicit to hand out free food in favor of a vote?

source: www.lasvegassun.com...


Your source is a campaign flyer which has been stated to be full of "conjecture and rumor". So once again, lies or misinformation?


I've noticed you constantly use the same news web for your sole basis of argument. Not even realizing that your sources are very liberally biased. And thats fine, if you wish to continue your arrogance, that's your prerogative.


I've used websites you, personally, have linked to for your own arguments and you're telling me there's a liberal bias? I don't think a conservative website is going to report on corruption within the republican/conservative circle just as corruption is reported very thoroughly on many democratic/liberal websites. If you'd like to point me to some new organization that you don't veiw as biased I'll work harder to address you using that particular news organization.


I submitted sources throughout this thread that would argue your point on the contrary.


I submitted your same sources that would argue your point on the contrary.


I've seen you many times on other threads, not being able to answer the simplest of questions....You do on the other hand, way to much copy and pasting of other peoples comments and statements. I guess some just can't seem to conjure up a thought of their own?


Sometimes, someone has already said it better. Some people require clarification on certain subjects to really understand something. Others just need some positive reinforcement of their ideas.

Because I'm a frequent participant in a wide array of political discussions shouldn't discount my abilities to point out fallacies and inaccuracies in those discussions. As for 'simple' questions I may have overlooked I try to address them to the best of my abilities, I've already written off one person on this website as if I were talking to a wall...regardless of what information I may present or suggest there are individuals who will absolutely, vehemently deny any such information exists or simply suggest it's wrong.

Finally, totally off the topic of the thread but relevant to any future discussions I ever partake in with you or anyone else; If you show the viewpoints of a particularly conservative author to make a point on a subject I should be allowed to share the viewpoints of a particularly liberal author to make my own point on a subject. Can we at least agree that more than one viewpoint on varying subjects is good thought stimulation for one's stance in matters?



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I do like your avatar... I know its off the subject but ATS really should have a contest for the best avatars and interesting ones...

Now to your post...

My understanding was that the power outage also hit several places at once and more then just one area...

Election night I was driving listening to NPR and they reported that Reids headquarters in clark county was also without power... along with several other places...

I called the election for reid right at that point... Before power was restored....

I found it all suspicious ...

On a side note did you read the thread

white house insider


Also I reread my post...

It was missing a word from what I was thinking... The words is gone from power as speaker and reid is still in his spot was along the lines of what I was thinking...

I should have chosen better words aligned with what I was thinking... My humble apologies...

edit on 12-11-2010 by ripcontrol because: my words I used versus what I was thinking



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Of course you would think this.

Nothing you posted is proof...all speculation...come back with proof.


I know, critically thinking is something I am prone to do.

It's a bad habit of mine.

I need to stop thinking about statistical probabilities.

I run into this same dilemma when I think about the statistical probability of a steel and concrete building imploding at free fall speed from some office fires.




Look my man, you really should critically think about how the public perceived Angle and her rhetoric...

It is like me questioning why Wavy Gravy cannot carry a state in an election...

I know YOU have your eye up to the camels asshole, but the results are really not that surprising to someone without a dog in the fight.







 
35
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join