> Robert wrote:
> It's a bunch of hooey. The entire exercise rests on the flawed assumption
> that the polls were conducted correctly

Isn't it a "flawed assumption" to assume they weren't?  In fact, all
the report is saying is that the odds of all of the exit polls in all
3 states being consistently conducted wrong is extremely low, almost
impossibly so.

The first rule of science is to assume nothing and let the facts speak
rather than your pre-conceived notions.  In this case, the facts say
that your assumption, that there was widespread consistent pollster
error , is very low.

Further, I'm more concerned about fair and accurate elections than
your partisan accusations.  Truth be told, Mr. Bush's election has
already given me a huge financial boost.  Throwing the election into
doubt would not be good for the markets, and reversing it would be
worse, not only within the markets, but for my taxes.

We've had 2 elections that have left room for doubt and that's not a
good thing.  Rise above your partisanship for a minute - there's a
broader and more important issue here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net
http://www.cfhosting.net

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:135842
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to