PROOF THAT NEOCONS ARE STUPID

No, he didn't.

The (totally irrelevant) "popular vote" had a margin of error greater than
the difference in numbers.

In other words, the most you can say about the (totally irrelevant) "popular
vote" is that "out of those ballots that were actually counted [and many
were not], it was a tie."

Jeeze, this is what, the third time in two months this has been thoroughly
explained and then discussed?

Steve Swartz

(OBTW, just because the "popular media" continues to repeat the lie of "Gore
won the [totally irrelevant] popular vote" doesn't make it any less a lie.
It just means that those in the popular media are stupid. But we know that
already.)


"Leadfoot" wrote in message
news:nXN1d.298098$Oi.247686@fed1read04...

"Ragnar" wrote in message
...

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
The vast majority of university professors and scholars are Democratic
liberals. Very few are neocons. The neocons just can't make the cut
into
higher
education.
They just aren't smart enough as Bush so eloquently demonstrates.

So, if Bush is so stupid, why is he President and you're just a bitter
old
man?

Because the supreme court elected him,

Remember the other guy had more people vote for him

Do your homework.


"Jack G" wrote in message
news:FVO1d.3647$g9.70@trnddc06...
Art, can you name the other presidents who were elected with less than a
majority of the popular vote? Or have you forgotten them?

Jack G.



Remember the other guy had more people vote for him


That will never be forgotten


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Is that any greater than the - 0 - hours you flew them?

Or do you have some stick time you haven't already embellished in this
group?

Reminder: riding around one is not loggable as PIC hours, Art.

Steve Swartz




"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
ubject: PROOF THAT NEOCONS ARE STUPID
From: Dweezil Dwarftosser
Date: 9/14/2004 10:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

ArtKramr wrote:


Martin? Isn't that the son of a bitch that built the B-26 Marauder?.
That
plane
damn near killed all of us before we even got to the ETO. The Baltimore
Whore,
The B dash Crash, the flying coffin, the one a day in tampa bay and the
widowmaker.Be glad you never served in one.

Just FYI, Art: they were still using that "one a day in Tampa
Bay" line in 1969 at MacDill - except the planes were by then
F-4Es of a Replacement Training Unit for the Vietnam war.

There was nothing defective about the aircraft or the maintenance,
either; it was the inexperienced drivers that put 'em there.



Is that from the 1,000 houirs you flew the B-26?




Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

From http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm

Popular Vote:

Bush: 50,456,002 47.87%
Go 50,999,897 48.38%

Looks like more to me!

Jack G.

"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Do your homework.


"Jack G" wrote in message
news:FVO1d.3647$g9.70@trnddc06...
Art, can you name the other presidents who were elected with less than a
majority of the popular vote? Or have you forgotten them?

Jack G.

"Jack G" wrote in message
news:h302d.8184$5t4.4608@trnddc01...
From http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm

Popular Vote:

Bush: 50,456,002 47.87%
Go 50,999,897 48.38%

Looks like more to me!

Uhmmm...I believe his point is in regards to the votes that actually
count--the Electoral College ones. ISTR Bush got more of those?

Brooks


Jack G.

"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Do your homework.


"Jack G" wrote in message
news:FVO1d.3647$g9.70@trnddc06...
Art, can you name the other presidents who were elected with less than
a
majority of the popular vote? Or have you forgotten them?

Jack G.

Jack:

I suspect that you are the same guy who kept ignoring all the explanations
before, and kept posting and reposting that table. If so, then the
following is a waste of bandwidth; if not, you might find the following
addition (your omission) illuminating:

Mechanical Tally Error:
Bush: 47.87 +/- 3.23 % (95% two-tailed confidence interval)
Go 48.38 +- 3.23 % (95% two tailed confidence interval)

Ballot Undercount Error, 2% - 7% local 3% estimated average (absentee etc.
ballots "not counted because they have no material effect on outcome")

So conservatively, the 0.51% difference between the two vote count totals
represents about a standard deviation's worth of difference.

So in other words, we are 80% confident that the true vote count could have
gone either way; and only 20% confident that Gore's total was actually
higher than Bush's.

Not counting, of course, fraud and/or uncounted ballots. This is just the
mechanical error of the vote counting machines.

Steve


"Jack G" wrote in message
news:h302d.8184$5t4.4608@trnddc01...
From http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm

Popular Vote:

Bush: 50,456,002 47.87%
Go 50,999,897 48.38%

Looks like more to me!

Jack G.

"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Do your homework.


"Jack G" wrote in message
news:FVO1d.3647$g9.70@trnddc06...
Art, can you name the other presidents who were elected with less than
a
majority of the popular vote? Or have you forgotten them?

Jack G.

ArtKramr wrote:

Just FYI, Art: they were still using that "one a day in Tampa
Bay" line in 1969 at MacDill - except the planes were by then
F-4Es of a Replacement Training Unit for the Vietnam war.

There was nothing defective about the aircraft or the maintenance,
either; it was the inexperienced drivers that put 'em there.


Is that from the 1,000 houirs you flew the B-26?

No, but it was from the more than 30,000 hours I eventually
amassed working on those F-4s.

How many hours do you have maintaining the B-26?
If the answer is "none", then you're totally unqualified to
comment on the subject.

John T. - 1st, 4th, 15th, 36th, 50th, 56th, 86th, and 388th TFWs.
Thailand, Germany, Spain, Turkey, Morrocco, Iran, Pakistan.

I never mentioned Electoral votes in my post. The topic of Art's post was
the popular vote.

Jack G.
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Jack G" wrote in message
news:h302d.8184$5t4.4608@trnddc01...
From http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm

Popular Vote:

Bush: 50,456,002 47.87%
Go 50,999,897 48.38%

Looks like more to me!

Uhmmm...I believe his point is in regards to the votes that actually
count--the Electoral College ones. ISTR Bush got more of those?

Brooks


Jack G.

"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Do your homework.


"Jack G" wrote in message
news:FVO1d.3647$g9.70@trnddc06...
Art, can you name the other presidents who were elected with less
than
a
majority of the popular vote? Or have you forgotten them?

Jack G.

I have no visibility of other posts that included the table I originally
posted - so yes I did ignore what I can not see.

The numbers that count are the official vote counts. The statistical
analysis is an interesting study - but does not change the official count.

Jack


"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Jack:

I suspect that you are the same guy who kept ignoring all the
explanations
before, and kept posting and reposting that table. If so, then the
following is a waste of bandwidth; if not, you might find the following
addition (your omission) illuminating:

Mechanical Tally Error:
Bush: 47.87 +/- 3.23 % (95% two-tailed confidence interval)
Go 48.38 +- 3.23 % (95% two tailed confidence interval)

Ballot Undercount Error, 2% - 7% local 3% estimated average (absentee etc.
ballots "not counted because they have no material effect on outcome")

So conservatively, the 0.51% difference between the two vote count totals
represents about a standard deviation's worth of difference.

So in other words, we are 80% confident that the true vote count could
have
gone either way; and only 20% confident that Gore's total was actually
higher than Bush's.

Not counting, of course, fraud and/or uncounted ballots. This is just the
mechanical error of the vote counting machines.

Steve


"Jack G" wrote in message
news:h302d.8184$5t4.4608@trnddc01...
From http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm

Popular Vote:

Bush: 50,456,002 47.87%
Go 50,999,897 48.38%

Looks like more to me!

Jack G.

"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Do your homework.


"Jack G" wrote in message
news:FVO1d.3647$g9.70@trnddc06...
Art, can you name the other presidents who were elected with less
than
a
majority of the popular vote? Or have you forgotten them?

Jack G.

"Jack G" wrote in message
news:dA02d.6092$MS1.2252@trnddc02...
I never mentioned Electoral votes in my post. The topic of Art's post was
the popular vote.

Then you are wasting your breath--the nationwide popular vote does not mean
squat.

Brooks


Jack G.
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Jack G" wrote in message
news:h302d.8184$5t4.4608@trnddc01...
From http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm

Popular Vote:

Bush: 50,456,002 47.87%
Go 50,999,897 48.38%

Looks like more to me!

Uhmmm...I believe his point is in regards to the votes that actually
count--the Electoral College ones. ISTR Bush got more of those?

Brooks


Jack G.

"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Do your homework.


"Jack G" wrote in message
news:FVO1d.3647$g9.70@trnddc06...
Art, can you name the other presidents who were elected with less
than
a
majority of the popular vote? Or have you forgotten them?

Jack G.