New Bloggerman entry is up:

[City Lights]

All I know is what I don't read in the papers (Keith Olbermann)

<snip>

And, save, for one "New York Times"reference to the CalTech/MIT study "disproving" the idea that the exit poll results were so wacky that they required thoroughly botched election nights in several states, the closest any of these research efforts have gotten to the mainstream media have been "Wired News" and "Countdown."

I still hesitate to endorse the ‘media lock-down’ theory extolled so widely on the net. I've expended a lot of space on the facts of political media passivity and exhaustion, and now I’ll add one factor to explain the collective shrugged shoulder: reading this stuff is hard. It’s hard work. (:evilgrin:)

There are, as we know, lies, damn lies, and statistics. But there is one level of hell lower still— scholarly statistical studies. I have made four passes at “The Effect of Electronic Voting Machines on Change in Support for Bush in the 2004 Florida Elections,” and the thing has still got me pinned to the floor.

Most of the paper is so academically dense that it seems to have been written not just in another language, but in some form of code. There is one table captioned “OLS Regression with Robust Standard Errors.” Another is titled “OLS regressions with frequency weights for county size.” Only the summary produced by Professor Michael Hout and the Berkeley Quantitative Methods Research Time is intelligible.

more... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240

[TaleWgnDg]

1. I remain on firm ground . . . then and now . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=47124

. . . and . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=201&topic_id=3167

edited to add addition url hyperlink (and to admit that I've got the election date incorrectly stated in both links)

[Rjnerd]

2. Just sent him a note...

Telling him that unless he has a statistics degree, he isn't expected to understand all the tables, they are there for the same reason you had to "show all work" back in high school math tests. They let the teacher (other statisticans) grade (peer review) your answer. Lets them know if you copied your answer from joey's paper (or manufactured your result).

Also reminded him that the result will shift if the number of questionable votes exceeds HALF the lead. After all, what got fraudulently assigned to one, should get correctly assigned to the other. Half the lead is not even the middle of the range they give.

[Miami Liberal]

3. Just sent him an e-mail too

I wonder if he's able to read all these e-mails we're sending him?

[Catchawave]

9. I know he's counting them!

I try and send a quick note everyday for encouragement to keep digging!

[Stephanie]

4. Is there anyone here who can translate that report for him?

A layman's summary would be useful to all of us too.

[Rjnerd]

5. Passed copies to Susan

My SO has bagged her limit on sheepskins. Working statistician, 6+ pages of published papers. She was too beat to look at it last night, but promised to do so shortly...

The berkeley paper did have an executive summary, that was mostly in engilish....

[onecitizen]

6. So, where IS Bloggerman?

Anybody know?

[Miami Liberal]

7. He's been on vacation this week

will be back on Countdown on Monday.

[Ima]

8. ?

Was anything on the recount mentioned on Tue, Wed, or Thur ? Had the TV on but didn't hear anything.

[Miami Liberal]

11. Not much was reported on the recount

I'm hoping Monday will bring better things.

[Roland99]

10. Any statisticians up here willing to lend him a hand?

:)