Yesterday on The David Pakman show they discussed the possibility of exit poll data pointing to election fraud in key battleground states during the general election.
Before getting to the exit poll data and what it means David Pakman had to make certain to give multiple disclaimers, claiming that “I’m not saying [there is election fraud]” yet “this is absolutely huge!”
1. I’m disappointed that David Pakman had an entire segment on his show about something that he is not saying.
2. I’m disappointed in David Pakman for failing to bring up the Democratic Primary given the segments topic.
3. I’m disappointed that David Pakman didn’t bring up the research done by Election Justice USA which detailed exit poll data favoring Bernie Sanders in the majority of states during the Democratic Primary.
4. I’m disappointed that David Pakman didn’t discuss the recent work of lulu Fries’dat & Anselmo Sampietro which details what vote flipping looks like.
5. I’m disappointed that David Pakman failed to mention that Edison Media Research Inc, whose data he is relying on to make the claims (he is not saying) is in court because they won’t release the raw data they collected during the Democratic Primary.
6. I’m disappointed in David Pakman because his source for his segment is one of the same gentlemen who claimed the Democratic Primary was stolen from Bernie Sanders yet doesn’t make that connection for the viewer.
— Greg Palast (@Greg_Palast) November 15, 2016
Most of all, I’m disappointed in David Pakman because he can’t bring himself to say the words Bernie Sanders or the Democratic Primary in a segment about exit poll data showing election fraud using some of the same sources and similar methodology that showed discrepancies months earlier during the Democratic Primary.
I’m just asking that the next time a political pundit does an entire segment on exit polls and election fraud they could at the very least say his name.
I’m sure you’re wondering at this point how exactly David Pakman characterized the similar fraud charges during the Democratic Primary. Let’s take a look:
The first thing to notice is the marked difference of tone. At no point does he expound the discrepancy in exit poll data with the actual vote count with marked excitement or enthusiasm as he did in his presentation yesterday. In fact, no data or margins were discussed in this segment at all. Instead they did their best to discredit a group reporting on the data. Overall, the segment seemed aimed toward Lee Camp and his followers to pump the brakes on talk of election fraud.
To conclude, I’d just like to point out the inherent difficulty anyone in Clinton’s camp is going to have claiming election fraud took place due to exit polling considering the same data and methodology show her stealing the Democratic Primary. It is a nonstarter to suggest such a thing without admitting what occurred to Clinton’s benefit in the Primary.