0 votes

AOL caught fixing their own poll!!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

RP in the lead in AOL poll

Update from last numbers:

RG +165
MH +197
RP +4683

RP and RG both at 21%, but RP has a 130 more votes.

Unfair Polls

My mom got a poll call this week. It was automated. You had to press a button for the different candidates. Ron Paul was not included. They did have a button for "other".

Ron paul Insulted by Steve Gill

Steve gill just insulted us on radio in mid tenn at 8:52 am central ,,online poll,, he is asking neocons to vote against Ron .,,,,,Its on his web site www.gillreport.com

Good Catch

Not sure of the vote numbers but the choice "Ron Paul is the only honest politician...etc..." is way way ahead of the no confident votes. Apparently his neocon friends either don't listen, don't vote in online polls, or there just aren't enough to compete with Ron Paul's army. Any of those explanations are good news for me. :O)

RP Catching up on RG

Ron Paul is now at 19%, 2% or ~4500 votes behind Ghouliani.

Change from a few hours ago:

RG + 46
MH +216
RP + 2193

I guess they did fix the "fix'

Princton Deibold machine fraud proof.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGQPxsigQIM

Make sure that they count the votes...

No electronic machines.... They are rigged...

Proven by Princton University...

I knew it!

There was just something that smelled about that poll.

I have saved a copy -- I'm sure it will be pulled from YouTube soon.

Good luck to us all,

Lisa C.
www.ronpaulinternational.com

Ron Paul "Sign Wave Across the USA" -- November 5th!

I found this on digg, but the file is gone?

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/AOL_Invades_Your_Privacy_F...

AOL Invades Your Privacy For Rudy Giuliani
AOL Time Warner takes the screen names on your AIM buddy list and outsources jobs to spam them with Rudy Giuliani solicitation. VoteRudy08 IMed me and at first I flamed him... but then he mentioned getting paid and so I started to dig deeper.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."
-- Mahatma Gandhi

won't work

Their pockets are not deep enough for their mercenaries to compete with an army of determined volunteers! Go Ron!

BP

Somebody get this data to Dan

at RonPaulGraphs.

The text listing of the numbers is pretty unintelligable.

Would like to see behavior of Rudy, Huck, Mitt AFTER the bust.

I would assume that Ron's numbers would go up due to the attention this has drawn among RP people.

But if RUDY'S numbers have fallen off..... hmmmm suspicious indeed!!!

Post bust data

Since the bust I recorded the following approx changes:

Rudy +10,000
Huck +10,000
Paul +16,000
Mitt +4,000
Mcain +600

Paul moved from 17% to 19%

Almost neck and neck, only 6000 votes in it.

Expect the poll to disappear in about...hmmm...4 hours maybe!

Seems like Huck's visit to the desert to face Satan (CFR) is paying dividends as dished out by the satan worshipers at Illuminati AOL. May his soul reside in hell for eternity (not that I believe in the soul, hell or eternity, but that's a different matter!)

This Thanksgiving tell Drudge et al that AOL is a proven spammer

(Please don't concentrate on the subtraction angle. It may be explicable. The angle you want is CHANGE in BEHAVIOR after EXPOSURE.)

PERSONALIZE THIS LETTER AND SEND TO DRUDGE@DRUDGEREPORT.COM AND JFARAH@WND.COM and ALL your favorite whistle-blowers.

Sirs: As a Ron Paul supporter, I know news organizations like yours are very interested in reports of online poll spamming and would fall over each other for credible proof that spamming occurred. I think that proof has just become public as of today, Thanksgiving Day. And the spammers are not Paul supporters, but AOLTimeWarner.

Today, YouTube identity "AOLExposed" posted a 4-minute screen capture of AOL's untemplated realtime presidential poll results, demonstrating that, during six different 1-second intervals, vote counts increased incredibly by 147-163 votes each time, while most other intervals were expectedly flat. Some hours later, DailyPaul identity "Libera_me" posted the results of a 15-minute capture of votes from the same AOL URL, demonstrating that the vote reporting had, in the interim, shrunk dramatically to no more than a reasonable 9 votes maximum per 1-second interval. Traffic had dropped from 1073 votes in 4 minutes to (exactly) 300 votes in 15 minutes.

There may be explanations for each of these data points in isolation, but taken together they resist any other explanation than that AOL changed its vote capture method within hours of the suspiciousness of their capture method being publicized. The second results were captured after sudden interest of DailyPaul readers would be expected to drive traffic up, yet traffic fell by a factor of thirteen. Any viewer can compare the current behavior of http://webcenter.polls.aol.com/modular.jsp?template=0&resTyp... against the behavior observed in AOLExposed's video.

Also, during the first capture, "bump" votes were demonstrably slanted differently from "nonbump" votes, without any reason, and overwhelmed nonbump numbers. The 955 bump votes, compared to the 118 nonbump votes, favored Giuliani (21.6% over 16.9%), McCain (10.1% over 7.6%), and Thompson (16.3% over 11.9%), while the nonbump votes favored Huckabee (25.4% over 22.3%), Hunter (3.4% over 1.8%), Paul (16.1% over 12.0%), and Other (8.5% over 5.0%). These slight differences may individually be attributable to margin of error, but the fact that they consistently favor "anointed" candidates, slanting the nonbump numbers by just a few percentage points each, suggests a very carefully planted bias.

During the second capture, NO bump votes appeared (and Paul supporters had begun voting in disproportionate numbers). The question to AOL is: why did bump incidents, in ever-so-gradually slanting directions toward candidates favored by the media (in terms of coverage and hitcounts), wholly DISAPPEAR after the AOLExposed video was posted? There might have been an explanation still available after the video-- but after the change in behavior had been documented, it may be evidence of a coverup of a coverup (Spamgate?) that will have severe ramifications for this political cycle.

Please maintain my trust, and advise your readership of this incident, leading them to demand an explanation and apology from AOL. Further, they should disqualify themselves from further online polling and should be held to such disqualification by competitive journalists who maintain any integrity.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

I believe the subtraction is the point

I have built many polling apps I have never programmed a subtraction function for any of them. Only a fixed poll would subtract points.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."
-- Mahatma Gandhi

Yeah, why subtract?

That's the thing I don't agree with, having a poll that subtracts votes? Makes absolutely no sense, unless you want to make sure you can control the outcome.

It could be a script or manual manipulation, but I would say

scripts.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."
-- Mahatma Gandhi

Time for PEOPLE POWER -- everyone tell Drudge about AOL!

Everyone please go to drudgereport.com, type the link to this page (http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/reply/8790) in the NEWS TIPS box, and click Submit. Or send a personal email to drudge@drudgereport.com, we will provide more talking points. You have enough to do it now though. HE WILL COVER THIS with our people power and it will snowball from there. He hates AOL. This could be a real Thanksgiving to remember. It's the FIRST credible proof of REAL poll spamming -- and it's not us! It's the MSM! Rejoice and be of exceeding good cheer!

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Mr. Occam called, he wants his razor back

The accusation in the video is utterly baseless. Now, I know a little bit about web development, and there are numerous explanations for the vote jumping observed, all far, far more simple and probable than AOL clickfrauding their own poll.

AOL is a collection of load-balancing servers. There's at least three ways to access this poll -- through this site, the AOL homepage, and the AIM welcome page. All three may reside on different servers for load balancing purposes. Now, since there's just one poll, all these servers need to sync up every so often, which may lead to the observed effect.
Another possibility is that the database server experiences different loads at different times, and vote insertions are queued up, and are processed in "gulps" to speed things up.
There are other, slightly more technical, but still more probable explanations that I won't get into.

So when the present poll results disagree with the poster's assumptions about who should be leading (Ron Paul), he quickly assumes it's a conspiracy -- even though the numbers actually agree with other polls (Giuliani being in the lead).

This is what the OMG CONSPIRACY!!! mindset will get you. A guy sees a pattern he believes is unusual, and is immediately convinced it's a conspiracy. He knows nothing about the subject (though he clearly believes otherwise) except what "he thinks ought to be" -- without so much as a thought as to where he got his preconception, and whether it's legitimate. This ignorance, coupled with a strong sense of vigilanteism ("I want to be the first to expose this evil conspiracy!") leads people to believing the moon landing was faked, and the twin towers we brought down by bombs.

This is the sort of thing that discredits the Ron Paul Revolution in the public's eye. And, sadly, I cannot blame them.

____________________________________________________________

paulcash - Ron Paul's Realtime donation tracker

Slact, please explain this ...

I have great respect for your site, but see if you can answer what remains after this observation.

AOL has CHANGED THEIR BEHAVIOR after the video was posted and there is NO INNOCENT EXPLANATION of that.

This video records bump numbers of 145-163 votes PER BUMP, six times, while watching a total of 1073 votes in 4 minutes. I performed the same exercise over 300 votes in about 15 minutes, and saw no bumps larger than 9 votes. This canNOT be explained by interest suddenly dropping tremendously in the intervening 4-5 hours. It can only be explained by a spammer dropping the fix after he thinks he's been "made". Ironically, if the spammer had NOT changed the activity, it could still be defended as legit by arguments such as you are familiar with. But the coverup of the coverup may take AOL Time Warner all the way down.

Between 3:10 and 3:25 pm EST (N from 213275 to 213575) I recorded the following votes in the following "bumps" or clusters (period means cluster continues next line, minus means vote disappeared (apparently innocently), parens are Paul/no Paul):

35555 555 15555 5 5 56 5 55 5 -5 5555 1. (21/4)
155 55555 55 5555 555 5 555 555 5. (24/1)
5 555555 5 558866 5 5555 55 22 5 5. (19/6)
55 5 5 55555 55 -5 555 5 5 5555 56 55 52. (23/2)
28 -2 225555 55 55 5 25559 25 1255 55. (17/8)
555555 5555555 5 55 5 55555569 (23/2)
145555 255555556 5 5555 24555. (19/6)
9 55555 5 55 555555 555 5555 555. (24/1)
5 25 555 15 5 555 555 5 55 5555 555. (23/2)
55 5555 2555556 25 55559 2 1555. (19/6)
555 15568 45556 5555 25555 5 55. (19/6)
5 55 5 558 155555 5 2555 2 555555 (21/4)

Again, from 1-9 the candidates are rg mh dh jm rp mr tt ft xx.

There is NO explanation for the server traffic dropping by a factor of about 13, especially when it is clear that Ronpaulicans are, er, "freeping" the poll right now at 84%, but "real" votes during the prior period gave Huck 25% and Paul and GIuliani 16%. The sudden Ronpaulican interest precludes a 13-fold drop in traffic; it is clear that traffic during the first disputed period was much more likely to be 118 votes in 4 minutes, not 1073.

I think AOL is guilty of fraud on this count and the videographer has been vindicated.

Do your own research, then post here. The video's link is:
http://webcenter.polls.aol.com/modular.jsp?template=0&resTyp...

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Deconspiring

I performed the same exercise over 300 votes in about 15 minutes, and saw no bumps larger than 9 votes. This canNOT be explained by interest suddenly dropping tremendously in the intervening 4-5 hours.

Quite simple - the poll moved off the front page.

Between 3:10 and 3:25 pm EST (N from 213275 to 213575) I recorded the following votes in the following "bumps" or clusters
[numbers follow]

I have already given a possible and likely explanation of this behavior. Servers load-balance, and they cache things. This can easily produce the behavior observed.
Your claim is that over 890% of the votes are fraudulent. Do you also assume the same for the Democrats poll, which got ~198k votes (compared to Republicans' 213k)? There is no evidence that these "jumps" in votes are produced by a script (or some other form of tampering), and not load balancing artifacts.
_____________________________________________________________
paulcash - Ron Paul's Realtime Donation tracker

OK, dropping out of this argument

Like I said from the start, many things can be explained away and caution is advised. I'm sorry, I did not think of their depromoting the poll, and will need to take back my immoderate reply. As in the past, if there were hijinks, the establishment has covered their tracks. There may not have been vote fraud in this case, but I do believe there has been vote fraud in the past, for which evidence has successfully been covered up and has not aspired to probative value in court (ask Dino Rossi). Paul agrees with me, he stated that he believes the election of Nov 1976 was stolen from him. The differences in percentages from (apparently) different servers are still suspicious, but I can no longer present them as probative.

Let's divert our resources to better things. Now that AOL has gotten our outrage bump, Paul is less than 2000 votes behind leader Giuliani, and (as I've always said) voting in that poll is irrelevant: he'll pass him, or he won't, or they'll alternate, and it won't matter.

What we need now is for people to research how they individually can prevent vote fraud by personal activity in January in Iowa and New Hampshire. That priority should zoom to the forefront. Will return this account to my beautiful wife.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Time on your hands?

Wow, I'm glad you have so much time on your hands to do that research. ;-)

Imagine how we can focus this creative and passionate energy into Dr. Ron Paul's election. This is awesome.

AOL/Time Warner is no friend of liberty.

Can vouch for AOL being worthy of serious investigation

1. The documented instance of Duncan Hunter LOSING ONE VOTE is highly suspicious, but not enough, because a good billionaire liar, I mean lawyer, can beat that.

2. The documented change in behavior mentioned by other watchers, while partly due to us Ronpaulicans joining in, probably also reflects change in the programming. The fix of the fix.

3. There is a documented difference between results. The videographer accuses the majority of votes, which occur at easily recognized bumps, of being botspam; the nonbump numbers are accepted as real votes. Here's the whole "spreadsheet":

036579 028 031 034 033 04 043 033 036805 206 020 rg 21.6 16.9 22.7
031621 032 032 033 037 07 034 038 031864 213 030 mh 22.3 25.4 19.7
001965 005 002 001 004 -1 004 002 001986 017 004 dh 01.8 03.4 01.2
015895 013 016 015 019 04 011 018 016000 096 009 jm 10.1 07.6 09.9
024721 016 020 022 018 03 018 018 024855 115 019 rp 12.0 16.1 15.3
014774 009 010 018 016 02 018 018 014876 091 011 mr 09.5 09.3 09.2
002083 003 004 002 001 01 002 000 002097 013 001 tt 01.4 00.8 01.3
024276 027 026 026 025 05 025 022 024446 156 014 ft 16.3 11.9 15.1
008951 012 006 006 006 01 003 014 009009 048 010 xx 05.0 08.5 05.6
160865 145 147 157 159 26 158 163 161938 955 118

The short version is: between N=160865 and N=161938 we captured 955 suspected botspam votes and 118 accepted real votes. The last four columns show candidate initials (including "other" as "xx"), botspam vote, and real vote. While it's within margin of error, note that Giuliani, McCain, and Thompson each get a sizable bump of 2.5%-4.4%, while Hunter and Paul get dumped on by 1.6% and 4.1%. The fact that there are up to 4% differences is NOT significant. What IS significant is that the poll ONLY favors anointed candidates (but letting Romney fend for himself), and slams it to real conservatives (but letting Tancredo fend for himself), as well as "Other". That's enough credibility and probable cause to start an investigation my friends!!!!

4. Soundbite version of above.

AOL was caught deleting at least one online vote during a poll.

The poll's behavior changed after it was publicized. We may not get more evidence.

Though anyone could have replicated the YouTube results, now they probably can't.

The poll gave enough favor and disfavor to enough candidates to be suspicious.

Mainstream media will believe they can ignore and explain away all of the above unless WE MOVE NOW. Feel free to vote in the rigged election-- but EMAIL FIRST!

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Not paranoid delusion!

"paranoid delusion!" so says Winston Smith below!

Wake-up to the fact that...This real and it has happened.

We are all 9/11 Truthers...we all just want the truth!

Real Vote Fraud.

Hey, I just want to bring the Black Box Voting machines back into the discussion. I think this should be a massive topic. Vote fraud can negate all of our hard work.

The mainstream media is dead.

Open this forum

Open this forum to learn about the We The People foundation, whose goal is exactly what you want.

http://dailypaul.com/node/6437

davidinliberty's picture

Definitely something to keep in mind

You are absolutely right. The fight is not ever, nor will it ever be.

-Dave

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand

SHE STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN - Michael Savage in reference to Dianne Fienstein

David Burns
Simi Valley, CA

Media = brainwash propaganda

23 tools to brainwash with the media
http://dailypaul.com/node/8740

HOLD OFF ON AOL FOR 1 HOUR ...

... video's numbers do not cross-foot, i.e., fail an initial accounting test. He or I made a cross-check error. Please don't assume this is an AOL malevolence and create another conspiracy theory which can be easily refuted by those billionaire-class liars, I mean lawyers. Let me report back soon on this thread.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

What I Saw Last Night

I saw Ron Paul's total vote count go just over 34,000, then drop back down to 33,776. Now how do you explain that?

As I've said in other posts, I actually worked for AOL, and I was encouraged and saw others encouraged to be dishonest. This does not surprise me at all that they would cheat in a meaningless poll.

I watched this poll yesterday

I knew something was not right.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."
-- Mahatma Gandhi