Reply #11: Yes, I can respond to that [View All]

[Febble]

The two precincts where, even if all voters who did not respond to the exit poll had voted for Bush, the exit poll would not have matched the vote count, are "impossible" only if you assume that only form of polling bias is literal "non-response" bias. If the sampling itself was not random - i.e. if Kerry voters were sampled at a higher rate than Bush voters - and there is credible evidence that this was so - then the discrepancy between poll and count is perfectly plausible.

Of course, so is fraud. But it is certainly not a smoking gun. Sampling bias is a real phenomenon. It is usually subsumed under the heading "non-response bias" because in one sense is due to a form of non-response, but my own view is that non-response bias (one group of voters declining to be interviewed at a different rate from another group) and sampling bias (one group of voters being sampled at a different rate from another) should probably be distinguished. Both are well-documented phenomena.