Grr my tinfoil hat is starting to call out to me

[Egnever]

someone stop me now please...

heres the last poll results and the final results.


BO HC JE BR
RCP Average 01/05 to 01/07 - 38.3 30.0 18.3 5.7 Obama +8.3
Final result 36% 39% 17% 5%


and on the puke side

JM MR MH RG RP FT
RCP Average 01/05 to 01/07 31.8 28.2 12.2 9.3 8.2 2.2
Final result 37% 32% 11% 9% 8% 1%

The polls were almost dead on except for Obama and Clinton

Add to that
----------------------------------------------------------------
Source: www.blackboxvoting.org /

Silvestro the Cat & New Hampshire Elections

John Silvestro and his small private business, LHS Associates, has the exclusive programming contracts for all New Hampshire voting machines, which combined will count about 81 percent of the vote tomorrow.

Silvestro IS the New Hampshire chain of custody...
Or at least a very large component in it.

Last fall, with the help of some New Hampshire citizens, Black Box Voting began working on a "New Hampshire Chain of Custody" project, in which we identified some of the areas of concern that might affect many jurisdictions at once. First on the list is LHS Associates, a vendor with inside access to every memory card in New Hampshire, as well as to the chips containing the "brain" of the Diebold optical scan machines.

LHS Associates programs all the memory cards in New Hampshire and Connecticut; about all of Vermont's voting machines, and has a lock on almost all of Massachusetts as well.

Read more: http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

And my head starts to spin like a top. Someone please stop the madness tell me how they got it all right except one particular match up.

[Tess99]

1. It's all too fishy

and even the pundits seemed wary of what happened tonight after looking at the numbers and I'm not so sure that "Clinton Wins NH!!!!" is gonna be the big story tomorrow. Stuff is not adding up and right now I'm kinda feeling like I did when they called Florida for the Chimp.

[Anouka]

6. And yet, isn't it?

they can deal with independents playing strategic games with the Republicans, and the effects of polling wich puts someone so far ahead that supporters feel it's safer not to support them,

or they can deal with the Bradley effect, and the question about Iowa's open caucuses versus NH's secret ballots,

or they deal with the stunner of women possibly breaking for Clintons only after a) Edwards called her out, and b) her tearing up (which, unfortunately, underscores all the negatives about women being too emotion and not thinking with their heads -- you win some you lose some)
... the softer side of Clinton worked, for many older women. But was it real?

I also wonder if white men had broken for Clinton in the same way white women did, if the pundits would be more comfortable discussing a Bradley effect. There seems to be a reluctance of placing that mantle on white women. I don't know why.

I think we'll see it discussed, but you may be right; it won't be with the joie de vivre of Iowa.

Too many people on both sides of the fence are asking how ALL the polls could be wrong.

[Tess99]

11. She'll get her props, no doubt.

But any talk about these polls will take the shine off her narrow victory and they will indeed be talking about them tomorrow. It's gonna be about these polls and her playing the sympathy card like she did against Lazio.

That coupled with the fact that they, the media, now have egg on their faces and can't completely gush they way they usually would.

I still find the whole thing straight up suspicious, but that's just me, I guess.

[regnaD kciN]

2. Uhh...isnt' that quote from Bev Harris's group...?

I think that would be enough to disqualify it in most DUers' eyes.

[Egnever]

could be I pulled it from another thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2624600

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. OK. Exit polls

In 2004 all of the exit polls forcast a Kerry victory, remember? Not telephone sampling pre vote polls, but exit polls conducted with actual voters when they walked out of he voting stations, Exit polls include a larger sampling, more interviews, and unlike the polls you listed in your OP, everyone sampled actually was a voter, not just potential voters. So exit polls don't have to be adjusted to allow for likely or non likely voters.

This time the exit polls picked up on the dramatic swing toward Clinton. There were threads posted here in the late afternoon/early evening saying that exit polls were indicating that Clinton might win. The exit polls were accurate. What was so screwy in 2004 was how for the first time anyone could remember, the exit polls got it so wrong. This time they got it right.

[Egnever]

4. Weew maybe I can put the tinfoil away.

what happend to your sig BTW?

[The Magistrate]

5. Unfortunately, Sir

In many quarters, 'fraud' has come to mean 'outcome I neither like nor expected'....

[MADem]

18. Ain't that the truth!!!

Of course, the "they never call the cell phones in those polls" reason has yet to be floated, this time.

[Anouka]

7. Exit polls don't explain why things were so different from polls coming in.

So, why were they so different?

[Tom Rinaldo]

12. Read up on polling more some time

The biggest problem pre-polls have is getting the right sampling. They are not polls of voters, they are polls of people who may or may not actually vote. And the economics involved of daily polling keeps the sample size very small. And there are no pre-polls that capture the final state of mind of a voting population. This was an unusual election because it came only 5 days after Iowa, so the immediate Iowa bump factor was very much in play but capable of being replaced by changing sentiments that there was no time to poll for. The debate was a huge event and the news cycle in NH each day after that debate was loaded with events that could effect volatile feelings. Everyone included in the exit poll were actual voters and they were snapshots of final decisions - very different than pre polls.

[EFerrari]

9. Don't the networks cook the exit polls now?

I mean, "adjust".

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. If you want to believe that feel free

But there are no machines to mess with in exit polls. And there are a whole lot of actual human beings who conduct them - who spend all day talking to the actual voters. That means there are a hell of a lot of potential whistle blowers to say; "what the heck, that doesn't match what I was hearing from the people I interviewed outside of the voting booths."

[EFerrari]

15. I was asking about a point of fact, not about a belief. n/t

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. In 2004 they came up with new theories after the fact

to explain away the actual raw numbers of the exit polls and over ride what they literally said. This time the raw numbers being leaked all day seem to have been accurate indictors of the real vote. In 2004 the raw numbers indicted a Kerry win. That was what had to be cooked after the fact to get them in line with the vote figures that were tabulated using voting machines.

[EFerrari]

17. I'd be interested to see who was leaking what.

It's doubtful that there will ever be a repeat of that embarrassing 2004 Mitofsky exit poll problem.

We'll know soon enough.

[TreasonousBastard]

8. We oughtta start charging more for that tinfoil...

McCain was off by 6 points-- not that far off from Obama's 9 points Everyone else was pretty close, unless you want to say that Fred's 1% is only 50% of the 2% he was projected at-- a really huge disparity.

Exit polls seem to have been much closer to actual results.

If youse guys are gonna get all tinfoilly about New Hampshire, you're gonna need some really big hats come next month.

[Egnever]

10. ok I give

Like I said stop me before I get too nutty on this one.

[JI7]

14. i think a little under 10 percent leaned Obama or Hillary

if they voted a day earlier or an hour earlier or a little later they could have easily voted for the other one.

they knew they would vote either Obama or Hillary.