Is this true. (2004 election results)

[Blarch]

We know that margins for error are valid, and that results have fallen within the error range for every Presidential election for the past fifty years prior to last fall. NEVER have exit polls varied by beyond-error margins in a single state, not since 1948 when this kind of polling began. In this past election it happened in ten states, all of them swing states, all of them in Bush's favor. Coincidence? Of course not. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-lampley/the-biggest-story-of-our-_b_576.html

This is in no way is related to the NH vote, please don't drag it in here, thank you.

Discuss:

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Yes, it was true in 2004.

[ccpup]

2. you're right

the Exit Polls from last night were surprisingly on-the-mark with the final result. A lot of what you're seeing today on DU are the dashed hopes of supporters who believed the PRE-election Polls (silly rabbits) and had accepted that "their guy" would win, of course. When he didn't obliterate that evil witch Hillary, they struggled to find a way to excuse what happened. Ergo, she stole it. :eyes:

But this is politics and nobody knows nothin' until Election Day.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

3. Exit polls are not main issue here. It is the variance from

the pre-election polls and actual. No one here has yet to explain
why all the polls, including Clinton internals, were so
wrong. And wrong for ONLY one candidate. The fact that they
were so wrong, coupled with the fact that the exits said the
last minute deciders split even, is what I have not heard
explained to my satisfaction. 20,000 un-pre-polled, unaccounted
for-in-exits - that accrued only to Clinton. All other
candidates earned the same number of votes that they were expecting.

[Benhurst]

4. Voters are fickle. They often change their minds.

That's why exit polls are far more accurate. It's one thing to say how you might vote, quite another to say how you did vote.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

7. Right - if exits are more reliable why were they SO off the mark

on people making up their minds at the last minute? (split between O & H)?

Did they tell the truth about who they voted for in exits - but lied about
when they made up there minds. Or are you saying all polls and Clintons
internals were all completely wrong - hugely?

[Benhurst]

10. As I understand it, the exit polls were accurate within their margin of error

so far as for whom the votes were cast .

As for the accuracy of "last minute" decisions, this gets into a more subjective area. I still haven't decided for whom I'm going to vote; but increasingly I'm leaning toward one of our candidates. And I'll probably be open to change up until I actually cast my vote for that candidate, even though it could be said I made my decision well ahead of doing so. So will I be making a "last minute" decision or not? :shrug:

But don't get me wrong. I'm as worried as anyone by the lack of transparency in the tabulation of our votes. I read an article saying that New Hampshire's ballots were going to be tabulated by an Israeli firm. What is any private corporation doing participating in our election process -- either with easily-corrupted touch-screen voting machines or scanners? And why haven't "our" representatives in Congress done anything about this?

As far as the "last minute" votes, though, I'm still not convinced it's a red flag. But, hey, after the last eight years, I'm open to changing my mind.

[LiberalMandrake]

5. Not related to the NH vote? Are you implying that there is honest voting machine software?

Are you implying that there is voting machine software that is not written to return the right results?

[Kittycat]

6. Why not relate it to the NH vote? I mean really - for years DU has been screaming about EVMs. Now

since they've very oddly favored their candidate - the rest of us need to shut up and just accept it? I think not. Until every electronic voting machine and tabulator are pulled, I won't fully trust elections.

And I have never trusted hillary. I wonder who those big dollar supporters where that she called at the 11th hour?

[L. Coyote]

8. NO.

"... In this past election it happened in ten states, all of them swing states, all of them in Bush's favor...."

Of course, it depends on which exit poll version you accept, raw or adjusted.

There were 15 States with % Disparity favoring Bush and StDev > 1.0
Here are those stats:

Disparity Range 3.03% - 4.83%
Mean Disparity = 3.65%
Mean Kerry Votes Reported = 48.37 %
Mean Kerry Exit Polls = 52.02%
33,982,586 voters

I would take exception with the statement that all of them are "swing states" portion.
New York is not, and they had the highest disparity (using Steve freeman data).

FROM: http://jqjacobs.net/politics/spreadsheets.html
http://jqjacobs.net/politics/xls/exit_poll.xls

[indepat]

9. junior must know the laughs on us

[Laura PourMeADrink]

11. exactly

[OnTheOtherHand]

12. absolutely not

"NEVER have exit polls varied by beyond-error margins in a single state, not since 1948 when this kind of polling began."

That's one of the wrongest sentences I've ever seen. Exit polls didn't start in 1948 (well, I dunno, someone might've been doing their own out in Elmira...). And they sure as hell have varied by beyond-error margins. No idea where Lampley got all that.