Reply #60: Maybe I'm misreading this, but Matthews seems to be saying the raw exit polls [View All]

[smoogatz]

showed Obama winning by as much as 8%; if the final count shows Hillary winning by 3%, isn't that an 11% swing? If that was the case, it would raise alarms indeed. Even the dumbass corporate journalists might sense that something had gone wrong, no? Two things trouble me about using Matthews as an election-fraud alarm: first, he's notoriously full of shit. He could well be making up a narrative that makes him look like less of a moron than he appeared to be on Tuesday night. Second, he's being very imprecise with language here. Look closely at what he says: "What we don't know is why the victory is so much different in fact, then the polling ahead of time, including what we call the Exit Polls were telling us. Obama was ahead in those polls by an average of 8 points, and even our own Exit Polls, taken as people came out of voting, showed him ahead. So what's going on here?" I think what he's saying is that the pre-vote polls showed Obama up by 8, and that MSNBC did some informal exit polling ("our own exit polls") that showed Obama ahead—but who did they talk to? What methodology did they use? I have a hard time taking any conspiracy theory seriously that relies on Chris Matthews to make its case. And another thing: both the Governor and Sec'y of State of NH are Democrats. Were they in on the tabulation fix? New England Democrats conspired to fix a presidential primary? To what end? You'd have to have some pretty serious evidence to back up that claim before I'd take it seriously.