CALTECH/MIT: Exit Poll's Bush Vote Underestimated

Sccop ^ | 11-12-2004 | CalTech/MIT

[Chicos_Bail_Bonds]

Voting Machines and the Underestimate of the Bush Vote

Summary

1. A series of claims have been made in recent days alleging that discrepancies between exit poll results and the presidential vote in certain states provides evidence of malfeasance in those states. These claims seem to be concentrated on states using electronic voting systems.

2. Exit polls predicted a significantly greater vote for Kerry nationwide than the official returns confirmed, but there is not any apparent systematic bias when we take this same analysis to the state level.

3. Analysis of deviations between the exit polls and the official returns show no particular patterns for states using electronic voting; nor does this analysis reveal any patterns for states using other forms of voting systems.

4. We conclude that there is no evidence, based on exit polls, that electronic voting machines were used to steal the 2004 election for President Bush.

[Chicos_Bail_Bonds]

The DUmmies aren't going to like what two of the highest acclaimed institutions in America are saying...NO ELECTION WAS STOLEN

[beezdotcom]

Wow, my alma mater actually did something to help a conservative. Mark it on the calendar.

[Chicos_Bail_Bonds]

Are you a CalTech alum or a MIT alum?

[swilhelm73]

I'd still like to know how the ex-CBS hack running the exit polling effort managed to be off by so much.

The only rational explanation I've heard is Morris's - the exit polls were juiced to make Kerry look like he was doing better then he was. Certainly, looking at the break down of the exit polls, the juicing looks obvious...

[xtinct]

Exit polls had a skewed view of the voters.

60% young women were interviewed - birdbrain sector.

Generally the voters were NOT forthcoming - couldn't be bothered with another survey.

[BIGLOOK]

The title should read: "CALTECH/MIT: Exit Poll's Bush Vote Misunderestimated."

It makes sense this way.

[Bonaventure]

Is this a genuine report? I can't find it on the Voting Technology Project site.

What is scoop.nz?

[Paleo Conservative]

The DUmmies aren't going to like what two of the highest acclaimed institutions in America are saying...NO ELECTION WAS STOLEN

But didn't someone at MIT prove that the recent referendum on Chavez in Venezuela was fraudulent contrary to Jimmy Carter's assertions?

[Duke Nukum]

It doesn't matter what the facts are, it only matters what that donut addict can twist them into.

I swear, I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next crackpot or crank, but I never make the mistake of believing them!

[beezdotcom]

MIT...it was an interesting culture shock to go from a conservative area of Virginia right into Cambridge, MA for four years. However, it at least forced me to examine and reaffirm many of my core beliefs, so in THAT sense it was useful...

[mlocher]

Wow, my alma mater actually did something to help a conservative. Mark it on the calendar

your alma mater has a reputation to keep. you alma mater does have a history of liberalism. but you alma mater also has a reputaion of logical thinking. applied logic will always shine light on hypotheses and by following the scientific method, your alma mater has done a service not just to conservatives, but to all americans.

[beezdotcom]

applied logic will always shine light on hypotheses and by following the scientific method, your alma mater has done a service not just to conservatives, but to all americans.

Perhaps. I'm a big proponent of the scientific method, but it is often tainted by the "good ol' boy" attitude that is prevalent in the peer-review process. This is the dirty little secret about science that most Americans only see indirectly. One thing my time at MIT taught me is that science is just as prone to political sway as any other field - scientists just cloak it in more obfuscating language.

[FredZarguna]

[snip] science is just as prone to political sway as any other field [snip]

In which case, of course, it really isn't science, but something else operating under a disguise.

[mlocher]

I'm a big proponent of the scientific method, but it is often tainted by the "good ol' boy" attitude that is prevalent in the peer-review process

i certainly do not "recant" what i said about the cal poly study. i believe they followed the scientific method.

nonetheless, you have raised an excellent point in your above statement, and i especially resonate with the "good ol' boy" attitude comment. peer review processes transcend scientists and exists in chucrh settings, the business world, social clubs and so forth.

for an organization to grow and for true progress to exist, there must be diversity (in thought) with a few hegellian thinkers tossed in the mix. diversity in thought comes from a diverse population. this is not an endorsement for affirmative action nor a condemning of it; it is a statement that to get to the "truth" in a complex problem, one must have differing views of the problem definition, and then work well together to get the correct solution.

the good ole boy network works well on "simple" problems, but does not change the paradigm to greater progress that is required for complex prolems.

i have used the term "good ole boy network" to mean a group of people of like minds. it could be a group of men, or it could be a group of women, or a mixture -- key is that everybody thinks alike.