Posted on 11/04/2004 11:30:46 AM PST by Nascardude
Thank GOD the internet was here and was able to start looking at the leaked information about the polls enabling people to start raising questions. Remember, danny boy was blaming the internet for the descrepencies and not the fact the exit polls were bogus. I'd suggest that this points to at least implied truth to the conspiracy concept. Of late, when danny boy is caught, he immediately blames the internet in an attempt to shift the blame.
So the exit pollster decided to save money by measuring only the third group, swing voters (by doing exit polling outside of polling places with lots of swing voters). And he found that they were not breaking for Bush enough for Bush to win. He completely missed the GOTV effort and the conservative turnout.
It's conceivable that flawed mechanics, and not bias, led to the failure of the exit pollsters.
This is the first time I completely agree with him, and I am angry. I hope there is an official investigation.
Freepers need to stay on this. The leftist pollsters were systematically trying to intellectually disenfranchise republican voters.
Rush is now reporting that the first exit polls actually came from the hanoi john campaign.
The MSM? Oh pshaw they wouldn't do that would they?
Oops! How'd that rednect expression get in there?
Dick Moris is one lib who knows his stuff
Inquiring minds and all that. ;)
Exit polls are almost never wrong.
Warren Mitofsky did the polling for the networks. Mitofsky is an ex-CBS News hack with a lefty agenda. 'nuff said.
The excuse so far seems to be the "bad sample" excuse or the "Kerry people voted early" excuse, but neither dog will hunt. As Morris points out, they got SIX STATES WRONG. I believe it hurt Bush and he won anyway.
As a utility researcher (prior to graduating from law school) we routinely sampled about 300 households in order to forecast the demands created by 300,000 residential customers. The key to getting accurate information from a small sample is careful selection of the sample, stratification and careful validation. None of this is rocket science - and, contrary to Michael Barone's disclaimers on FNC, the statistical mechanics are not arcane - many people working in the marketing and credit analytics fields understand the methods involved.
I would also look to Susan Estrich and any other pundit/consultant/campaign people who were interviewed during the afternoon and early evening who hyped the bogus information - they had to know.
BAWHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHA! I love it! Stupid HELLywood think we're the stupid ones, NOPE they're the IDIOTS!!
How soon we forget! The 2000 elections were beset by EXACTLY the same problems, remember it led the MSM to call the state of Florida for Gore before the polls had closed in all of the state? I have said frequently that I thought it was far from an honest mistake, or computer problem, that it was a deliberate ploy by someone to trick the networks into calling the state, albeit incorrectly, and thereby interfere with the election. I would start by finding out who worked the Florida stats for 2000 and then see if any of them were on the team for 2004.
Ping
BTTT
The major networks were wishful thinking. hehehehe!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.