[AmericanVictory]

But why would the figueres of this Institute be reliable. There is no evidence, is there, of any basis for their figure which is more reliable, and the impression one gets, without knowing too much about them, is that truth as we know it is a gringo concept that they can't be bothered with. One reason I am dubious about what this Institute says is that I don't see how Bush can have won as he did in the actual count if the 45% figure is not accurate.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"One reason I am dubious about what this Institute says is that I don't see how Bush can have won as he did in the actual count if the 45% figure is not accurate."

---

Absolutely. Look at the results in Florida, Texas and New Mexico---there is no way that Bush would have done so well in heavily-Democrat counties without a big improvement among Hispanics. Exit polls showed Bush getting close to 60% of the Hispanic vote in Texas, and given the fact that he carried a lot of traditionally Democrat, and very Hispanic, counties such as Cameron (Brownsville), I think that must be correct.

[curiosity]

You're right. I don't know which figures are more reliable. I'm just saying that we shouldn't accept the media exit polls at face value because 1) they were way off in predicting the election and 2) there's another poll that contradicts them and it's unlcear which is more accurate.