Help! Remember a thread with a link to a prof. saying exit polling being

wrong was unlikely. I had the link earlier and can't find it now

It's the main story on their homepage. Try linking from there.

Check out these two statistical studies. It's not the paper vs electronic machines as much as the final tallies being potentially manipulated in a central computer -- just as Bev Harris has been saying -- that's in question.

1. Reported at The Raw Story on Nov 8, statistical study done by former MIT math professor. Title: Odds of Bush gaining by 4 percent in all exit polling states 1 in 50,000; Evoting/paper variance not found to be significant
Link: http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=405
Excerpts: ...A statistical analysis of exit polling conducted for RAW STORY by a former MIT mathematics professor has found the odds of Bush making an average gain of 4.15 percent among all 16 states included in the media’s 4 p.m. exit polling is 1 in 50,000, or .002 percent.....Anick reasons that there are four possible causes of the "Bush gains." (1) Significantly greater lying or refusal to speak to pollsters in Bush voters versus Kerry voters; (2) Consistent/systematic errors in weighting demographic groups; (3) A surge of Bush voters after 4 p.m., in all states; (4) Systematic tampering/hacking of reported vote totals, in Bush’s favor.

2. Research paper cited today (Nov 11) as a BuzzFlash News Alert, PDF copy of paper posted at Buzzflash. Statistical study done by Steven Freeman, MIT PhD on faculty of Univ. of Pennsylvania, studies poll data from OH, PA and FLA. Title: The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy
Link: http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/11/The_unexplained_exit_poll_discrepancy_v00k.pdf
He calculates the odds against the observed exit poll anomalies in these three states as 250,000,000 to one.
Excerpt from his conclusion: Systematic fraud or mistabulation is a premature conclusion, but the election's unexplained exit poll discrepancies make it an unavoidable hypothesis, one that is the responsibility of the media, academia, polling agencies, and the public to investigate.