To the "fellas" trying to "debunk" exit polls and the fraud:

GIVE IT UP!

IT IS NOT WORKING!

Next topic, please.

What are you trying to say?

I think I'll just let you rant by yourself.

Because I'm not going to read to you the 1.000 + posts related to the exit polls written here today.

...actually, don't bother.

:eyes:

Gd'night!

I dunno.

Third base.

This is the exact same reaction we get from Republicans about the election fraud issue itself...don't look closer, give it up, it's not working, next topic please. How ironic.

I am trying to actually get to the bottom of how powerful the exit poll issue really is. I'm not trying to "debunk" anything. I just want the truth of the matter. And if looking deeper scares you, then feel free to bury your head in the sand and avoid the threads when they come up.

But don't tell me to "move on". Like folks here are so fond of saying...that's usually a sign that someone is scared of what's going to be found.

All these "fellas" are lurking around your tread, sorry.

:hi:

There was widespread and systematic voter suppression of minority voters, dirty tricks, vote machine fraud, and other vote manipulation in Ohio, New Mexico, and Florida- that was of magnitude enough to call in question who won those states.

http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html
http://www.flcv.com/EIRSFla.html
http://northnet.org/minstrel/alpage.htm
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19
http://www.helpamericarecount.org/NewMexicoData/NewMexicoGeneralElection.pdf
http://www.flcv.com/bernalil.html
etc.

and also similar patterns in other states where the suppression and fraud did not change the election results including vote machine fraud in Calif., Pennsylvania, Washington, Texas, etc.
http://www.flcv.com/orangets.html
http://www.flcv.com/snohomis.html
http://www.flcv.com/mercerco.html
http://www.flcv.com/philadel.html
http://www.flcv.com/texas.html
http://www.votersunite.org
etc.

(the voter suppression of minorities in Mercer County is the worst I've ever seen-followup needed)

The unethical and illegal actions were so systematic and widespread that this cannot be allowed to continue uninvestigated and unpunished. There was a huge amount of obvious malfeasance and dirty tricks that should be investigated and dealt with
http://www.flcv.com/dirtytrf.html
http://www.flcv.com/EIRSFla2.html
http://northnet.org/minstrel/alpage.htm
http://www.votersunite.org
http://www.freepress.org departments

The final exit poll will be accurate and the MSM (the entity that paid for the exit poll) will be pleased with the results. They will be able to use the exit poll to analyze the demographic of the election which is what this exit poll was designed for. So, it's not the exit poll that I am debunking, it is the very notion that this exit poll data set can be used to verify the actual vote count that I am debunking.

By the way, you don't see me making all sorts of calculations to prove my case. I have a BS degree in mathematics, but I'm no exit poll expert. My posts consist primarily of links and quotes to the web sites where real exit poll experts have weighed in on the primary thesis offered in this forum. They have found the case made here wanting. If the very pollsters that conducted this exit poll explain that the numbers cannot be used to verify the election, who am I to disagree, and argue with them?

Are you a exit poll expert? No, you are not. Is TruthIsAll a exit poll expert? No, he is not (unless he was lying in the two posts where he said 'I am not a exit poll expert.')

So now I can point out a feature of this topic that I do not understand - something that is simply bizarre to me. IF YOU ARE NOT AN EXIT POLL EXPERT, WHO ARE YOU TO TELL EXIT POLL EXPERTS - MORE SPECIFICALLY MITOFSKY, THE MAN THAT INVENTED EXIT POLLING - THAT THEY ARE WRONG ? If you can explain this to me I'll buy you a hamburger.

Yes, I am aware the efforts to erase exit poll misconceptions is not working, but our efforts to prove fraud to the house and senate did not work either, yet you and many others are still trying to make a case for fraud, and I commend your efforts. Since you did not 'GIVE IT UP' after January 6, what makes you think I have less resolve than you?

when you have secretary of state running out the clock, stonewalling every effort, failure to follow Ohio recount laws (i.e., randomly picked precincts, blocking access to records), courts that run out the clock, the inability to get a court to allow investigators to INVESTIGATE the machines, etc etc etc

so please do not come here and tell us we failed.

At least not that I am aware of. I have never claimed there was no fraud. All my efforts are concentrated on a single issue - what can and cannot be done with this particular exit poll data set.

You are confusing the national exit polls with what happened in Ohio.

Did this occur in the state of Washington? Look over the analysis of the hand count and the exit polls since only two counties were touch screen and not the most populous--what does it show, that the exit polls overestimate democratic support, and this is not a battleground state.

Mike

Take a gander at some of the stuff coming from Florida specific to Broward County and elsewhere. You seem to be on the blog for greater periods than I, and I think this is where some fruitful work can be undertaken.

Its time to leave the exit poll ayesayers to their threads.

Mike

all of a sudden, now of all times? why? you aren't chaning anyone's mind.

They never rest...

...but I just wanted to re-iterate it in my own terms.

it seems to me that the main issue with exit polls is not wether or to what extent they are considered accurate (though from what I've been reading the notion that they are not accurate is one that has only started to be propagated since November 2, for clearly suspicious reasons) the main issue is why the drifts between the exit polls and the election results favored Bush in such a ridiculously large percentage of cases. Republicans, or others in who's interest it is to be able to innocently explain away this phenomenon have only, to my knowledge, come up with a single construct that even barely stands up to analytical scrutiny, that being the idea that, for some unexplained reason, Bush voters were significantly less willing to divulge their actions to an exit poll than were those who chose to vote for John Kerry.

It seems to me that there's a huge problem with this; it's an undeniable observation of human nature that people tend very strongly to be feel more at ease expressing their beliefs and admitting their actions when they are in the company of people whom they feel share those beliefs, and around whom, consequently, they feel more secure. i know that i feel very secure blabbing my views when I'm home here in nyc, but would keep them to myself if I were in Texas. If one accepts this, then one can predict with close to 100 percent certainty that if their theory is to hold up, the red drift, or whatever you want to call it, will tend be more pronounced the more Democratic the area being observed, and less pronounced for the more Republican ones. Well, I haven't read about or found any such correlation, not in the figures brought out (then changed) on election night, and not in the scoop.nz figures, though I'm content to be proved wrong on this. i'm not even sure if weighting was designed to take this into account. If and when the raw Mitofsky data emerges, with precinct by precinct rundowns of how many said they voted for whom, this tenuous theory can be confirmed or laid to rest once and for all, because it no significant correlation can be found, in total, between the prevailing political prejudice of each particular precinct, and its degree of divergence from the published election results, then the theory collapses, and as far as I am aware, there is no further rational theory being put forward to explain why nearly all of the exit poll discrepancies favored Bush.

And one further point, the notion that exit polls are useful for everything EXCEPT confirming the accuracy of vote count is one of the least comprehensible idea I've read on this forum.

And yes, I'm a newbie.

:hi:

but could you sum that up in one sentence? my brain isn't comprehending long posts today :crazy:

And smart and honest...well! :toast:

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

discusses some huge problems with a number of exit polls, specifically Mitofsky's. It also discusses the methodology he used at various times. Can't link to the textM only on dead tree as far as I know, but your country/city library's likely to have a copy.

One thing I'd like to know more about is how widespread were the two different forms Mitofsky used, and how many got the long versus the short form. (One of his greatest failures ... errr... wrong predictions) involved a NJ race with three forms, and adherents to one political party were more likely to skip the short-form exit poll. He called the wrong winner in the governor's race by a wide margin.

:D

"Should be that the more blue the state, the more red it drifts, but that ain't what happens."

what are you referring to? i said two were gone, meaning two disruptors were banned. i honestly do not know what you are talking about or what it has to do with :shrug:

:bounce:

MOVE ON!!!

They couldn't pass by with out stopping to sat hello!:freak:

The "rewards" are good...

'To the ignorant Repukes:puke: trying to pass themselves off as intelligent Democrats. :D "