Election Mystery Solved! The EXIT POLLS were RIGGED!!

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41324

"Tuesday's re-election of President George W. Bush and the election of a number of new conservative lawmakers across the nation astonished liberal newsmen, pundits and handlers who, hours earlier, had believed allegedly rigged exit polls and were confidently whispering that a new mandate was going to sweep the nation."

Dick Morris's theory:
http://www.thehill.com/morris/110404.aspx

"To screw up one exit poll is unheard of. To miss six of them is incredible. It boggles the imagination how pollsters could be that incompetent and invites speculation that more than honest error was at play here.

The mistaken exit polls infiltrated all three networks and the cable news outlets and had a chilling effect on the coverage of election night."

"At the very least, the exit pollsters should have to explain, in public, how they were so wrong. Since their polls, if biased or cooked, represented an attempt to use the public airwaves to reduce voter turnout, they should have to explain their errors in a very public and perhaps official forum.

This was no mere mistake. Exit polls cannot be as wrong across the board as they were on election night. I suspect foul play."


If the EXIT POLLS WERE RIGGED, I'm still wondering: Why did Wall Street BELIEVE the exit polls enough to start a sell off on Wall Street???

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4292

If the pre-election context wasn’t enough to put the media on alert, the exit polls on election day should have been. The polls by the National Election Pool, throughout the day, showed Kerry ahead in a number of swing states. Media commentators made it quite clear that they had seen and took seriously the polls. Professional pollster John Zogby took them seriously enough to call the race for Kerry. Wall Street took them seriously enough to start dropping stock prices.

you never ever trust polls. Too many variables and people who want to skew these things.

Exit polls are only incredibly off in the United States? And, if so, this shoots a hole into the "moral values" theory.

voted, there is no reason for anyone to prevaricate. The natural response is to state firmly who you voted for, and hope that it will add to the groundswell of support for your candidate.

Saying you voted for the other guy makes no sense, tactically or strategically. That's why exit polls have always been used as benchmarks for targeting fraud. If the votes aren't within 1%-2% of the exit polls, something fishy is going on.

Something fishy is going on.

Check out these articles:



Two excellent articles DEBUNKING THE NYT ARTICLE
"The empire strikes back: Data and disinformation"
http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2004/11/empire-strikes-back-data-and.html
also:
Footprints of Electoral Fraud: The November 2 Exit Poll Scam
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KEE411A.html

ogby Speaks Out
According to Zogby, it would have required "wrong sampling in wrong areas throughout the country," or the purposeful manipulation of data to obtain exit poll results so significantly different from the official totals. He viewed neither as a possibility.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=64057&mesg_id=64057
LINK: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1118-11.htm


Here are two excellent articles about the validity and reliabilty of Exit Polls:

Votergate 2004; We Don't Need Paper to Prove Fraud, But We Do Need Money
http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=10385

and

I Smell a Rat
Link: http://www.freezerbox.com/archive/article.asp?id=321
(also on Zogby's site but I didn't keep that link)

Dr. Freeman has updated his paper
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1382287#1382346
Link: http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm


AND, you might keep track of this and other news and developments, analysis and commentary here:

VOTE FRAUD LINKS - A DU Compendium - Thread #3
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=201x4927

VOTE FRAUD Links Compendium - Thread #2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=201x3223

VOTE FRAUD Links - a DU Compendium
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=201&topic_id=1984#

It's much more likely that the vote counting was rigged extensively, given what we know about the voting machine companies and suspicious statements from O'Dell (head of Diebold "I'm committed to delivering Ohio's electoral votes to the president...") and Republican Representative King ("We'll take care of the counting.").

The hard evidence of vote rigging is mounting.

tv and explain to us, (in prime time) how this error occurred. I'm daring them to do it.

Well, then, everything's ok then. What a relief.

the liberal media...

They're rigged when things don't go the way we want it to, and then they are correct when it is going our way. LOL see, quite simple.

and many happy posts.

Thank you for the warm welcome. Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier, I was at work then I went out and now I'm trying to catch up. Haha trying to keep on my toes.

It's about them being way outside of the statistical limits that they always function within. Unless all the pollsters decided Nov. 2nd was "Bring Your Crack Pipe to Work Day", something is fucked up. If they were this far outside the MOE in favor of the Dems they should be investigated as well.

Now I'm trying to figure out WHO rigged those Exit Polls...
Was it Kerry or the DNC?? Mmmmmm....

mistabulation is the most likely explanation, but we need the raw data and nobody's coming clean.

www.appliedresearch.us/sf/

is that he believes KERRY rigged the exit polls, not Bush, to suppress the pubs from voting in the western states. Morris is still upset with Clinton and is really a repub now. Hate to say it but,When he states exit polls are never this wrong across the board he is insinuating that since Bush won, kerry must have done it.

the exit polls were rigged and didn't mean anything doesn't that mean that the reasons people gave for voting for their candidate are wrong also?
So either Kerry won or "values" played no part in people's decision.
Can't have it both ways.

Kerry still could have won with 20% of the people voting on "values".

values being an issue, I believe they were taken after the election was over. Am I wrong here because didn't the exit polls show at the end of the day that Bush did win? Just asking a question here because we really do want to be right when we make accusations. Not just blowing smoke up their you know whats! What was the end of the day data? If they show a Bush win, then maybe everyone else is right and the exit polls were only half the story in the early part of the day. Like the analogy of the football game at 1/2 time.

why didn't he come out and say that loud and strong.


He would be the darling of the Media, his next book would be a hit, he would be immediately given millions under the table by Rove.

He;p me on your line of thinking.

and I've been following him for years, ever since the toe sucking incident. He has totally turned against Clinton. He hates the Clintons. He believes it was the Kerry campaign that leaked the early data from the exit polls in a effort to suppress the vote much like what they say happened in 2000 when CBS called the election for Gore before the polls closed in Florida panhandle. There were people in line who walked away and didn't vote because they beleived the election was over. Read his articles he posts on his website vote.com. He isn't always right though. He predicted Swartzenegger would lose etc. But I think he clearly thinks the rigging was done by Kerry. You can't post something by him when he is a Clinton hater and probably Kerry hater too. Notice he doesn't come right out and say the Kerry campaign. Because Bush won in the end, he believes they were rigged. He's done polling for years. For Clinton first.

That is still my question.

If he said that, and I have read his crap for years, including the toe sucking :),why doesn't he accuse Kerry and totally bat down any tip of this iceberg?

IMO, he is not saying that because he knows that it is not true.

What he does know is that Bush stole,let's not use the word Won, this election.


He is smart ,in many way. but he is a money grabbing crook. One thing is a constant about people with money,they always want more.

Everybody,not just the exit polls, knew that Kerry was winning even the day before the election.

They did not even need the exit polls.
The exit polls CONFIRMED what they already knew.

Kerry was winning until the Rove Elves got to work.

on election day? I'd really like to know. If the exit polls showed at the end of the day the bush won or however you word it, then we are all wrong. If they showed that Kerry won the exit polls then maybe everyone is right. I think Morris didn't say exactly who did the rigging, just like all politicians use double talk. Like Kerry saying all the votes will be counted but then conceding before they were. I can't explain Dick Morris to anyone. It's just my line of thinking. I find it hard to believe there could be widespread voting fraud yet it's all supposed to be on one side. What about the crack guy in Ohio that was paid for registering people? Were they real people he registered? No, it was Mickey Mouse etc. and he was paid by Acorn which is on our side. I think it goes on all sides in America, unfortunately.

You seem to have a problem accepting the fact that Bush is the crook here. It is not just the exit polls, it is the voter suppression etc. etc.

You really like to have us see both sides and I won't do that, this issue is clearly one sided.

manager in a restaurant and I guess it's just an occupational mishap that I have the ability to look at everything from both sides. Is that always bad? I actually thought it was an attribute. Maybe I'm wrong. ;) I also love to debate so maybe that's not fair of me. Sorry.

KMG:
I guess it's just an occupational mishap that I have the ability to look at everything from both sides. Is that always bad?

No. It's not bad. It's what Liberals, and Progressives do; researching, and studying reported facts and figures and be ever vigilant, and critical, if not ever cynical before making up one's mind.

And if I may be so forward, none of your posts do the above.

KMG:
Maybe I'm wrong.

You are. But not in your description of seeing BOTH sides of an issue--something I haven't seen you do yet.

Your arguments are wrong; flying in the face of surfaced statistics, facts, testimonials, footage, and the most apparent: that Republican owned-and operated election contraptions all show "glitches" all in favor of a Republican (p)Resident of the WH.

Using the very same exit poll methodology in other counties and states that don't have Republican owned-and operated paperless voting contraptions, all have proven to be utterly accurate; off by perhaps 1%.

Take a walk on the "common sense" side, and have a look from the Liberal/Progressive side's POV, will ya?

"The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepacny"
He talks about "corrected" and "uncorrected" data. He also details where the data he used came from.
http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm

to get paid for a new registered voter, then Mickey Mouse voted and of course voted for Kerry?? How does this compare to obvious, actual, factual, organized and planned voter suppression??? Or voting machines that registered votes for Bush when Kerry was selected (not one report of the other way around)??? Not to mention other possible fraud with the central tabulators.

He believes it was the Kerry campaign that leaked the early data from the exit polls in a effort to suppress the vote much like what they say happened in 2000 when CBS called the election for Gore before the polls closed in Florida panhandle.

If I were a Bush voter and seen Kerry was winning I would go vote even if I had to crawl there. If I were a Kerry voter I would think oh what the heck Kerry is winning why bother, they don't need my vote. This whole thing is bull. It was bull in 2000 it's even more bull now.

Bushco rigged the vote, end of subject.

Don't forget that he always *was* a republican --- I detested
the fact that Clinton hired him, after he had worked for such
repugnant people as Trent Lott!!!!

...because being predisposed to automatically blame the Democrats--ANY Democrat!--for any mistakes in any given circumstance, while keeping silent in the face of outright thefts, lies, cheating by RWers and Repugnants has the tendency to make you look as if your opinions are skewed...and you lose any amount of credibility as being "objective".

Dickie's just a pissed-off, vindictive, little man.

I've had the displeasure of watching him on the Insanity and colmes show, and although they tout him as a Democratic Adviser, he's nothing more than a bitter ex-democrat and a Republican apologist and hack.

Of course they have to allege that the US exit polls were rigged.

It's the only way they can spin/justify the mind-numbing hypocrisy of speaking out against the Ukraine election.

They need to PROVE BUSH WON. Plain and Simple.

I get the feeling that if the rancid truth came out Falwell would excuse Bush for cheating. For these guys, the end justifies the means.

This is the first I've heard of this theory. I don't think it matters much because if it did the media would have scooped it up and run with it. Anything to support bush.

Also, turning on the exit polls doesn't take away all the repub dirty tricks at the polls. The flyers sent out to dems to confuse them about their polling places. The voter registrations forms torn up and thrown away. My brother and sister-in-law worked a polling place in Detroit and watched white repub challengers CARD every black voter, passing over the white ones. Please, tell me that isn't the act of a desperate party that KNOWS they don't have a snowball chance in hell of getting their disfunctional leader elected.

polls bush would have lost. When they found out that they were losing they started rigging the vote in large numbers. No one should believe that bush had 3,000,000 more votes than Kerry. Their people were all in place and when they got the go signal they acted. Those people who said they voted for Kerry were correct only there votes were changed inside the polling place. It is easy. It makes me sick. We have to ruin the president and the repuke congress.

He uses fundamentalist Christian doctrine to spew hate, and distruction against Muslims, the Islamic faith, AND Democrats; talks about death to "America's" enemies while calling on god's power to facilitate this twisted, insane doctrine of his--but for me, the kicker was when he claims over, and over again on Faux News, that "George W. Bush is an honest, decent, god-fearing and loving man."

Yep. Fundie-Christian fanatic Falwell is the equivalent of fundie-Islamic fanatic bin Laden.

There's no doubt about it.

:spank:

Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. And I believe this is so atrocious that the media and the exit pollers need to DISCLOSE ALL THEIR INFORMATION and we begin an investigation IMMEDIATELY on this terrible travesty. Mitofsky should come back from the Ukraine which I believe he was sent to so conveniently and start disclosing all the unadulterated exit polls!

Oh yes, I believe the exit polls were hacked (LOL). We need to see that exit data and verify how it was gathered with a blue ribbon panel of investigaters. NOW! And because the thought of hacking is just so upsetting to us citizens the investigation should be done quickly, bipartisan, and open to the public. Before Dec 6th.

Trudyco

This is probably oversimplifying things, but this is what I thought about the early exit poll results after the election.

Could it be possible that many people hated Bush so much (not really debateable) that they would do whatever they could to get to the polls early thereby skewing the early exit polls? I still believe there were alot of fraudulent actions going on, but that the exit poll arguement doesn't hold a lot of water.

I think that if they haven't yet, that the major pollsters should at least come forward with what they think is the reason the numbers don't add up.

all that does is piss off the people that conducted the polls - they already agree that their data is flawed! Go ahead and back them in a corner and watch them switch around and defend their data and methods.

Is it Mitkofsky/Edison? Is it the NEP (and who are they)? Do each of the MSM own it?

Who legally can divulge this information?

Trudyco

what went wrong? I mean it shouldn't be that hard to discover. Especially if there was some major, across-the-board systematic error, which it would appear that there would have to have been, to explain Bush beating the polls in 42? out of 50 states. Has anyone investigated this?