15 QUESTIONS FOR THOSE WHO WOULD DISPARAGE EXIT POLLING.

1. Why are exit polls used throughout the world to monitor elections?

2. Why are exit polls considered to have been wrong in this election?

3. Mitofsky, the original exit pollster, has been doing them for 25 years. He must be doing something right. After all, isn't this how he makes his living?

4. If exit polls are worthless, why are they even used at all?

5. Why is it that exit polls are always considered to be very accurate - until Bush started running?

6. How can it be that 41 out of 51 state exit polls ALL understated the Bush vote tally? With 16 them beyond the margin of error?

7. How is it that Rove was the FIRST ONE TO KNOW that the exit polls were "wrong"? Does he do his own exit polling?

8. Why did VNS refuse to release exit poll results on the day of the 2002 elections?

9. Why is it that the motives of Democrats who were exit-polled are questioned whereas those who count the votes of the touchscreens and optical scanners are considered to be trustworthy?

10. How come exit polls have been correct to within 1/10th of one percent in the last three German elections?

11. How is it that the TV networks used exit polls over the last 40 years to call presidential elections, and were always right on the money?

12. Why did the networks call FL initially for Gore (correctly, based on exit polls) and then wrongly reverse the call to Bush in 2000? Could it have been due to the 16,022 Gore votes in Volusia that were mysteriously dropped from the Gore column (and given to third party candidates) by what Dan Rather at the time called a "computer glich", but which we now know was due to a Diebold "problem"? Or was it because 175,000 minority voters left the polls thinking their punched card votes for Gore would count? Or both?

13. Why is it that in 41 of the 51 states, the vote tallies would move from the exit polls favorably to Bush and only 10 would move to Kerry - and not ONE a battleground state?

14. IS THIS MASSIVE MOVE TO BUSH FROM THE EXIT POLLS JUST A MAGNIFICENT COINCIDENCE?

15. What is the probability that in 16 out of 51 states, the Bush tallies would deviate BEYOND THE MARGIN OF ERROR from the Bush exit polls - AND ALL IN FAVOR OF Bush - WITH NOT ONE DEVIATION IN FAVOR OF KERRY? Hint: you will find the answer in another thread. Be prepared to be shocked.

UPDATED PROBABILITY VERSION - A REVISED VERSION OF THE ORIGINAL CALCULATION WHICH HAS AN UNBELIEVABLE IMPACT ON THE ORIGINAL ONE IN 4.5 BILLION PROBABILITY CALCUALTION.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x86863

ORIGINAL PROBABILITY VERSION - WITH UNDERLYING STATE EXIT POLL AND REPORTED VOTE DATA:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x79760

These are all very good questions. I especially like number 6. How did Rove know that they were wrong on election night? I think it was because he had his laptop and modem set up in the room while watching the "results" come in.

but is it possible Rove might have done it himself? connected to the central tabulators' computers and changed the numbers?

Or is it just me?

Is Rove psychic or a crook?

Hmmm.

about FL in 2000.

You are right on all of these points, of course, but what's seriously frustrating is that you have the exit polls on one hand and technology-specific voting anomalies on the other. And on one foot you've got documented evidence of errors/fraud at the individual machine level. Any more corroborating evidence and we won't have a leg left to stand on...

into voting irregularities based in part on exit poll vs. vote count differences, but ignoring the same problem here?

exit polls? Don't let them destroy the evidence.

GOP says the exit polls are not accurate. They are
still misleading us. The fact is, that the exit polls
in 2000, 2002 and 2004 have been off (except for the
senate races in the 2004 election, those were right,
just the presidential polls are wrong). Prior to these
last 3 elections, traditionally our polls have been
close to 2% accurate. This is also true of other
comparable countries that hold elections and use exit
polls. Don't support the exit polls were wrong spin.
Read for yourself.

http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/04/11/ana04027.html
and
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00142.htm
and
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2004/11/12.html (scroll down to
exit stage right)

That's why the whoremedia won't ask it.

tia

You are right, the answer to the question is obvious. I was referring to your "Hint: you will find the answer in another thread. Be prepared to be shocked." I thought this meant you were working on something else related for another thread. My bad.

or even 2000?

There is a reason they warn you to disregard this early data.

And why wouldn't Mitofsky cry foul, because as you say this has been his business for 25 years, and now he is seeimingly discredited?

Your questions are very damning. I know I expressed some doubts earlier because I do see some anomolies in the data -- such as, why is Vermont so far off, while being a paper balloting state? But, overwhelminingly, your questions indicate how rotten this whole thing seems. There seems little reason to hide the exit polling data unless VNS is afraid that it will show manipulation in the published results. And the MSM appears to be able to say out of one side of its mouth: "Fraud in the Ukraine -- look at the exit polls!" and "Fraud in the US? What fraud? The exit polls are flawed" out of the other, which is surely shameless.

But, from a strategic point of view, doesn't a great deal hinge on what happens in New Hampshire? If the New Hampshire recounts don't confirm significant mistabulation, won't that call into question the accuracy of the exit polls? If you think the answer would be no, I'd like to hear your reasoning.

I find it very strange that 120,000,000 votes can be more accurate than 12,000 people polled during exit polls.

There are no answers to your questions other than the obvious.

FRAUD.

tia

We need to get serious if we're serious about this.

Folks: we say there's vote fraud in OH and FL because the tabulated results are so much more favorable to Bush than the exit polls.

We produce evidence of fantastically accurate exit polls in other elections.

THEN we notice that in 41 of the 51 states + DC, tabulated results are ALSO more favorable to Bush than the exit polls are.

All 3 items are true. But together they do NOT produce a coherent argument that there's vote fraud in OH and FL. 'Cause what do we say about those other 39 states?

-- that Bushies padded the votes in RI and ID, where there was never any doubt who'd win -- and where the gap between exit polls and tabulated results is about what it is in FL and OH? anyone believe THAT?

-- that Bush voters in RI, ID, etc. sometimes denied voting for Bush to exit pollsters? -- but that slices into our case for fraud in OH and FL...

Simon and Freeman have each argued for fraud. Simon has *published* the results in 47 states! NEITHER of them faces the real problems in our argument that are raised by the gap in the non swing states ... and neither do my DU friends who also fixate on a few states without taking account of the wider context.

Again...let's get serious. An opposition that's confused ain't worth a pitcher of warm spit.

Stephen Voss

Fraud in the other states was designed to pad the popular vote.
There is no conflict in the argument. The probabilities of fraud in FL and OH are close to 100%. But not just in OH and FL.

The fraud was more pervasive than just OH and FL. But OH and FL were flipped because of the EV. If Kerry took either one of the two, he would have won. That's why the focus was on OH and FL. And that's why they were flipped. Simple.

Hope that clears it up to you.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

He has been dialoguing with a DUer, so will respond. Maybe just send him the list and ask him to address these questions?

Let Olbermann ask the questions.
Or Randi Rhodes. Or Mike Malloy.
Or Al Franken, if he still cares about the truth.
They all lurk on DU.

If you would like to send the questions to any of them, be my guest.

tia