Reply #62: On edit: I see that we agree (I think).

[kiwi_expat]

So we both agree with the statement:

"But to test the {non-response bias] hypothesis we can see if the DISCREPANCY was greater where N was larger, and it was. The DISCREPANCY was also greater where there were other factors that might make strict Nth voter protocol more likely to have been compromised - where the interviewer was stationed far from the exit; were the voter did not feel well trained, etc."


Or are you saying that you/Mitofsky have run separate analyzes on the individual factors, and did indeed find that, for example, the farther away from the poll the interviewer was stationed the more the results tended to favour KERRY??