Right now, all headlines say Blair won, citing exit polls. Go figure. nt

[smartvoter]

[merh]

1. Haven't those silly journalists over there heard that exit polls

don't mean diddly squat? :freak:

:shrug:

[Amaryllis]

5. Exit polls work everywhere else; they just don't work in the US! Funny how

that works, huh?

[merh]

6. Oh, you mean they are legitimate for all other elections except the

2004 US prez election? :shrug: Who'd of thunk! :freak:

[Amaryllis]

7. Exactly, Merh! Seems to be a unique geographical phenomonon that for some

odd reason they no longer work in the US, but still work fine everywhere else.

[merh]

13. Do they no longer work in the USofA or was it just that one,

silly ole election in November of 2004? :tinfoilhat: :freak:

[Amaryllis]

14. Good question. Do they only do them for the pres election? Chuck Hagel,

Saxby Chambliss and several govs won by stunning upsets in 2002. Did they do exit polls on those? Lynn Landes thinks exit polls have been rigged for a long time and Votescam indicates that also.

[kster]

15. I'm sure they where

but 2004 is when they got BUSTED by the people."Chuck Hagel Saxby Chambliss and several govs won by stunning upsets in 2002" probably practice for the big one?

[dchill]

12. They work

extremely well in any election that doesn't involve shrubbery.

[satya]

30. tee-hee. That's a pun worth stealing... n/t

[althecat]

34. but shouldn't that be..

Shrobbery

[Febble]

33. Well there are two reasons they "work" in the UK

One is that because our count is utterly transparent, fraud is scarcely an issue (although that may change this year with postal voting more common). No-body disputes the count. This means that any discrepancy between exit and count is assumed to be a problem in the exit polls.

There used to be a tendency for exit polls to over-estimate the Labour vote, and in 1992 they got it seriously wrong, and predicted a Labour majority although not an outright win. In the end the Tories got in with a working majority. It was our "2004". Since then the pollsters factor in "shy conservatives" - and they have have been more accurate since.

So unless our elections really have been seriously fraudulent for years, it does suggest that "shy conservatives" are a real phenomenon. And there is absolutely no evidence that our elections are fraudulent because the count is so transparent.

This is why auditable elections are so important, and perhaps why exit polls are a red herring.

[smartvoter]

16. The funny part is it's our journalists here using them... nt

[merh]

17. It is so freekin' sad.

:cry: How do the USofA "journalists" sleep at night? :shrug:

[smartvoter]

19. We should start a campaign to everyone who used these saying

"You can't have it both ways. You can't tell us exit polls are crap here and then use them to proclaim the winner elsewhere."

[FreedomAngel82]

20. Ugh

Doesn't that make you so mad?!?! Our exit polls don't work but their's AND the Ukraine's does?!?!?!?! AHH!!!!!!!!

[smartvoter]

21. It's really astounding when you think about it. Regardless of your

position on voting fraud, it's such a glaring inconsistency that it is genuinely bizarre.

[okieinpain]

2. well as much as I'm pissed with the poodle, I didn't want the other

folks to get elected, because if we thought blair was bad the other guy's are thatcher clones.

[Worst Username Ever]

4. Agreed 100%. The conservative party is the next most likely to win.

I'll take the left-of-center labor over conservatives any day.

And besides, they don't elect blair, the elect their party rep. The party reps figure out who the party leader is. I bet Blair is gone by christmas.

[JDPriestly]

3. Link, please

[smartvoter]

10. One of many: "Exit Polls in Britain Show Blair Winning ..."

With Reduced Majority

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/05/international/europe/05cnd-britain.html?hp&ex=1115352000&en=8398caee88c0fe86&ei=5094&partner=homepage

The reason I didn't provide a link is they're everywhere...

[keepthemhonest]

8. yup they are going to wake up in the morning

to a big surprise if they trust those untrusty exit polls. Aren't they using that outdated paper stuff(ballots or something like it) over there anyway? They need to get with the times and stop trusting the people to make all of these tough decisions.

[New Earth]

31. lolool

that's what i was gonna say.

[keepthemhonest]

37. Hey Faye

How are you doing? Long time no see.

smart minds think alike eh?

[New Earth]

38. hi you

i'm good, how bout you? i'm still here, just gone into lurk mode for some reason :nopity:

i'm always in the Lounge drunk on the weekends though :o

[Peace Patriot]

9. I want to know if British TV networks ALTER their exit poll data to fit...

...the official tally, thus denying Brits the one true measure of an honest, transparent election. And I wonder what Brits would say (and do!) if they found out that they had been given DOCTORED exit poll information.

Any guesses?

Most Americans aren't aware of what the TV networks did to us on election night--and so I don't fault them for not reacting. They didn't know! --and still don't. If we get no other fact across to our compatriots--especially to Kerry voters (the majority!)--it should be this one. The gauge by which all other democratic countries monitor their elections for fraud--the exit polling result--was ALTERED here to show a Bush win. They friggin lied to us! --and thus prevented demands for an official investigation and smothered and marginlized all protest.

[moggie]

28. How would that work?

The polling stations close at 2200 local time. Right on the stroke of the hour, the BBC announced the results of the exit poll they had run jointly with ITN (Independent TV News, another broadcast news company). Since the ballots are manually counted and the first result doesn't arrive until about 2245, I don't see how the exit poll results could be doctored without it being very obvious. If the networks announced one figure at close of polling, and the next day said "oops, sorry, we mislaid a bunch of returns, and the correct figure should have been x", I'm pretty sure that a majority of British people wouldn't fall for it!

[Febble]

32. They don't bother

to adjust the poll, as it's not worth it - the actual results come in so quickly. The exit polls are just there to give the anchormen and the pundits something to talk about between 10pm and the first result, at about 11.30. No results are "called" until the count is complete, but the count is really quick. No candidate concedes until the count is done.

They exits seem to be right this time, but in the past they have been wrong. In 1992 they predicted a hung parliament (no overall majority, but more Labour seats than Tory seats), and in fact the Tories won a working majority. Since then they factor in "shy Tories" and the exits have been closer to the the count.

The thing is no-one takes them too seriously, and our count is so transparent that no-one would think of using them as an audit on the election.

All the paper ballots are hand counted in public, under the close scrutiny of representatives from all parties. The counts are televised, and the results are announced at the count when it is complete and all candidates are satisfied with the results.

[ROH]

11. The exit poll shown by the BBC before any results were announced was:

Labour ......... 37%
Conservative ... 33%
Liberal Dems ... 22%
Others .......... 8%

We can compare those exit poll percentages with the final results when they are known.

[Raksha]

18. Thank you for posting these figures, ROH.

I was hoping someone would do that. I'm going to save them to compare with the final results when they become known.

[althecat]

22. So far exit poll is spot on

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/constituencies/default.stm

Exit Poll --- > actual
lab %37 --- > %36.3
con %33 --- > %33.2
LD %22 --- > %22.6
Other %8 --- > %7.9

And as for the final result picked by the pollsters... a majority of 66... Blair presently has a majority of 99 with 27 seats yet to declare. So that is pretty close too (predicting that is much harder and is broadly similar to trying to pick all the state results off an exit poll if there were 600 states).

[DrDebug]

27. Wasn't the UK MOE 2-3% and the US MOE 1%

So even though the accuracy was less and there were ten times more areas, the result is within 1% accurate.

[althecat]

23. This thread is worth nominating FWIW... more evidence of the obvious...

Exit polls do work.. just not in the US.

[kster]

24. yes...n/t

[althecat]

26. Excellent.. have also started a thread in GD to get a bit more profile

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3606474

[Anarcho-Socialist]

25. It looks like a fair election (paper ballots) and the exit polls

were right on the money.

[smartvoter]

36. Funny how that works. nt

[kster]

29. Where is wycliff I

want to talk to him.

[tavalon]

35. I didn't realize England was using Diebold and EE & S machines too!