Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Newsjock

(11,733 posts)
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 10:50 AM Oct 2012

Networks, AP cancel exit polls in 19 states

Source: Washington Post

Breaking from two decades of tradition, this year’s election exit poll is set to include surveys of voters in 31 states, not all 50 as it has for the past five presidential elections, according to multiple people involved in the planning.

The National Election Pool — a joint venture of the major television networks and The Associated Press — has not announced the states that won’t be included, but the decision is sure to cause some pain to election watchers across the country.

Voters in the excluded states will still be interviewed as part of a national exit poll, but state-level estimates of the partisan, age or racial makeups of electorates won’t be available as they have been since 1992. The lack of data may hamper election night analyses in some states, and it will almost certainly limit post-election research for years to come.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/10/04/networks-ap-cancel-exit-polls-in-19-states/

91 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Networks, AP cancel exit polls in 19 states (Original Post) Newsjock Oct 2012 OP
Election fraud is being planned in those states. FiveGoodMen Oct 2012 #1
sounds like you may be right. but WHY aren't they doing this? what is their rationale? secondwind Oct 2012 #2
In simple terms, if the GOP is planning to steal elections, they don't want.... OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #84
exactly. nt Robeysays Oct 2012 #3
This DURHAM D Oct 2012 #4
Actually I won't, since I doubt any will be swing states ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #21
Do you really think..... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #25
Yep. RoccoR5955 Oct 2012 #36
Bingo. David Zephyr Oct 2012 #38
Which of these states do you see that as a threat in? ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #56
They are all states that are safe GOP or Democratic Freddie Stubbs Oct 2012 #81
Yup. They did it before, they'll do it again. closeupready Oct 2012 #86
Where there's smoke there's fire Blue Owl Oct 2012 #5
If I wake up 11/7/12 w/ Mitt as President elect I will go nuts. Botany Oct 2012 #6
If that happens, I will never vote again. --nt CrispyQ Oct 2012 #33
In the future... salvorhardin Oct 2012 #7
Swing states, no doubt. Marr Oct 2012 #8
Actually no I'd be shocked ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #20
Really? I can. Marr Oct 2012 #28
Well we have the list now, and Ohio is being polled ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #65
I remember that so clearly. TDale313 Oct 2012 #78
No, none of them are swing states Freddie Stubbs Oct 2012 #82
Follow the Money! SCVDem Oct 2012 #9
Please note: AP is not the old neutral wire service annabanana Oct 2012 #10
that's it -- that is the coverup. grasswire Oct 2012 #11
How suspicious under the current set of circumstances involving the Republican Party's nc4bo Oct 2012 #12
THESE are the states where the results will be "surprising." annabanana Oct 2012 #13
This thread needs NETWORK level kicking! annabanana Oct 2012 #14
Sent a FB PM to Rachel Maddow and posted on Al Sharpton's page. nc4bo Oct 2012 #19
Why weren't these states listed in the original? nc4bo Oct 2012 #64
Something reeks. marmar Oct 2012 #15
Just guessing here... brooklynite Oct 2012 #16
I think the safe states will not have exit polls. hrmjustin Oct 2012 #17
I think the MOST CONTESTED states annabanana Oct 2012 #23
WHY would you think that? ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #26
What would be foolish about it? Marr Oct 2012 #34
So you're telling me the media.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #39
California would fall into that category KamaAina Oct 2012 #41
I thought about that.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #43
Yes, a number of hot House races due to redistricting KamaAina Oct 2012 #44
You're the one making an assertion with no data. Marr Oct 2012 #46
I absolutely will note it.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #51
What would I be wrong about? Marr Oct 2012 #52
Yup, that's why I said you were off base.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #54
So I see. Marr Oct 2012 #55
The list is now out ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #45
Look at that....I missed 6 out of 19 ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #53
Texas? JackRiddler Oct 2012 #89
I am sorry, but you are terribly wrong Freddie Stubbs Oct 2012 #83
You think they need ones in Utah, Hawaii, Delaware, NY, MA.... jberryhill Oct 2012 #18
We need to find out which states Lucy Goosey Oct 2012 #22
Exactly ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #24
Hawai'i has a Senate race for an open seat KamaAina Oct 2012 #42
You're right - I was only thinking of the Presidential race... Lucy Goosey Oct 2012 #50
If it's AL, MS, NE, AZ, etc. SansACause Oct 2012 #27
So who wins it, Brown or Warren? proverbialwisdom Oct 2012 #31
You make a good point ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #35
No exit polls in AZ? Panasonic Oct 2012 #32
The comments are great.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #29
Having polls in contested states will keep Romney from stealing the election. Since the GOP McCamy Taylor Oct 2012 #57
Quite amusing I agree ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #61
This is what they tried to do in Ohio in 2004. McCamy Taylor Oct 2012 #30
Good thing Ohio is not one of the states ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #49
Wait. They're not polling TEXAS? aquart Oct 2012 #73
It's definitely not a swing state ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #76
But it's been redistricted and the Hispanic population is growing. aquart Oct 2012 #77
So the fix is in. They are going to steal it again. I guess I have to accept President Rmoney. kimbutgar Oct 2012 #37
Oh no, they are gonna steal Mississippi! ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #40
LOL look at the actual list of states before you look foolish ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #47
THE LIST OF STATES ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #48
I see no problem with taking poll workers from these states in order to do more accurate polls in McCamy Taylor Oct 2012 #59
I certainly hope you're right, but where did you find the list? Vidar Oct 2012 #62
The article's been updated, it's now listed there ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #67
Sigh. These states are pretty reliable about where they are going to go. Jennicut Oct 2012 #71
This is Republican Think SCVDem Oct 2012 #58
There will still be some polling in those states for the national numbers ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #60
This might explain it... KansDem Oct 2012 #63
None of those states are being cut, so no that doesn't explain it ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #66
I wasn't referring to the states... KansDem Oct 2012 #70
Here we go... this started in 2004 when "the exit polls were all wrong!" budkin Oct 2012 #68
Which of these states do you expect to be stolen? ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #69
Wrong question. Exit polling is SOP used internationally by The Carter Center to monitor elections. proverbialwisdom Oct 2012 #72
It looks to me that the Carter Center talks very little about exit polls muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #79
Exit polls are actually illegal in many countries including Canada ButterflyBlood Oct 2012 #88
Exit polls vs vote totals? davidn3600 Oct 2012 #74
Honestly I'm not too worried... Obama's leads are so big it would be too obvious n/t budkin Oct 2012 #85
Still feel that way after today's conflicting poll reports? FiveGoodMen Oct 2012 #90
Yes because there is still a month left and 2 more debates budkin Oct 2012 #91
No good can come from this. blkmusclmachine Oct 2012 #75
For anyone following the subject these last years, this is one of the tells booksenkatz Oct 2012 #80
a couple of years ago, (i can't remember which country) newspeak Oct 2012 #87

OldDem2012

(3,526 posts)
84. In simple terms, if the GOP is planning to steal elections, they don't want....
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 06:45 AM
Oct 2012

...the public to know that the exit polls clearly indicated a victory by the Democratic Party.

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
21. Actually I won't, since I doubt any will be swing states
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:21 AM
Oct 2012

Holding exit polls only in safe states is pointless and in which case you might as well not have them at all.

ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
25. Do you really think.....
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:30 AM
Oct 2012

.....exit polls are needed in Alabama, Mississippi, Utah, Rhode Island, Vermont, or Maryland?

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
56. Which of these states do you see that as a threat in?
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:23 PM
Oct 2012

Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Freddie Stubbs

(29,853 posts)
81. They are all states that are safe GOP or Democratic
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 06:37 AM
Oct 2012

Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
86. Yup. They did it before, they'll do it again.
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 04:15 PM
Oct 2012

There is no downside, after all. We know that from experience.

Botany

(70,099 posts)
6. If I wake up 11/7/12 w/ Mitt as President elect I will go nuts.
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:00 AM
Oct 2012

exit polls have been a useful and accurate tool for elections for years ....
and the were in the United States until 1988 and the introduction of
electronic voting machines.

salvorhardin

(9,995 posts)
7. In the future...
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:03 AM
Oct 2012

In the future, exit polls will consist solely of the Cokie Roberts, George Will, and EJ Dionne sample, except every 16 years when Michael Moore shall be polled just for laughs.

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
20. Actually no I'd be shocked
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:20 AM
Oct 2012

Seriously I just can't picture exit polls in DC, Maryland, Texas and Utah but not in Ohio.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
28. Really? I can.
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:35 AM
Oct 2012

I remember in... it must've been 2000, during the Kerry/Bush election debacle. I was watching the news one evening when I saw the most surreal bit of cognitive dissonance I've ever seen in my life.

A panel of "political experts" was discussing the fiasco, and how the results just didn't match the exit polls. All agreed that this was proof that exit polls just aren't reliable, and that news agencies should stop reporting/discussing them altogether.

They immediately turned to the next item under discussion, a big election in Russia (which was going on at the same time). The western-backed candidate lost. The panel was, without exception, up in arms about the obvious fraud. Their proof? Exit polls that didn't match the official election results.

Nothing these people do surprises me anymore. I don't know whether they're propagandists, or brainwashed, or just plain stupid, but logical contradictions and obvious signs of fraud seem to be completely invisible to them when they don't fit into their world view.

 

SCVDem

(5,103 posts)
9. Follow the Money!
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:08 AM
Oct 2012

Who owns the major television networks, not PBS, and the AP?

I want some assurances that this electioned won't be scammed.

2000 and 2004! NEVER AGAIN!!

annabanana

(52,791 posts)
10. Please note: AP is not the old neutral wire service
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:09 AM
Oct 2012

of it's youth.

Check out it's controlling board
(emphasis on controlling.)

nc4bo

(17,651 posts)
12. How suspicious under the current set of circumstances involving the Republican Party's
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:10 AM
Oct 2012

proven voter suppression and voter fraud tactics.

They announce this crap but do not include a list of states is a tell.

We are not going to like it one bit.

nc4bo

(17,651 posts)
19. Sent a FB PM to Rachel Maddow and posted on Al Sharpton's page.
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:19 AM
Oct 2012

Post in every public area you can is my advise!!

nc4bo

(17,651 posts)
64. Why weren't these states listed in the original?
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 01:18 PM
Oct 2012

Seems they already knew what they would be, how odd they set it up this way.

brooklynite

(93,262 posts)
16. Just guessing here...
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:17 AM
Oct 2012

...buit they probably decided that the analyzing the outcome of the Presidential race doesn't depend on exit polls in Idaho and Maryland.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
34. What would be foolish about it?
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:42 AM
Oct 2012

It doesn't necessarily indicate outright collusion in election fraud on the part of the media.

What I think we have in this country is a corporate media establishment who begins with the assumption that US elections are 100% peachy keen, spick-and-span legitimate. In recent years, we've seen several instances of exit polls not matching official results, and actually changing the results of the election.

It's not something they want to talk about, because in their minds, the very notion of election fraud is absurd. So yeah, to me, it seems like common sense that they'd shut off exit polling in hotly contested areas.

ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
39. So you're telling me the media....
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:59 AM
Oct 2012

...on election night, would rather be in the dark about Ohio and Florida by not having exit polls, but be able to tell you with confidence that Rmoney took Utah, or Obama won Vermont? And spend money on this?

Good lord, please don't ever take a job running Current.

You are not thinking logically. You are thinking like a conspiracy nut.

If you are going to eliminate exit polls in close states, why bother polling states that are not close?

Mark it down, these will be the states where there is no exit polling, because the state is safe for one presidential candidate or another and the senate races are not close....

Alabama
Arkansas
Louisiana
Illinois
South Dakota
Idaho
Alaska
South Carolina
Kentucky
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oregon
Utah
Wyoming
Vermont
Rhode Island
Georgia
West Virginia
Delaware


ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
43. I thought about that....
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:05 PM
Oct 2012

....but I assume there might be some hot House races that they can poll as well, like New York and Texas....maybe. Plus as you said, too big a state.

 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
44. Yes, a number of hot House races due to redistricting
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:07 PM
Oct 2012

which was done by an independent commmission with no incumbent protection.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
46. You're the one making an assertion with no data.
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:10 PM
Oct 2012

I don't know which states are going to be excluded from exit polling, but I've seen our media do more asinine things that drop exit polling in contested races in the past.

Your question is pretty much the same one I was talking around. If you're going to eliminate exit polls in close states, why bother polling in states that are not close? It would be stupid and illogical, and if it happens, I hope you'll note it.

ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
51. I absolutely will note it....
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:17 PM
Oct 2012

....and I'll be sure to book mark this so when they are exit polling in the contested states, you admit you were wrong.

My predictions are based on a basic knowledge of how the polls stand right now. Many are simply not close and not worthy of wasting money on sending people to poll them.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
52. What would I be wrong about?
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:18 PM
Oct 2012

Unlike you, I never made an assertion. I speculated on a possibility.

I think you're misreading me. I'm not a conspiracy aficionado.

*edit* Actually, I did-- didn't I? I just noticed I opened with "Swing states, no doubt". That was pretty conspiratorial and paranoid, and I will acknowledge that now, without seeing a list.

ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
54. Yup, that's why I said you were off base....
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:22 PM
Oct 2012

...and if you look below post #45, the official list is up.

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
45. The list is now out
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:10 PM
Oct 2012

Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Yeah most contested states for sure.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
89. Texas?
Sat Oct 6, 2012, 06:32 PM
Oct 2012

Not that it's a close state, but a big one with a population mix that would yield a lot of interesting data.

This is a capitulation to the budget gods.

Freddie Stubbs

(29,853 posts)
83. I am sorry, but you are terribly wrong
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 06:43 AM
Oct 2012

The states are AL, AK, DE, DC, GA, HI, ID, KY, LA, NE, ND, OK, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WV and WY (all of these states are listed in the article).

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
18. You think they need ones in Utah, Hawaii, Delaware, NY, MA....
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:18 AM
Oct 2012

Yeah.. I'll be fascinated to know about exit polling data from Oklahoma....

Lucy Goosey

(2,940 posts)
22. We need to find out which states
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:25 AM
Oct 2012

If, say, they decided not to do exit polls in states like California, Hawaii, and Utah, where the outcome is pretty much a forgone conclusion, it could maybe make sense as a cost-saving measure.

But if they are not exit-polling, say, Ohio, Florida and Virginia, that's obviously a huge problem.

Lucy Goosey

(2,940 posts)
50. You're right - I was only thinking of the Presidential race...
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:16 PM
Oct 2012

...but there are still a lot of important down-ticket races, even in the non-swing states.

SansACause

(520 posts)
27. If it's AL, MS, NE, AZ, etc.
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:33 AM
Oct 2012

I see no problem with some states not having exit polls. I can tell you in advance what the exit polling is going to show in Alabama and Mississippi, California and Massachusetts.

If it's the swing states, something is definitely fishy.

ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
35. You make a good point
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:42 AM
Oct 2012

Quite frankly, you could exit poll only about 10 specific states in the Presidential, and that's all you'd need to get a clear view of how it's going in that race.

My guess is MA, CT, MO, MT, ND, IN, get exit polled because of close Senate races.

 

Panasonic

(2,921 posts)
32. No exit polls in AZ?
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:39 AM
Oct 2012

You must be fucking nuts.

Arizona and Missouri has turned themselves into a swing state, and Obama has a legitimate shot in getting both.

The downticket Dems (Carmona and McCaskill) are important for Obama's future.

ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
29. The comments are great....
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:37 AM
Oct 2012

....right-wing nuts saying this is proof Obama is stealing the election.

Then again, if you look here....

McCamy Taylor

(19,240 posts)
57. Having polls in contested states will keep Romney from stealing the election. Since the GOP
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:30 PM
Oct 2012

thinks they have a god given right to steal elections, they probably consider any effort to keep them from stealing as stealing.

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
49. Good thing Ohio is not one of the states
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:12 PM
Oct 2012

They are:

Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
76. It's definitely not a swing state
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 06:05 PM
Oct 2012

I am a little disappointed in that though because I'm curious about the demographic breakdown, but I can't blame them for not spending so much money on an expensive state where the result is not in doubt.

aquart

(69,014 posts)
77. But it's been redistricted and the Hispanic population is growing.
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 06:41 PM
Oct 2012

They really need to at least get a baseline on that.

They're going to end up playing frantic catch-up in the counties.

kimbutgar

(20,608 posts)
37. So the fix is in. They are going to steal it again. I guess I have to accept President Rmoney.
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:54 AM
Oct 2012

Big money wants Rmoney so bad they will take away our democracy

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
47. LOL look at the actual list of states before you look foolish
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:10 PM
Oct 2012

Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Yeah I'll be pretty stunned if Romney manages to steal DC or Rhode Island.

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
48. THE LIST OF STATES
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:12 PM
Oct 2012

Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

So according to some here Romney is planning on stealing DC, Hawaii and Rhode Island...but also needs to steal Wyoming and Oklahoma as well. If we believe that this is obviously because of vote fraud and can't possibly be because of cost reduction of course.

McCamy Taylor

(19,240 posts)
59. I see no problem with taking poll workers from these states in order to do more accurate polls in
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:32 PM
Oct 2012

the other (contested) states.

 

SCVDem

(5,103 posts)
58. This is Republican Think
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:31 PM
Oct 2012

They have cut the cost on the National level knowing that local news must have this data.

Will there be a pool poll in areas left unpolled?

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
60. There will still be some polling in those states for the national numbers
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:39 PM
Oct 2012

Just not enough for state numbers.

KansDem

(28,498 posts)
70. I wasn't referring to the states...
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 01:50 PM
Oct 2012

...but to the fact that ever since 2000, exit polls have been at odds with the "official machine count."

Remember when Voter News Service?

Role in the 2000 presidential election

A possibly unwritten secondary mission of the Voter News Service was to provide election results as quickly as possible on election night—a point which came to haunt the VNS in the 2000 presidential election.

[edit] Election Night in Florida

The VNS received intense criticism for its 'flip-flop' calling of the state of Florida in that election[citation needed]. During the course of the evening, it first called the closely contested state of Florida for Al Gore, then George W. Bush, and then as 'too close to call'. Critics argued that the state should never have been called until the state's fate was clear. The Voter News Service also received specific criticism for calling the state of Florida for Al Gore before the polls closed in the Florida panhandle, which was located in the Central Time Zone and heavily Republican. In addition, criticism also came because of the call for Bush which occurred before precincts in Broward, Palm Beach Volusia, and Miami-Dade Counties, all democratic, reported their results to the state which occurred after the networks called the state for Bush well after 2 AM eastern standard time.

[edit] Bush vs. Gore

The next day it was discovered that 'bad data' resulted in the carnage of the previous night. Due to the Bush margin of victory being less than 0.5% of the total number of votes cast, an automatic statewide machine recount was ordered. In Palm Beach County, a butterfly ballot was used to conduct the election in some precincts. On election day, voters intended to vote for Al Gore instead voted for Pat Buchanan,[citation needed] and the Reform Party ticket. Buchanan received 3,407 votes or 0.8% of the total compared to 0.29% of the total statewide. As a result, unwilling Buchanan voters in Palm Beach county reported votes for Gore in exit polling which resulted in flawed data. Palm Beach County's butterfly ballots


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_News_Service

As you may remember, Gore won Florida, but it took the SCOTUS to rule for Bush.

If you're going to steal an election, you need to control all the data.

budkin

(6,650 posts)
68. Here we go... this started in 2004 when "the exit polls were all wrong!"
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 01:36 PM
Oct 2012

Looks like they are planning on stealing it again...

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
69. Which of these states do you expect to be stolen?
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 01:37 PM
Oct 2012

Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

muriel_volestrangler

(100,993 posts)
79. It looks to me that the Carter Center talks very little about exit polls
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 05:24 AM
Oct 2012

In some cases, they mention them when they are available. But I can't see anything saying how they should be conducted (eg by looking at all areas of a country, rather than concentrating on the areas likely to swing). I can find something saying they recommended against the use of exit polls in 1994 in Mexico, because they'd make voters think their vote wasn't secret.

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
88. Exit polls are actually illegal in many countries including Canada
Sat Oct 6, 2012, 04:54 PM
Oct 2012

I like exit polls (because I love statistics about elections), but they are hardly the backbone of a functioning democracy.

 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
74. Exit polls vs vote totals?
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 03:14 PM
Oct 2012

Are you saying the exit poll is more accurate? If you think so, why do we bother count the votes. Let's just elect our president based on what the media's exit polls show.

Exit polling is based on whether the voter is telling the truth. If someone goes in to vote and then comes out and lies, that's going to mess it up. And yes....people have lied to pollsters. Not everyone is as open and honest about their vote as you may be.

budkin

(6,650 posts)
91. Yes because there is still a month left and 2 more debates
Mon Oct 8, 2012, 08:48 PM
Oct 2012

Plus Nate Silver just predicted Obama tonight.

 

blkmusclmachine

(16,149 posts)
75. No good can come from this.
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 05:08 PM
Oct 2012

But that's been the plan all along. Just 1 more indignity. And another. And another. Then another. Before long, nothing's left.


OPERATION NORTHWOODS

booksenkatz

(3,466 posts)
80. For anyone following the subject these last years, this is one of the tells
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 06:06 AM
Oct 2012

... the corporate media rushing in to protect the corrupt system. (At best.)

newspeak

(4,847 posts)
87. a couple of years ago, (i can't remember which country)
Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:36 AM
Oct 2012

I do remember it was an eastern european country, had mass protests because the exit poll did not jive with the results. since many of the states now have corporate owned voting machines (which apparently can only be scrutinized by their own employees) we've had disparities between exit polling and the machines. when you have a voting machine ceo publicly lauding that he will help the repug party win, then I think this country is already a banana republic. and the real corruption started with a coup in 2000.

scalia and thomas should have recused themselves since family members were already working for little boot's campaign. and what happened to max cleland in maryland is a travesty. a disabled veteran being compared to OBL by a damn chickenhawk who never served. and, maryland had the brand new voting machines.

it's a sad, sad country that makes villains into heros (for not protecting the country, but standing on a pile of rubble and talking tough) and heros into villains (those who actually have put their lives on the line defending this country and speaking the TRUTH). we're turning into one big sick reality show.

we need a landslide to win.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Networks, AP cancel exit ...