You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #43: According to Mitofsky [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
Heewack Donating Member (297 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-24-04 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #39
43. According to Mitofsky
The numbers were leaked without proper weighting.

The thing that I think you have to consider is that his exist polls were design to project a winner, not determine fraud. Two different animals in the way the polls are constructed and put into practice, at least according to Mitofsky. And since we are using his numbers his input has to be taken seriously.

"And what about the 71,000 exit polled and released prior to 8am?
That's 63% of the 113,000 total to be polled, and is a pretty heavy weight all by itself."

Not if the numbers are not weighted correctly due to sample differences. That can take a little while to determine whether you have samples 59% women, or 59% men in a given polling place, and how to adjust them to reflect a predictable outcome. Evidently sometimes it takes too much time if the voting is close.


"If we assume the final 113,000 is a fair representation of the voting population, and Kerry was ahead by 3% after 71,000 were polled, then consider this:

Bush needed to win 56% of remaining 42,000 to reverse the 51-48 spread from Kerry to his favor.

Forget weighting for a moment. Do you really believe that a 15% Bush turnaround from the first 71,000 (counted, where he had 48%) to the final 42,000 (not yet counted, where he needed 56%) was possible?"

The way I understand this you can't forget weighting because the raw numbers are only representitive of whom you were able to take the poll. Without weighting you could take that same 113,000 and if they came from a certain precinct that was heavily one candidate or another it would skew the results.

But I get what you are saying.

In the polls the weighting is everything.

If you had a definite random sample then your conclusions would be correct about the unheard of 15% turnaround from the first 71,000. But that obviously wasn't the case according the the man who did the poll.

I think your analysis has been interesting and I think one could actually find some factual abnormalities if we had the complete data. I just think that with what we have it is near impossible to make a conclusive judgement.

I hope you have a Happy Holiday's.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC