Cal Tech exit polls (corrupted) & Freeman-U of Pa exit polls (uncorrupted)

[BlueInRed]

I have been asked by Jonathan Simon (of Verified Voting) to post this data widely. He supplied it to me in response to an an inquiry about the accuracy of an article (http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KEE411A.html). The exit poll discrepancy is caused by the source of the base data -- Cal Tech used corrupted exit polls, while Freeman used uncorrupted data.

Freeman (U of Pa) based his report on screen shots taken of exit polls at about 12 am Eastern. Jonathan Simon of Verified Voting also took similar screen shots of 47 of the exit polls. Simon says (ha!) that the Cal Tech people used flawed data, while Freeman used accurate exit poll data.

Here's the full text of Simon's explanation:

"Please distribute this clarification as widely as possible.

Okay, here's the deal. These data points for national # of respondents are undoubtedly correct. My screen shot for the 12:23 a.m. national update says 13,047; although I don;t have a second national screen shot for comparison, I do have several individual states which reflect a major change in candidate preference with little (OH, e.g.: 1963 @ 7:32 pm to 2020 @ 1:41 am) or no (CT, e.g.: 872 unchanged) increase in # of respondents.

What this indicates, however, is simply that in these later updates the exit poll results were being "corrected" by inclusion of increasing amounts of actual tabulated data (known as "quick counts") from target precincts. It is not so much that "the fix was in," but that the "exit polls" were no longer exit polls at this point, but were still being called such in the screen shots and by the media in general.

There was a lot of confusion about this and it has led to some very serious analytical error, such as the Cal Tech/MIT paper which uses the corrupted late "exit poll" results to conclude erroneously that the exit poll/tabulated vote discrepancies are not worth shouting about. This was, unfortunately, picked up by Keith Olbermann as a valid refutation of Steve Freeman's excellent work using the pure exit poll data and analyzing these red flag discrepancies.

The "official" exit polls were not designed to serve as a check mechanism on the vote totals, so Edison/Mitofsky had no compunction about conflating them with tabulated vote data (and thereby contaminating them with the very data stream we were relying on them to check, and rendering them useless for this purpose) as the night wore on. Fortunately I was able to secure the screen shots for 47 states (incl. DC) before the tabulated data was mixed in; and this data, of course, has proven to be a gold mine for analysis.

Would it have been swept under the carpet if someone had not been awake at the swtich to pick it up? Doubtless. Does that mean it was part of a "fix?" Not necessarily, just that this is a very tricky game (which it shouldn't be!) and you have to stay awake and keep on your toes. Are the lack of cooperation by the pollsters and the glib misinterpretations by the media evidence of a cover-up, an attempt to make the whole thing just go away? Very probably.

Can we still get at the truth? Yes, if we keep sorting through the rubble, learning as we go, and not taking "no" or "i dunno" for an answer.

Please post this information widely.
—Jonathan Simon "

[glitch]

1. Most excellent. Nominating for front page, and shame on Caltech/MIT nt

[intelle]

2. Thanks for posting this.

Are you going to send this on to Keith Olbermann?

[BlueInRed]

3. already sent, but feel free to resend

to Olberman. If he's getting 27,000 emails, I doubt he reads them all himself!

[intelle]

4. Thanks, will do, n/t

[althecat]

5. kick