How were the exit polls conducted? Were people simply asked who they voted for? Was every single voter asked or just some of them? Of the people asked, how many responded at all?
I think it's more likely that a voter would proclaim to have voted for Kerry rather than bush, ESPECIALLY in battleground states. A Bush supporter most likely knew who they were voting for since 2002 when election talk started firing up, and felt no need to create some controversy when they simply just wanted to vote and leave.
I didn't come across an exit poll in Minnesota, but I know that if I had, I wouldn't have said anything. Kerry supporters in Minnesota, at least the ones I know, have really loud voices and lots of friends. I'm not saying I'm afraid of the KErry supporters around here, I just like my peace and quiet.
That said, don't you think it's possible that all the people who said they voted for Kerry really did vote for Kerry? And people who voted for Bush just didn't say anything?
Why else would democrats be so surpised Bush won?
Please pardon my pseudo-intellectuaphilisophicalismysiticality.
Sayzak..you are gonna find too many people on here that say the exit polls were right and that the election was stolen.
My husband voted Bush and told the exit pollers that he voted Kerry...he did it because he thought it would be amusing to mess up their stats, and because he doesnt think its people's business to ask such personal questions.
Thats was the reason I refused to answer them at all. Its nosy to ask people's votes as they are leaving. Many dont think its a public issue...many see their political affliations to be private.
One person said that if the people lied on the polls it would have been more widespread...I say if you dont know who lied and who didnt...how can they know for sure?
Sean, I believe it was Sean, said that they should no longer allow exit polls and have a bind winner at the end of the night (something along those lines)...
I totally agree with that....there is no reason why anyone needs to know ANYTHING until the end of the night.
Exit polls are strictly because someone wants an answer before the actual answer....its nosiness....
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
Sayzak said this in post #1 : How were the exit polls conducted? Were people simply asked who they voted for? Was every single voter asked or just some of them? Of the people asked, how many responded at all?
Ooops, I meant to address this as well....
I believe I asked ICB this question....
Does anyone know the people they asked the questions to?
Were they only old, women, men, young, white, black, etc....
Or do they ask everyone?
I will always find it odd that people say the exit polls were right especially when they dont know the demographics involved in the polling.
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
Everyone? Did they ask you? There wasn't anyone taking any polls at our voting place which is about a block from our home. We saw about a hundred people move through there during the time that we spent there and nobody was challenged..
Sean Kelly said this in post #4 : Everyone? Did they ask you? There wasn't anyone taking any polls at our voting place which is about a block from our home. We saw about a hundred people move through there during the time that we spent there and nobody was challenged..
I asked the question everyone because I didnt know.
Well, now I know they werent at your polling place at all...which makes me wonder even more how accurate they could have been as a whole. How many other places were they not at?
But to answer your question...yes they were at our polling place, which was less than a mile up the road from me.
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
I asked, too, because I didn't know I have no idea how extensive the polls were, but we didn't see them at all here in san Jose as far as I know.. I wonder if perhaps the exit polling was restricted to places of highest uncertainty as to what the results would be. I think it should be outlawed.
mystic said this in post #2 : .
Its nosy to ask people's votes as they are leaving. Many dont think its a public issue...many see their political affliations to be private.
One person said that if the people lied on the polls it would have been more widespread...I say if you dont know who lied and who didnt...how can they know for sure?
mystic, if you check you'll find that down through presidential election history, the media has projected the winners of elections early by conducting exit polls. how many of them can you remember that were incorrect, besides the dewey/truman poll of 1948?
have you ever studied statistical sampling? it is not a guess. it is a scientific, almost foolproof prediction of a result, subject ONLY to the margin of error. it is almost NEVER wrong. yet, somehow, mysteriously, bush wins the states that kerry was found to have won by exit polling, and also wins the states that exit polling found bush to have won.
the margin of error allows for things like giving false responses, as your hubby did. i think it highly unlikely that hundreds of people in ohio and florida conspired to lie to 'throw a curveball' to the country for a lark. it's much more likely that the voting irregularities and manipulations caused the discrepancies between the exit polls and the actual vote tally.
i would LOVE to see a house-to-house vote recount this month in the challenged states. too bad it won't happen.
mystic, if you check you'll find that down through presidential election history, the media has projected the winners of elections early by conducting exit polls. how many of them can you remember that were incorrect, besides the dewey/truman poll of 1948?
have you ever studied statistical sampling? it is not a guess. it is a scientific, almost foolproof prediction of a result, subject ONLY to the margin of error. it is almost NEVER wrong. yet, somehow, mysteriously, bush wins the states that kerry was found to have won by exit polling, and also wins the states that exit polling found bush to have won.
the margin of error allows for things like giving false responses, as your hubby did. i think it highly unlikely that hundreds of people in ohio and florida conspired to lie to 'throw a curveball' to the country for a lark. it's much more likely that the voting irregularities and manipulations caused the discrepancies between the exit polls and the actual vote tally.
I would LOVE to see a house-to-house vote recount this month in the challenged states. too bad it won't happen.
Ill be perfectly honest Jim...Ive said it so many times..and Ill say it again with no problem.
I took a few stats classes and one on statstical research...I dont believe in it, and I dont like it. Regardless of if they have shown to be right or wrong...I dont believe in polls.
I think too many times the polls are biased and flawed...more times than not.
I am with Sean...I dont agree with exit polls, and think they, too, should be outlawed!
Regardless who was showing as the favorite in the polls on this forum...my comments were always that I dont agree for the reason I showed above.
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
Jim Nasium said this in post #7 : have you ever studied statistical sampling? it is not a guess. it is a scientific, almost foolproof prediction of a result, subject ONLY to the margin of error.
(...)
it's much more likely that the voting irregularities and manipulations caused the discrepancies between the exit polls and the actual vote tally.
quote:
mystic said this in post #8 : I took a few stats classes and one on statstical research...I dont believe in it, and I dont like it. Regardless of if they have shown to be right or wrong...I dont believe in polls.
From an engineering standpoint, I agree with Jim. I use statistical models in software - there is some stuff out there that will blow your mind. Ever heard of fractals? Some fractal computations are based purely on chaos and unpredictability, but the result is an unmistakable pattern. How is this possible? Laws of probability. Statistically, all options weighed equally, the system "should" perform a certain way. And guess what? It does!
Some statistics are fluffy analysis of meaningless values. There's a funny quote that embodies this, "did you know that 93% of statistics are fabricated by white males under the age of 32?" Funny though that may be, some statistics are spot on. It is astronomically unlikely without a coordinated planned event that the statistics are wrong in the case of the exit polls. As Jim says, it is more likely that the discrepency is the result of incorrect vote data.
I have to agree that statistics aren't some fake hokey science, they are a very good indicator. When looking at statisitics, you have to worry more about who conducts a survey and how they are conducted. However, random sampling is fairly accurate.
As an engineer and someone that has worked in research, I'll just say that statistics work and they are one of the reasons we can make progress in science, especially in the realm of microbiology.
Additional...
I remember when I used to lift weights at the gym with my friend there was another guy talking to my friend about by protein supplements and he was saying he only buys individual amino acids rather than the mixture. He claimed that those mixtures aren't good because you don't know how much you're really getting, but that's just wrong. If it says 20% in the bottle, you're getting 20% +/- 0.001%.
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.
- Bill Cosby
The guy who takes a chance, who walks the line between the known and unknown, who is unafraid of failure, will succeed.
- Gordon Parks
Inner City Blue said this in post #12 : I have to agree that statistics aren't some fake hokey science, they are a very good indicator. When looking at statisitics, you have to worry more about who conducts a survey and how they are conducted. However, random sampling is fairly accurate.
As an engineer and someone that has worked in research, I'll just say that statistics work and they are one of the reasons we can make progress in science, especially in the realm of microbiology.
Im not saying that in all instances stats are wrong...Im just saying that in many other areas they are... in science stats can work...but in this exit polls situation, scientifically, there are too many flaws.
But as you said yourself..."you have to worry more about who conducts a survey and how they are conducted."
Thats correct...and thats why after seeing polls showing Kerry as favored and the same day seeing polls that showed Bush was favored...well, needless to say, they were both nothing short of a joke.
Now..taking that and putting that same perspective on the exit polls....well, again, I ask...who did they ask? Where were they located? Who talked, who didnt? Why did they choose some places over another? Who lied, who didnt...and how would we ever know that?
Maybe 4 years later people arent so quick to want to talk to these people.
BTW...will they ever show us the full study with the answers to these questions?
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
If it didn't work in 1948 and it didn't work in 2004, that's a pretty fool-proof indicater that exit polling is not as conclusive as everyone thought. In the end it comes down to what random people asked say. In a crouded polling booth you have long lines, and anywhere from 5 to 20 people voting at one time. Are all of those people asked on their way out, or are people asked on the way in? I'd like to see how many people actually responded. If someone is going to accuse the GOP of stealing the election, they should have those numbers. If they don't than they're chasing a pipe dream.
Please pardon my pseudo-intellectuaphilisophicalismysiticality.
Sayzak said this in post #14 : If it didn't work in 1948 and it didn't work in 2004, that's a pretty fool-proof indicater that exit polling is not as conclusive as everyone thought. In the end it comes down to what random people asked say. In a crouded polling booth you have long lines, and anywhere from 5 to 20 people voting at one time. Are all of those people asked on their way out, or are people asked on the way in? I'd like to see how many people actually responded. If someone is going to accuse the GOP of stealing the election, they should have those numbers. If they don't than they're chasing a pipe dream.
it's pretty obvious you never had a university course in statistical sampling. the way you phrase it, the polling was done by a grade school kid asking questions to whoever would stop and answer. statistical sampling is done on a highly scientific basis and TAKES INTO ACCOUNT by the margin of error all of the types of things you raise questions about. the results are incorrect about as often as the us olympic hockey team upsets the soviet union team. it DOES happen, but it's highly unusual.
the pre-election polling showed ohio going to kerry. the exit polling showed the election going to kerry by a sizeable margin. something's wrong. believe it!
11-13-2004 12:45 AM
I have no idea how extensive the polls were, but we didn't see them at all here in san Jose as far as I know.. I wonder if perhaps the exit polling was restricted to places of highest uncertainty as to what the results would be. I think it should be outlawed.
Oh well...thats okay.
