"Exit - Poll Outrage"

[Lori]

This, from Dick Morris:

That an exit poll is always right is an axiom of politics. It is easier to assume that a compass is not pointing north than to assume that an exit poll is incorrect. It takes a deliberate act of fraud and bias to get an exit poll wrong. Since the variables of whether or not a person will actually vote are eliminated in exit polling, it is like peeking at the answer before taking the test.

 

But these exit polls were wrong. And the fact that they were so totally, disastrously wrong is a national scandal. There should be a national investigation to unearth the story behind the bias.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/31590.htm

 

Thoughts?

[Kelly the Dog]

1. So what if exit polls were wrong. It is your fault as a watcher if you take them as gospel or anything other than they are, a too-soon, semi-educated guess. I watch them and use them and often believe them myself, and did last night, but I don't feel betrayed by them in retrospect because I knew going in that they may or may not be right. And may indeed be way off. They are like any poll, only worse.

 

2. I subscribe to the theory that people lie to pollsters all the time. They tell them what they think the pollsters want to hear, or at least a significant sample of people do, so as not to appear stupid or out of step. It's an incredibly stupid thing to do but I think it happens all the time.

[Lori]

1. So what if exit polls were wrong. It is your fault as a watcher if you take them as gospel or anything other than they are, a too-soon, semi-educated guess. I watch them and use them and often believe them myself, and did last night, but I don't feel betrayed by them in retrospect because I knew going in that they may or may not be right. And may indeed be way off. They are like any poll, only worse.

 

2. I subscribe to the theory that people lie to pollsters all the time. They tell them what they think the pollsters want to hear, or at least a significant sample of people do, so as not to appear stupid or out of step. It's an incredibly stupid thing to do but I think it happens all the time.

100387[/snapback]

Valid points - if you're depending on exit polling to decide whether or not you pull yourself away from the TV long enough to go vote, then maybe you shouldn't bother. I think Morris' point was that 'somebody' was deliberately releasing those numbers in an attempt to influence the election... I dunno; maybe he's right, or maybe he's just paranoid. But if he is right, I'd consider that a valid reason to do away with exit polls completely, or at least with announcing any numbers before ALL the polls have closed.

 

That's why I asked for some other viewpoints. Thanks for obliging.

[KD in CA]

Easy to believe that the networks would do whatever they could to help Kerry.

 

Zogby's has pretty much been discredited as a neutral source.

[Campy]

1. So what if exit polls were wrong. It is your fault as a watcher if you take them as gospel or anything other than they are, a too-soon, semi-educated guess.

 

2. I subscribe to the theory that people lie to pollsters all the time.

100387[/snapback]

I agree on both counts. But I can't a recall an election where they've been as far off base as they were yesterday.

 

I do know a guy who voted early yesterday morning for Bush, and was polled. He claimed he received an email advising GOP voters to say they voted for Kerry should they be polled, as it would help the GOP get the vote out in the Central and Mountain time zones, as well as create a sense of complacency from Kerry-leaning voters. I asked, he said it wasn't from the GOP per se, but from one of the PACs. He's not a BS'er, and has no reason to pull my leg on this, so I gotta' believe him. Methinks the impact of that tactic, if any, will never really be known.

[Paco]

I agree on both counts.  But I can't a recall an election where they've been as far off base as they were yesterday. 

 

I do know a guy who voted early yesterday morning for Bush, and was polled.  He claimed he received an email advising GOP voters to say they voted for Kerry should they be polled, as it would help the GOP get the vote out in the Central and Mountain time zones, as well as create a sense of complacency from Kerry-leaning voters.  I asked, he said it wasn't from the GOP per se, but from one of the PACs.  He's not a BS'er, and has no reason to pull my leg on this, so I gotta' believe him.  Methinks the impact of that tactic, if any, will never really be known.

100621[/snapback]

I don't ask this to be a wiseass, because nothing like this ever surprises me anymore. I'm just curious; if an email like that went around to the number of people it would take to successfully pull a stunt like that, you'd think it would inherently find airtime if for no other reason than because the media got kicked in the nuts again. And no one digs into a story like that deeper than pissed off journalists.

 

Just wonderin'...

[Campy]

I don't ask this to be a wiseass, because nothing like this ever surprises me anymore. I'm just curious; if an email like that went around to the number of people it would take to successfully pull a stunt like that, you'd think it would inherently find airtime if for no other reason than because the media got kicked in the nuts again. And no one digs into a story like that deeper than pissed off journalists.

 

Just wonderin'...

100660[/snapback]

True. The only reason why I even consider that it might be true is because of the source. Obviously you don't know him, and I can't call him a friend (he's reported to my wife at work for several years), but neither Teresa or I believe he's making it up. That's just not his style.

 

Your post above raises legitimate questions about the veracity of this type of tactic, but it does have me thinking about what purpose the polls serve. Do we really need them?

[Buftex]

This, from Dick Morris:

Thoughts?

100334[/snapback]

 

 

Sorry Lori, can't open the link. Who is Dick Morris suggesting that this stunt would benefit? Just curious. When I left work, around 6pm (Texas time), I got home expecting to see John Kerry well ahead. Instead, I just saw numbers all in favor of Bush. My first inclination was, something is up. I then remembered something Carl Rove said not long ago, saying that there was going to be a "big surprise" on election day.

 

I know at least two people, at my job, who had planned to vote for Kerry early in the day, but didn't bother to vote at all, when they saw the exit poll numbers. I think it sucks, and am not excusing them in any way, but I am not sure that this would not be typical of people who are usually "apolitical". I know, we are in Texas, so their vote would have had no impact, but it does make you kind of wonder what happened. It was one thing, 4 years ago, when Florida was projected for Gore, but the exit polls I saw around 4pm my time, showed Kerry aheah in 17 of 19 states, in some quite comfortably, and all of the big swing states. I have been following politics for a long time, and can't ever remember exit polls being so wildly inaccurate.

[Lori]

Sorry Lori, can't open the link.  Who is Dick Morris suggesting that this stunt would benefit?  Just curious.  When I left work, around 6pm (Texas time), I got home expecting to see John Kerry well ahead.  Instead, I just saw numbers all in favor of Bush.  My first inclination was, something is up.  I then remembered something Carl Rove said not long ago, saying that there was going to be a "big surprise" on election day. 

 

I know at least two people, at my job, who had planned to vote for Kerry early in the day, but didn't bother to vote at all, when they saw the exit poll numbers.  I think it sucks, and am not excusing them in any way, but I am not sure that this would not be typical of people who are usually "apolitical".  I know, we are in Texas, so their vote would have had no impact, but it does make you kind of wonder what happened.  It was one thing, 4 years ago, when Florida was projected for Gore, but the exit polls I saw around 4pm my time, showed Kerry aheah in 17 of 19 states, in some quite comfortably, and all of the big swing states.  I have been following politics for a long time, and can't ever remember exit polls being so wildly inaccurate.

100688[/snapback]

The Post website has been wonky all day. (Hmmm... I smell a conspiracy... )

Here's a couple more paragraphs:

Why did the exit polls show such a Democratic win when the Republicans were ahead all along? Why did they bias the coverage in the favor of the Democrats when Bush was winning from the beginning?

 

Exit polls are almost impossible to get wrong this way. They are based on interviews with voters as they leave the polling places having just cast their ballots. They don't reflect absentee, mail-in or early-voting ballots, of course — but these voters generally tend Republican. When you combine military votes with those of voters who are likely to travel and need absentee ballots, the bias is all pro-Republican.

 

So why were the exit polls wrong?

In this election, we have seen CBS go with a story on Bush's National Guard service based on forged documents. We have seen the New York Times and CBS report 377 missing tons of explosives that were not missing, not that many tons and confiscated by American troops. And now we have seen exit polls that were wrong, quite possibly deliberately biased.

That should erase any doubt who Morris is pointing the finger at. Like I said, I'm not sure I'm buyin' what he's sellin' - just thought I'd throw it out there for discussion.

 

(And as soon as I saw those early numbers for PA, I knew better than to trust any of the other ones...)

[Alaska Darin]

Sorry Lori, can't open the link.  Who is Dick Morris suggesting that this stunt would benefit?  Just curious.  When I left work, around 6pm (Texas time), I got home expecting to see John Kerry well ahead.  Instead, I just saw numbers all in favor of Bush.  My first inclination was, something is up.  I then remembered something Carl Rove said not long ago, saying that there was going to be a "big surprise" on election day. 

 

I know at least two people, at my job, who had planned to vote for Kerry early in the day, but didn't bother to vote at all, when they saw the exit poll numbers.  I think it sucks, and am not excusing them in any way, but I am not sure that this would not be typical of people who are usually "apolitical".  I know, we are in Texas, so their vote would have had no impact, but it does make you kind of wonder what happened.  It was one thing, 4 years ago, when Florida was projected for Gore, but the exit polls I saw around 4pm my time, showed Kerry aheah in 17 of 19 states, in some quite comfortably, and all of the big swing states.  I have been following politics for a long time, and can't ever remember exit polls being so wildly inaccurate.

100688[/snapback]

Gee, it's nice to see so many people paid attention 4 years ago.

 

"I didn't vote because the electronic babysitter told me..."

 

Idiots.

[Wacka]

People, especiallly republicans, are sick and tired of the press trying to find out info on them. Why the hell should I tell them about me and what my SECRET vote was.

 

They have been using that info for years to make hemselves look good- Ooh, we can determine the way the state will go 30 seconds after the polls close. Trying to pander to the HP crowd. Wait for the votes to be counted. Always thought of them as total stevestojan anyways.

[Buftex]

Gee, it's nice to see so many people paid attention 4 years ago. 

 

"I didn't vote because the electronic babysitter told me..."

 

Idiots.

100753[/snapback]

 

 

I agree AD. Everyone should vote, no matter where they live. It shouldn't take "hotpocket" issues like gay marriage to get people out to vote.

 

But, I am really just trying to figure out how reporting inaccurate early exit poll data, showing Kerry with a large lead, would benefit the Democrats. Am I missing something? I don't see the logic. Unless, of course the suggestion is that showing Kerry with a sizable lead woudl inspire evangelicals to rush out to vote. In which case, idiocy, it would seem, is a non-partisan affliction.

[Alaska Darin]

I agree AD. Everyone should vote, no matter where they live.  It shouldn't take "hotpocket" issues like gay marriage to get people out to vote. 

 

But, I am really just trying to figure out how reporting inaccurate early exit poll data, showing Kerry with a large lead, would benefit the Democrats.  Am I missing something?  I don't see the logic.  Unless, of course the suggestion is that showing Kerry with a sizable lead woudl inspire evangelicals to rush out to vote.  In which case, idiocy, it would seem, is a non-partisan affliction.

100804[/snapback]

There is no doubt about that. I think giving the early exit poll did 2 things to the "Hotpockets" folks on both sides of the aisle:

 

1. It galvanized the Republicans to stand in line no matter how long or what the conditions.

2. It gave the Democrats the excuse not to do what they didn't want to anyway.

 

We have become so lazy. Our Grandparents won WWII. We can't even make dinner regularly.