2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumTo Clear the Air, Sanders Should Challenge New York Vote
In November 2004, the officially announced results of the Ukrainian presidential election differed from exit polling by 12%.
U.S. officials officially cried fraud.
Last Tuesday, the results of the New York primary between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders differed from exit polling by 12%.
Tim Robbins has cried fraud, and the Washington Posts most consistent Clinton hack this cycle is leading the charge in mocking him.
A friend of mine, a Sanders supporter who acted as a poll worker in Brooklyn, initially saw nothing wrong, suggesting that a bunch of people, who were ineligible to vote, cast provisional ballots for Sanders and then told exit pollsters that they voted accordingly. My friend, who has not given me specific permission to use their name, worked a precinct in the Greenpoint neighborhood, Sanders best in New York City. About one-third of all ballots were cast provisionally in that precinct.
But that would not explain why exit polling has been so bad in fifteen other states, missing consistently to Clintons benefit and outside the margin of error in eight states with open or mixed primaries."
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/26/to-clear-the-air-sanders-should-challenge-new-york-vote/
LonePirate
(13,407 posts)If I am an impartial observer or investigator, I would first want to know how valid, scientific, representative and reliable the exit polling is? It's interesting how there is never any discussion about the exit polling being flawed. Somehow all the discussion starts with the assumption that exit polling is infallible and somehow the final election results are faulty. If the exit polls are deemed to be sound, then an understanding of the differences can be investigated.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)I do think there should be a sample audit tho. If the polling had a deficiency an audit should address and put forward recommendations to correct the issue.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)It should bring on investigations to find the truth.
-none
(1,884 posts)One of the first questions ask after being ask if you are will to do an exit interview, is who did you vote for, for such and such an office. Kinda hard to mess that up unless the voter lies.
There were no real problem with exit polling until 2000 when it suddenly became a problem. People suddenly did not start lying in 2000.
LonePirate
(13,407 posts)There were fewer than 1.400 responses in CNN's exit polls in NY even though 1.8M votes were cast. Did the poll takers seek responses at polling places that were representative of the NY electorate? Were they based in heavy Bernie precincts or heavy Hillary precincts? Did the poll takers only question certain types of people based on appearance or demeanor? Or were the poll takers completely unbiased in their samples?
Those questions and a host of similar ones need to be asked about the exit polls before jumping to conclusions that the polls are right and the results are wrong.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)or will this require two ** ?
Tarc
(10,472 posts)Obviously his legal counsel is saner than some of his base.
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)Until an audit is done and the provisional ballots are counted or people will always question NY. Not standing up for Dems. who were possibly thrown off the rolls is not helping people to believe Hillary has your back and could hurt her in the general election if she gets the nom.
Let me make this clear again, I'm NOT talking about the independents, I'm talking about newly registered Democratic voters and Democratic voters who got thrown off the rolls.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Obviously Bush won Florida, and exit polls had it wrong...
Tarc
(10,472 posts)Just like one of Sanders' prime cheerleaders;
You need to chill out, Tim Robbins
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Once is an incident, twice is coincidence, three times is weird, four times is a pattern
And once we get to the "1 in a trillion chance of this happening all by chance" territory, the word FRAUD is applicable.
Tarc
(10,472 posts)He was pretty quick to hop on the lawsuit when it came to that DNC database "breach" a few months ago, so obviously they have many experienced lawyers on hand who aren't hesitant to jump if they see a genuine legal problem.
So why no official challenges yet?
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Just a guess.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)how long does something like that take?
I'm guessing that (after the clinton delaying tactics - sorry, after the Clinton incremental pragmatic approach) by the time they discover the fraud it will be 2020.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)Jitter65
(3,089 posts)errors etc.