|
|
|
Vic Daring
New Member
49 Posts |
 Posted - 09/04/2008 : 08:49:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by chaloobi
I'm not sure how you would compare statistical analysis of exit polls and return data to UFO sigtings. Seems completely unrelated to me...
Per the article, statistically, there's almost no way Bush could have won based on the exit polls. And there's been no reason found how the exit polls could be wrong.
|
The comparison, is that there are other explanations for the disparity. Off the top of my head: 1) People lied to the pollsters. 2)As the article notes, maybe Bush voters ingored the pollsters. I know, Zogby doesn't buy it. But polls are conducted by the media, largely. Bush followers hate the media. (See the last couple days at the GOP Convention.) So it doesn't seem that far fetched to me.
There are almost certainly other, more statistical-based possibilities that I'm not smart enough to think of.
So my concern is this - We have an observation: Exit polls and Election Results don't match. And we're brushing aside all other possible explanations.
Just doesn't seem like a good application of critical thought to me. It seems more like the guy who saw a shiny light in the sky, and because I can't give him an explanation he likes better, it HAS to be beings from another planet.
|
The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed. |
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2008 : 09:11:57 [Permalink]
|
I'd think the polling organizations would be examining their polling techniques, scrutinizing details, and trying to make sure that the methodology isn't responsible for the poll vs vote discrepancy.
I haven't heard anything on this front, at all.
And you have to know that a company that makes its living off accurate polling would be running serious internal audits over the 2004 election.
The media could easily investigate this.... if they weren't 100x more interested in Lohan/Spears/Hilton.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2008 : 09:17:13 [Permalink]
|
Vic said:
Just doesn't seem like a good application of critical thought to me. It seems more like the guy who saw a shiny light in the sky, and because I can't give him an explanation he likes better, it HAS to be beings from another planet.
|
No one is saying that but you.
At least on this forum.
There is plenty of reason to be skeptical of the 2004 election result, and there are plenty of reasonable questions that SHOULD have been asked. The polling companies (which are not "the media", just employed by them) should have been engaging in serious internal investigations post 2004... they probably did! But we just lack the data on the results because of the tabloid nature of our current "media".
Now.. if those internal audits didn't turn up methodology flaws, then it would be time to start seriously considering other questions.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2008 : 09:40:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Vic Daring
So my concern is this - We have an observation: Exit polls and Election Results don't match. And we're brushing aside all other possible explanations.
|
We have two observations:
1. The one you noted above
and
2. #1 has never happened in 35 years of exit polling here or anywhere else in the world where reputable exit polling is done.
The most likely non-fraud explanation is flawed methodology. According to the article the company that did the polls was highly experienced and went overboard to reduce the margin of error for this poll. They were contracted by both conservative and mainstream news media. Post election they reviewed their methodolgy in detail and found nothing wrong. And they had every incentive to find something wrong so they could correct it and ensure the future viability of their business.
So they offered the "Bush supporters don't like exit pollers" explanation, for lack of anything better. Not only is this a phenomenon never before observed anywhere in the history of exit polling, and for which no corroborating social evidence exists, but it is directly contradicted by analysis of actual data.
You really have to reach to get to an explanation other than fraud. If there is something more plausible, then what? |
-Chaloobi
|
| Edited by - chaloobi on 09/04/2008 09:40:46 |
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2008 : 09:43:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
I'd think the polling organizations would be examining their polling techniques, scrutinizing details, and trying to make sure that the methodology isn't responsible for the poll vs vote discrepancy.
I haven't heard anything on this front, at all.
And you have to know that a company that makes its living off accurate polling would be running serious internal audits over the 2004 election.
The media could easily investigate this.... if they weren't 100x more interested in Lohan/Spears/Hilton.
|
According to the Rolling Stone article they conducted an in-depth review of their methodology and found nothing wrong. That's when they threw their hands up and suggested maybe Bush supporters didn't like exit pollers. Could you imagine if they suggested the more plausible explanation, IMO, that the election was rigged? |
-Chaloobi
|
|
|
|
Vic Daring
New Member
49 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2008 : 10:42:23 [Permalink]
|
I guess I'm sort of stuck in a loop of my own creation.
For me to really get worked up over this, I need something more. E-mails between co-conspirators. A paper trail that links someone to a specific misdeed.
'Course the only to get that kind of thing would be a good, thorough, investigation. Which I'm not exactly clamoring for.
I will say that, for all the carping about the media, I'm still pretty sure if Newsweek or MSNBC or somebody thought they had a chance to break that story, they'd be on it pretty hard. But then, I'm also an admitted media-apologist (worked at a newspaper for about five years). |
The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2008 : 10:48:45 [Permalink]
|
Vic said:
For me to really get worked up over this, I need something more. E-mails between co-conspirators. A paper trail that links someone to a specific misdeed.
|
Did you miss the crap Blackwell pulled in Ohio? You can set all the other 29 states with exit poll discrepancies aside. His actions alone should have been enough to trigger widespread investigations into election fraud. The guy he got elected has been politicizing the DoJ for years though, and the AG wasn't going to bother having the FBI investigate...
That is an example of well documented election fraud on the state level, with no action taken by anyone in law enforecement.
The idea of a wider conspiracy, I'll agree with you, would need much much more evidence to be convincing.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2008 : 11:04:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Vic Daring
For me to really get worked up over this, I need something more. E-mails between co-conspirators. A paper trail that links someone to a specific misdeed. |
I'm thinking the poll data is enough to warrant an investigation, which would likely turn up lots of interesting stuff.
I will say that, for all the carping about the media, I'm still pretty sure if Newsweek or MSNBC or somebody thought they had a chance to break that story, they'd be on it pretty hard. But then, I'm also an admitted media-apologist (worked at a newspaper for about five years).
|
One would think. I'd like to see an objective second opinion on the claims made by the Rolling Stone article. If everything it reported is more or less accurate, I'm left scratching my head wondering why nobody has run this up the flag pole. |
-Chaloobi
|
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2008 : 11:04:19 [Permalink]
|
| Problem is with our system, widespread problems arent nessisary, you only need to target one critical state/region in any close election. Bet you a million that these issues will never come up in a non-swing state. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Stolen Elections?
