What happened to exit polls? They use to be the canary in the coal mine for election fraud

[We Want Peace]

In 2004 Bush vs. Kerry, exit polls showed the exact opposite of election results.

Because of this, the media determined that exit polls were inaccurate and discontinued them completely.

Now we have absolutely no way to check to see if our elections are valid, and if they have been getting away with manufacturing consent and stealing elections for this long...why would they stop now?

[JHB]

1. That would have meant something smelled fishy about Bush2000...

...so obviously it was the exit polls that were wrong. Why do you hate America? 911! 911!

[2pooped2pop]

2. canary died during Bush stolen election

mainstream media refused to report it. Bird not replaced. Canary still dead.

[DCKit]

3. They were discredited by Republicans who stole elections.

Then, it was enforced by the Supremes.

[slackmaster]

4. There is always a way to check the validity of a vote count

It's called a "recount," and any verifiable system allows for it. A recount is inherently more accurate than exit polling because the sample size is 100% of the votes.

The real purpose of exit polling is to generate news buzz.

[SharonAnn]

5. That would require counting the actual, physical (paper) ballots. Not just

re-running a computer program.

[slackmaster]

6. Yes, exactly.

By hand.

[zbdent]

18. don't forget using Access to change the counts in your favor

after the fact ...

[We Want Peace]

8. last time the hand 'recount' in Wisconsin included torn, overstuffed bags with the wrong numbers

n/t

[slackmaster]

12. US Department of Justice is monitoring the election this time

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/June/12-crt-709.html

[shcrane71]

15. hrmmmph... Federal government gave Bush Florida in 2000, and the presidency. nt.

[We Want Peace]

20. my thoughts exactly!

n/t

[shcrane71]

22. Welcome to DU, We Want Peace!

[We Want Peace]

23. Thanks!

[Gabi Hayes]

7. Voter News Sevice got it right. the media, including so-called watchdogs, either blew it bigtime,

or refused to cover it honestly

if you google VNS, you only get one side of the story

try the DU google links and take a stroll down memory lane:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/searchresults.html?q=VNS+voter+exit+polls&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&sa=Search%21&domains=democraticunderground.com&client=pub-7805397860504090&forid=1&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23008000%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23336699%3BVLC%3A663399%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3AFFFFFF%3BLBGC%3A336699%3BALC%3A0000FF%3BLC%3A0000FF%3BT%3A000000%3BGFNT%3A0000FF%3BGIMP%3A0000FF%3BFORID%3A11&hl=en

[Marr]

9. Do you know what was the craziest news moment for me that year? I was

watching CNN, and they were discussing exactly the issue you mentioned-- this whole panel of "experts" all agreed how exit polling just wasn't reliable, and obviously couldn't be cited as an indicator of election fraud anymore. Then the host (Wolf Blitzer, IIRC) turned *DIRECTLY* to the Russian elections, where he explained that the vote had obviously been rigged, since the exit polls showed different results.

He literally changed positions on the subject in the next breath, and his "experts" just nodded along in agreement.

[pnwmom]

13. That's what I can't understand. How they can justify with a straight face using them everywhere

but here.

[We Want Peace]

14. That is just brazenly absurd! This is why we must occupy the media!!

This is why we must occupy the media. A democracy cannot exit without a free press.

Now we have Koch brothers blatantly paying for elections, the majority of that money goes to the corporate media so it is pretty obvious who they work for.

[shcrane71]

16. It's sad that Americans must be so skeptical about our "free press". nt

[We Want Peace]

25. bought and paid for corporate media

This coming election November, Koch brothers alone have put in more money than McCain Raised last time.

All of the money goes to the corporate media.

There job is to lie about polls and support, manufacture consent, then cover up the election fraud. There will probably be some shooting, maybe a zombie attack to change the subject.

It works every time, as long as we keep allowing them to get away with it.

[Baitball Blogger]

10. The timing of the unpoplarity of exit polls coincides with the deception of the 2000 election.

[pnwmom]

11. I thought it was laws that required that pollsters stay away from the polling places.

Are they really not doing it anywhere now, or just in this Wisconsin election?

[Doctor_J]

17. The GOP media machine stopped running them because

they are proof positive that the Repukes are stealing elections. Very simple, really.

[Egalitarian Thug]

19. If it's important that the miners not know about the gas, you have to take the canary away.

Silly hippie

[Freddie Stubbs]

21. Your premise is incorrect. There were exit polls in 2006, 2008 and 2010

http://articles.cnn.com/2006-11-07/politics/election.exitpolls_1_exit-polls-voters-republican-house-candidates?_s=PM OLITICS

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/exit-polls.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/weekinreview/07marsh.html

[We Want Peace]

24. Are they exit polling for the Wisconsin race today?

You seriously have not noticed the media stopped doing exit polls after discrediting them?

[Son of Gob]

27. Yes

They start releasing them at 4 pm.

[We Want Peace]

28. can we trust the exit poll takers? Is this independent of Koch(corporate media) Funded?

This might be just as trustworthy as their polls before the election- like not at all, just part of the manufactured consent.

[Igel]

26. Innumeracy and ill will.

When the early exit polls became the tool of innumerate propaganda, they stopped being reported. An exit poll that doesn't give early results, for whom only a validated model is used, has no value to the innumerate and (wo)men of ill-will.

I watched a kid use the ideal gas law PV = nRT to determine the moles in a volume of liquid. The math worked out, but he demonstrated a profound lack of caring about the assumptions behind the equation. He insisted that given pressure, volume, temperature, and the constant R the equation had to work. There was, after all, an "=". Plugging in numbers and chugging out answers didn't make up for innumeracy and ill will: The model, the assumptions, upon which this equation is based simply don't hold for liquids.

There are a lot of examples of this kind of critical non-thinking used on the Internet, including this particular chunk.

For this post, take my handle to be thatisall.