Should they release exit polls before polls close? n/t

[Skwmom]

[Ferd Berfel]

1. NO

Let everyone vote first. They should not call winners until all polls are closed.
And voting should be on paper ballots and hand counted

[azretired]

2. NO

People who have not voted may choose not to vote because their candidate has already apparently won/lost. Among many other reasons as well

[Punkingal]

3. Nope.

[WDIM]

4. No

[stevenleser]

5. No. And I don't like when partial results are advertised in media before all polls close either.

I notice that was done in Michigan and Texas because time zones had resulted in polls being closed in one part of the state but not another.

I think that is wrong to do.

[DinahMoeHum]

6. No.

n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. No, but since I am watching CNN-I tell me, they started?

And I would not be shocked

[Lizzie Poppet]

8. No. Should be illegal. (nm)

[Nye Bevan]

13. Can't be made "illegal" since we have a First Amendment (nt)

[democrattotheend]

9. Not candidate numbers

Especially since they get reweighted as actual votes come in. (No, this is not a conspiracy - it is how they have always done it).

But I think it is ok to release little tidbits like this that might hint but don't give anything away:

Majorities of Democrats in five states going to the polls Tuesday say they would be satisfied with both candidates as the nominee.

[Land of Enchantment]

10. No-- but historically they have been the most accurate until Karl Rove

happened in Ohio with Kerry. I've read Kerry actually WON Ohio.

[JackRiddler]

11. NO!

[TheBlackAdder]

12. I don't understand how "Mail In Votes" get disclosed before poll closing time.

[winter is coming]

14. No. I don't think they should disclose the results from early voting, either. n/t

[Agschmid]

15. No.

[Nye Bevan]

16. I have no problem with it.

If someone sees from an exit poll that it's a close race they may be more motivated to go out and vote.

[amborin]

17. no; and in CA for yrs, it was prohibited, for the obvious reason

[Nye Bevan]

21. How could they "prohibit" it without violating the First Amendment? (nt)

[amborin]

23. it's illegal:

http://www.vox.com/2014/11/4/7157939/2014-midterm-elections-exit-polls-fox-news

[Nye Bevan]

24. No it's not. Read the story at your link. There is no "law".

It's an "agreement among the media outlets", the terms of which are disputed.

[brooklynite]

18. Why not?

They're not telling what the vote share is; only characterization a of the electorate and their opinion on issues.

[bigwillq]

19. No.

And they shouldn't release results until all polls close in every state (more of a GE concern).

[JackRiddler]

20. They should release them to a third party

That will publish the "uncorrected" results after polls close.

[Motown_Johnny]

22. Of course not

Silly question