HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » 5 Primaries: Exit Poll Di...

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:13 PM

5 Primaries: Exit Poll Discrepancies and Win Probabilities


"This is a summary exit poll analysis of the March 15 Democratic exit polls. Clinton won the recorded vote in the five elections.

The exit polls indicate that Sanders won MO (80% probability) and IL (74%).

There was a 10% discrepancy in the OH exit poll from the recorded vote. The probability that the discrepancy was due to chance is 1 in 976."

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/03/16/five-democratic-primaries-exit-poll-discrepancies-and-win-probabilities/

here's some levity. . .

72 replies, 4427 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 72 replies Author Time Post
Reply 5 Primaries: Exit Poll Discrepancies and Win Probabilities (Original post)
stellanoir Mar 2016 OP
geek tragedy Mar 2016 #1
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #2
geek tragedy Mar 2016 #3
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #5
merrily Mar 2016 #52
geek tragedy Mar 2016 #53
merrily Mar 2016 #56
geek tragedy Mar 2016 #57
merrily Mar 2016 #58
geek tragedy Mar 2016 #60
merrily Mar 2016 #61
geek tragedy Mar 2016 #63
merrily Mar 2016 #64
geek tragedy Mar 2016 #66
merrily Mar 2016 #67
geek tragedy Mar 2016 #68
merrily Mar 2016 #69
MaggieD Mar 2016 #4
Chichiri Mar 2016 #6
bkkyosemite Mar 2016 #10
MaggieD Mar 2016 #11
alcibiades_mystery Mar 2016 #20
obamanut2012 Mar 2016 #46
cosmicone Mar 2016 #14
starmaker Mar 2016 #7
bkkyosemite Mar 2016 #8
obamanut2012 Mar 2016 #47
brooklynite Mar 2016 #51
Godhumor Mar 2016 #9
davidpdx Mar 2016 #35
Godhumor Mar 2016 #36
davidpdx Mar 2016 #37
Godhumor Mar 2016 #38
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #42
obamanut2012 Mar 2016 #48
SidDithers Mar 2016 #62
davidpdx Mar 2016 #71
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #72
RandySF Mar 2016 #12
CalvinballPro Mar 2016 #21
RandySF Mar 2016 #24
cosmicone Mar 2016 #13
SidDithers Mar 2016 #15
LineLineReply .
MohRokTah Mar 2016 #17
MohRokTah Mar 2016 #16
stellanoir Mar 2016 #18
AtomicKitten Mar 2016 #22
MohRokTah Mar 2016 #23
stellanoir Mar 2016 #30
MohRokTah Mar 2016 #31
Half-Century Man Mar 2016 #55
SalviaBlue Mar 2016 #34
Lucinda Mar 2016 #19
RandySF Mar 2016 #25
Renew Deal Mar 2016 #26
AZ Progressive Mar 2016 #27
msongs Mar 2016 #28
highprincipleswork Mar 2016 #29
tritsofme Mar 2016 #32
Tarc Mar 2016 #33
stellanoir Mar 2016 #39
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #40
stellanoir Mar 2016 #43
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #44
WI_DEM Mar 2016 #41
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #45
obamanut2012 Mar 2016 #49
FlatBaroque Mar 2016 #50
NowSam Mar 2016 #54
jalan48 Mar 2016 #59
workinclasszero Mar 2016 #65
stellanoir Mar 2016 #70

Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:15 PM

1. I guess we're in the denial stage ... nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:18 PM

2. I usually do not talk to you

 

but yes, the nation mostly is. I accepted a long time ago that we have pretend elections with pretend democracy... so I am good with that... but yes, you are correct, but not for the reasons you think.

Once the crisis is over, we might be able to fix it... and it will be painful...but hey... whatever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #2)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:20 PM

3. I would say we have a very imperfect democracy, but that doesn't say much

 

because every democracy is profoundly flawed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #3)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:23 PM

5. Starting in 2000 we have seen multiple flaws

 

and we have way too many indications of stolen elections.

As I said, I made my peace with it a long time ago.

Now back to reading Trump speeches... MSM will not do that...but I need to put together an ideology. And as I said, the MSM will NOT do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:36 AM

52. "We?" Who's denying exit polls and why?

You're funny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #52)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:38 AM

53. hey, why bother counting votes when we have exit polls, right?

 

raw exit polls are not terribly reliable, as anyone who's been paying attention over the past few decades knows.

but, if it helps you rationalize why your candidate got his ass kicked in Ohio, go ahead.

Aren't you feeling betrayed that Bernie isn't contesting the fraud in Ohio, IL, and MO?

Maybe because this fraud theory is from fringe Internet kooks rather than having a basis in reality.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #53)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:41 AM

56. My candidate? You actually came out as a Hillary supporter and I missed it? Crap!

I miss all the fun.

But, the only thing the OP says is what exit polls said. Why all the bitterness?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #56)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:43 AM

57. I changed my mind--it started with the data breach episode

 

and ended when the Berners started attacking Dolores Huerta--a real revolutionary and activist--and accusing her of bribery--showing that this talk of revolution and sweeping change was pretty much fraudulent.

Having the right voting record doesn't qualify one to be president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #57)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:45 AM

58. Uh huh. If it makes you feel any better, I never saw you as Bernie supporter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #58)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:46 AM

60. of course not, I don't hate Hillary enough and am not a narcissistic purist

 

Bernie fans are the only people I know who wanted to reject people as not good enough to support Bernie. Quite a mentality.

Of course, the DU Bernie faction are the ones who vote Nader/Green Party in the general elections, so I never fit in with that crowd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #60)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:46 AM

61. Bull puckies. That is not the reason and you know it.

Some people are just much more transparent then others. Transparency is a good thing!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4334518

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #61)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:49 AM

63. Oh, but that is the reason. You are entitled to your opinion

 

You all just can't fathom that people can disagree with you on anything without being corrupt and stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #63)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:52 AM

64. Oh, that's bull puckies, too, gt.

I have never had a problem with honest disagreement.

Poseurs, yes, honest disagreement, no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #64)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:59 AM

66. You all really should rename your hate site, it does a real disservice

 

to the man after whom it was named.

He was not prone to calling the Democratic base (i.e. the ones voting for Hillary) pieces of dogshit and referring to her as a "bitch."

he was not a foaming at the mouth hater, but rather a genuinely thoughtful progressive, unlike the angry hate mob you've assembled over there.

Very nasty people over there, not terribly different in tone from Trump supporters. Very nasty.

Bernie's campaign will end within 3 months. Then what will you do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #66)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 11:09 AM

67. Flail much? No worries. I'd try to deflect too, in your shoes.

Painful

"He was not prone to calling the Democratic base (i.e. the ones voting for Hillary) pieces of dogshit and referring to her as a "bitch."

Unless you have a link to a post of mine that does that, you should understand that replying to me with your gripes about humanity in general or 900+ posters who are not me is both inappropriate and pointless.

Since you seem to love reading at what you call hate sites, though, maybe you should go to hillarysupporters.com and jackassradicals, though why a site would self identify as jackasses is beyond me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #67)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 11:11 AM

68. let us just say that it is very little surprise to see the people who have hated Obama

 

since he was inaugurated now hating Hillary Clinton.

And I will also note that it is your fellow travelers who pollute DU with links to rightwing propaganda outfits like The Federalist, World Nuts Daily, Infowars, Daily Caller, etc.

As well as promoting Donald Trump's health care plan as better than the ACA and Hillary's suggested improvements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #68)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 11:18 AM

69. Still flailing! Your posts are full of the hate word, but devoid of anything that applies to me.

As previously stated, replying to me about things that other people do is both inappropriate and pointless.

Poor geek.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:20 PM

4. Denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:24 PM

6. Actually, more than anything else I saw depression and acceptance last night.

I think most of them came to terms with it days or weeks ago -- we just have some late bloomers is all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:28 PM

10. If the shoe was on the other foot I can almost garantee you MaggieD would be having

a topsy turvy fit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bkkyosemite (Reply #10)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:29 PM

11. Well you'd be wrong

 

I was a Hillary supporters in 2008 that happily voted for Obama. And never once smeared him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bkkyosemite (Reply #10)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:53 PM

20. Did a solitary post on DU claim voter fraud in the Michigan race?

 



I seriously don't know. Maybe there were several. I didn't see any personally. Did you?

Or did Clinton supporters simply accept that they had lost that election? It takes a bit of grace, I grant you. But it is doable. Sometimes you lose an election and it...wasn't even stolen GASP! I know, right? Cuh-razzy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #20)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:25 AM

46. Zero -- but there is always plenty when HRC wins

Baffling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:35 PM

14. I've seen anger from the get go. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:26 PM

7. Thanks for TIA analysis

If one does not believe the political machines do not tamper with the vote counts they are in denial

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:27 PM

8. Paper Ballots that are counted with all sides attending...this election is rigged and I am

standing by my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bkkyosemite (Reply #8)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:25 AM

47. lolz

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bkkyosemite (Reply #8)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:32 AM

51. Funny thing; Bernie doesn't seem to agree

Point to any complaint he's filed about the final vote count.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:27 PM

9. Oh good, I was wondering when this embarrassment as an analyst would show up again

I always love whackadoodles with access to Excel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 09:44 PM

35. ....


On Thu Mar 17, 2016, 01:29 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Oh good, I was wondering when this embarrassment as an analyst would show up again
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1508320

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling a long time DU contributor an "embarrassment as an analyst" is rude and against the rules against calling out a DU'er. UNACCEPTABLE!

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Mar 17, 2016, 01:38 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I am worried if I allow this post to remain it may be looked upon as allowing an attack to remain in view so I vote to hide.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't see anything over the top about this. This is a bad alert.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #35)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 10:02 PM

36. Yeesh, really?

Well then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #36)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 10:07 PM

37. BTW I am a Sanders supporter and was juror #2

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #37)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 10:08 PM

38. Well, thank ya. Appreciated. N/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #37)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 09:31 AM

42. Throw in the fact the author being cited was permanently banned for being a disruptor./nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #42)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:26 AM

48. yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #42)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:22 PM

71. My point was that I voted against hiding

Not sure what your point is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #71)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:36 PM

72. I was just adding another reason not to hide it./nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:30 PM

12. It's not unusual

Supporters for one candidate may sometimes be more likely to respond to interviewers than others. Also, interviewers can be biased in whom they choose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Reply #12)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:54 PM

21. I also imagine that not every voter completes the exit poll as well. I mean, is it required?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CalvinballPro (Reply #21)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 07:07 PM

24. No

voters in key precincts are randomly selected after they walk out of the polling place and offered the opportunity to fill out a questionnaire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:32 PM

13. It's a conspiracy !!!

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:37 PM

15. Richard Charnin. LOL...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #15)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:38 PM

17. .

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:38 PM

16. Exit polls are NEVER accurate.

 

Never have been. Never will be.

All exit polls ever do is allow the networks to call races early if trends from exit polls are close to what is reported.

It allows the networks to call a race the second the polls close in races that are a blowout.

Otherwise, it's too close to call as both MO and IL were until nearly every vote was counted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #16)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:45 PM

18. globally

Exit polls are considered a tried & true safeguard on elections.

We don't even allow UN election observers on our elections.

Exit polls here are often adjusted by the networks to match the vote tallies.

Networks have disparaged exit polls since results have had all sorts of anomalies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Reply #18)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:56 PM

22. x 10000

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Reply #18)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 07:01 PM

23. You are wrong.

 

Exit polls never have been and never will be an accurate predicter of an election. UN Election watchers only use the when things turn out wildly off and they are still not enough of a predicter without further evidence.

After 2000 an industry grew up to bilk people out of their money over "black box voting". The entire movement developed into nothing more than a greedy money snatching scam.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #23)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 08:09 PM

30. the EVM's that were manufactured by 3 partisan firms

were ushered in hastily with HAVA after the '00 debacle.

Those were immediately deemed insecure & unreliable by plenty of IT geeks & wizards. The manufacturers pretty much said that the machines had an approximate 9 year shelf life. We're several elections past their expiration dates.

So the highly hackable, insecure machines are now degraded even further.

Sure there are a few grifters in any movement. Many, many more people did copious amount of research, sacrificing time, energy, & money for no financial gain whatsoever.

Plenty of people were convinced that Kerry won in '04, and votes were shaved off totals in many states, but it was blatantly obvious in Ohio.

So if you really think this is a functioning democracy and our elections are completely secure, then fine.

Given the advances in encryption & security over the last decade, just think we're in dire need of a long overdue upgrade.









Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Reply #30)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 08:49 PM

31. Woo. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #23)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:38 AM

55. Yes, because fuck checks and balances. Verification is over rated.

Common sense regulation and the means to confirm compliance mean nothing. Just ask the short term lending industry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Reply #18)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 09:31 PM

34. +1,000,000 ...

How soon they forget. Reality is being rewritten.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:50 PM

19. I suspect that the results were close to the Sanders internals or the campaign would

have spoken out by now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 07:10 PM

25. Nate Silver forecasted wins for Hillary in Illinois and Ohio

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 07:13 PM

26. 1 in 976 is better than Bernies chance that win the nomination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 07:18 PM

27. Illinois had early voting, and those likely favored Hillary

Dunno about Missouri though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 07:32 PM

28. Clue? it was Bill, in the school yard, with the bullhorn. he did it all himself nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 07:38 PM

29. It's just pathetic that we live in a country where you can't either trust or verify the vote!!!!!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 08:56 PM

32. lol! He's still at it with this nonsense! I am 99.9869465% sure this guy is nuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 09:02 PM

33. "exit poll discrepancies!", says a guy with a wordpress blog

We don't determine elections by exit polls, we determine them by counting the votes. If there is an identifiable problem(*) with the vote-counting, ten the Sanders campaign is well within their legal right to investigate that.




(*) "The vote didn't go the way I wanted/hoped" is not a valid concern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #33)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 09:27 AM

39. beyond the simplistic cyber snobbery. . .

His info from his site :

"After graduating from Queens College (NY) in 1965 with a BA in Mathematics, I was hired as a numerical control engineer/programmer for Grumman Aerospace Corporation. GAC was a major defense/aerospace manufacturer which built the Lunar Module, Navy fighter jets and commercial aircraft.

I obtained an MS in Applied Mathematics from Adelphi University in 1969 and an MS in Operations Research from Polytechnic Institute of NY in 1973.

In 1976, I moved on to Wall Street as manager/developer of corporate finance quantitative applications for White Weld & Co, an old-line investment bank that was acquired by Merrill Lynch in 1978. When personal computers first became available in 1982, I converted many of the mainframe FORTRAN application programs to Lotus 1-2-3 spreadsheets and years later to Excel.

As an independent software consultant, I specialized in quantitative applications development for major domestic and foreign financial institutions, investment firms and industrial corporations.

I never imagined that years later I would be posting election analyses on the Internet. After the 2000 fiasco, I was motivated to develop a robust forecast model. In July 2004 I began posting weekly election projections based on state and national pre-election polls.

The corporate media and politicians avoid the subject of systemic election fraud like the plague. But unadjusted state and national exit polls have been confirmed by the True Vote Model. The Democratic true share has consistently exceeded the official recorded share. I have written two books proving systemic election fraud. . ."

more on his site

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 09:28 AM

40. Exit polls have margins of errors.

And both the IL and MO showed close races and they were.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #40)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:01 AM

43. margins of error are factored in

see : MOE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Reply #43)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:14 AM

44. Ohio real vote

Ohio actual vote

Clinton - 57% Sanders 43%

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=ohio+democratic+primary


Ohio exit poll

Clinton 55% - Sanders 45%


http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/15/us/elections/ohio-democrat-poll.html?_r=0


Well with the two percent theoretical margin of error.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 09:30 AM

41. Exit polls are not 100% accurate

especially given the narrowness (particularly in Missouri) of those two victories

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WI_DEM (Reply #41)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:23 AM

45. Exit polls showed SBS winning IL and 49-48 and MO 50-49*

Those aren't far off from the actual vote.



*from memory

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:28 AM

49. Richard Charnin

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:30 AM

50. AGainst Clinton, Bernie needs a cheat-proof margin. 51% is not good enough

it needs to be near 65-70%. The CLinton FOundation has paid off a lot of people; they have a lot of favors they can call in. Just like the mafia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:38 AM

54. So the vote flipping machines worked just right?

Because between coin flipping, ace holding and diebold, this sure seems like the fix is in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:45 AM

59. The oligarch's have determined it will be Clinton vs. Trump in the finals.

The public is tricked into believing a Republican billionaire is a populist and a conservative Wall Street Democrat is a liberal. Enjoy the show America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stellanoir (Original post)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 10:56 AM

65. Since when do exit polls determine who won an election?

 

This is as stupid as saying Bernie wins all the online polls...therefore he should be President!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #65)

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 03:15 PM

70. No one is saying that "exit polls determine an election". . .

nor is anyone thinking that online polls could possibly mirror voting totals.

see post # 18

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread