https://trofire.com/2016/11/15/math-increasingly-suggests-election-fraud-hillary-clinton-david-pakman-show/
Yes, you could call me a sore loser, black and blue all over, in fact…but I just watched an interesting presentation that seems very well documented and scientifically based, a presentation that seems to show that the delta between the exit polling in many very important swing states was off by 4 to 5 percent, with Trump collecting 4 to 5 percent more votes than the exit polls seemed to indicate.
Exit polls are generally more accurate than pre-election polls (though I admit, I don’t see the enormous amount of early voting accounted for in this claim). They generally are accurate within 1 percent, maybe a bit more. If the election is that close, exit polls don’t really tell you much except that you’d better work very hard to get the rest of your voters to the poll and be vigilant in watching the vote counts.
So, when vote counts vary by over 4 percent from exit polls in Florida, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, more than 2% in many other states, the pollsters have to step back and ask the question, “What the heck did we do wrong?”.
Increasingly, pollsters are beginning to affirm that, in fact, they did nothing wrong. Could it be that the tallies were mishandled, or tampered with in the machines? Trump did say the vote would be rigged. We thought he meant in Hillary’s favor, but, perhaps, given his penchant for blurting out things he should keep shtum about, perhaps he was revealing that he had been advised that an attempt was being made to create the results Trump needed.
I don’t believe that exit polls are inherrently more inaccurate than pre-election polling. To achieve the best results, the pollsters must be following their own strict guidelines of ‘who’ to poll, to be completely random. For example, asking every 10th voter who is leaving the polling place, without exception. Not accepting volunteers who want to participate, etc.
Second, the polling must be conducted in an intelligently determined set of polling places, with as many voters as possible.
Will some bias remain? Yes. But pre election polling is likely to be just as biased or inaccurate.
The polling inaccuracy in this recent election seems to have been on both sides, but exit polling matched the pre-election results far more closely than the actual results.
One can say “Polling is useless” and no one should bother to spend any money on it. Or, in this case, one could say…maybe, just maybe, the pollsters were closer to the actual result than the published figures. The statistical difference raises doubt.
If pollsters are consistently, election after election, measuring a higher degree of democrat sentiment than republican…and the results almost always show the republicans garnered more votes than expected…something is oddly off. Pollsters don’t benefit from being wrong. Is is even a little bit possible that voting machines are being hacked? How extensively do election boards randomly check paper copies vs. machine count?
Yet you can’t come up with a cite and I quoted well known poll watcher Nate Silver saying there is indeed an inherent larger margin of error for exit polls. Does your religion dictate your belief in exit polls or something? You were very specific.
This “within 1 percent” is just some vague memory or what? Btw, the article I linked addresses your bit in parentheses:
BTW, your lines about “just ask every 10th voter” and “intelligently determined polling places” pretty much confirms that you didn’t even look at the short article I linked. Those are also addressed therein.
exit polls are one ‘official’ way to look for election fraud, no matter where in the world. The fact that exit polling was inaccurate vs the published vote count by such large margins in just those particular states that Trump had to have to win? I think it is suspicious and bears examination. I believe that across the entire country, in the 35 states where exit polling was conducted, the comparison of poll vs. actual was not surprisingly large. The large delta was in the closely contested important to each candidate states, only.
so, the more I think about it and read about it, the more I think that polling should be tossed in the dustbin. It really is useless, and may even effect who votes or who doesn’t.
Not to say I’m not suspicious about the possibility of big-ticket elections being manipulated, even stolen, by behind the scenes efforts to stop people from voting, one way or the other, or to even screw with the machines.
The discrepancy wasn’t just in those particular states that Trump needed to win. It was in all states, by about the same amount, including states like California where Trump had no chance and states like Wyoming where he was a shoo-in. Why waste resources on rigging the vote where it won’t matter?
I suppose, what it really says, is that there are a large number of Trump voters who were ashamed to admit they were as deplorable as we thought they might be.
Time will take care of the crude conservatives. The kids will push them out, and I hope will refuse to pay for their nursing homes.
