Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Report Acknowledges Inaccuracies in 2004 Exit Polls
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2005 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Camelot with the genders reversed, yes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2005 8:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Intelligent enough to see how the AmeriKan public has again been hoodwinked, they mostly lack the proper computer voting "software" Confused
[/quote]

says the guy who believes what the pro Klan 9-11 conspiracy site The American Free Press (and not only them) says.

Anyway the Anti Bush people could't knock out Bush .

They obviously don't have a lot of things going for them.


Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Mon May 16, 2005 9:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
some waygug-in



Joined: 25 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2005 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's some more interesting reading for you:

http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2004/11/on-exit-polls.html

At least one diarist on Kos attempts to offer a more substantive answer. The diarist makes reference to Mark Blumenthal:


My point is that there are two competing theories for the discrepancy: The first is that the exit polls were slightly biased to Kerry due to a consistent pattern of what methodologists call "differential non-response" that has been evident in exit polls to a lesser degree for a dozen years (Republicans were more likely to refuse to fill out the exit poll than Democrats). The second theory is that systematic and consistent vote fraud occurred in almost every state and using every type of voting equipment. The first hypothesis seems plausible to me; the second wildly improbable.
Reverse the terms "plausible" and "wildly improbable," and you get closer to the truth.

"Differential non-response" is simply an impressively polysyllabic term for what I have called the "chatty Democrat" theory. The idea that conservatives are taciturn by nature is, of course, pure horseshit. The modern Republican party is a cult, and most cultists are verbal bullies. Liberals, by contast, have been cowed; they speak up only in non-mixed company.

Once we toss the "chatty Dem" theory onto the trash heap where it belongs, what do we have left?

Vote fraud.

Is the notion "wildly improbable"?

How many pundits in 1972 would have used those very words to describe the proposition that Nixon's men would break into Democratic headquarters? How many pundits would still use such a term to describe the (pretty much proven) thesis that Reagan's team cut a deal with Iran in 1980? How many pundits in 2003 would have described as "wildly improbable" the thesis that Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction in order to grab another nation's oil reserves?

Blumenthal places a lot of stock in Warren Mitofsky's interview in Mayflower Hill. (Mitovsky is one of the heads of the polling consortium.) This precis (by a Kos reader) sums up the situation well:


Mitofsky in Mayflower says he has already checked to see whether there's any divergence between precincts with electronic voting and others, and he didn't find any. Case closed, said Blumenthal.

But wait a minute. Which precincts did Mitofsky check? Many of us are not concerned that all precincts have voting irregularities. Only a select few. Why is Blumenthal so quick then to close the case? Why is he so ready to call us delusional?

I appreciate his web site as an aggregator of info, but i haven't appreciated his analysis at all.

With regards to Mitofsky, the only thing the revered exit pollster offers to rebut questions of possible fraud is speculation. Mitofsky refuses to consider possible machine irregularities.
Once again, the debunker's argument presumes the validity of the very data being questioned. Why should we consider the final tallies accurate? They're accurate because they're accurate. That's why.


Laughing


It's hard to argue with "logic" like that.............. kind of reminds me of some on this forum. Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2005 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

why should anyone believe what you say about the machines.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hypnotist



Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2005 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

His "chatty democrat theory" theory is rubbish.

It's correct to say that exit polls don't just report the raw results of the polling, but go through some post-processing first. The issue seems to be that either a) this post-processing has always been woeful and unable to ever produce decent exit results (in which case why is anyone still paying for them?!), or b) the assumptions underpinning the exit results have somehow become invalid.

Now, one explanation for b) could be voter fraud but there are clearly others. I don't see what Homer's trying to say though - if Bush increased his share of the vote, he must have engaged more of the voters somehow, so how come fewer of them would admit voting for him?

Joo, why would anyone believe anything anyone says about the machines? The code that runs them can't be examined and there's no paper trail to verify the results. Maybe they're 100% accurate, but who knows? It can't be proven either way.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2005 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I will go with what the pollsters said.

I guess more activists would be willing to say who they voted for and I would say Bush voters might be more busy.

I haven't seen any real reason to doubt the election results. And I think conspiracies are hard to pull off and cover up.

As for the anti Bush people - well most of them - the answer is obvious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
saw6436



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Daejeon, ROK

PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2005 6:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What was the margin of error on these exit polls?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International