Why were the Polls off?

[Pliablemoose]

Why were the polls inaccurate & why were the exit polls so far off?

I have my own theory, just wondering what everyone else thinks...

 

[poopaskoopa]

I guess the democrats voted early? The pollsters were only polling people with full sets of teeth?(j/k) I have no idea. I'm curious to know this as well.

 

[b0mbrman]

Blanket Theory: Media wanted it to be close so we'd all watch the news and they'd sell ads.

Now, if we assume that's not true, I honestly have no idea. When voter participation exceeded everyone's expectations, I thought we'd be sitting on a comfortable Kerry victory this morning because I expected new voters and undecided voters to swing to his side....

Unless all those extra voters came out to vote for the gay marriage amendments, I don't see any clear explanation

 

[MidasKnight]

I'd say the very high turn out skewed the polls.

 

[chess9]

The young people got laid instead of voting. (today I think it was a good choice because I got screwed but not laid)
The undecideds broke 50/50, or closer to that number.
Bush pushed the state visits until the very end driving his numbers up in the battleground states.

-Robert

 

[thedarkwolf]

Rush has a good article on it. Yeah its RUSH but it still pretty interesting.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/ho...ent/stack_a.guest.html

 

[XZeroII]

It's because they are simply POLLS. That's why there are margins of error. The problem is that people don't understand this stuff and think that sites like Electoral-Vote.com (or whatever it was) are accurate. However, those sites don't take margin of error into account. They take polls in major cities and get skewed results. Electoral-Vote.com should be used for fun and not taken seriously. Next time you see a statistic, remember what you learned from this election.

 

[OZEE]

Originally posted by: chess9
The undecideds broke 50/50, or closer to that number.

Why would anybody have assumed that the undecideds would have gone 2-1 for Kerry? I thought that was absolutely, positively the most STUPIDEST assumption anybody could have made... The logical assumption would have been that the undecideds would have gone 50/50 -- just exactly like it really ended up...

Why/How were the exit polls screwed... err.. skewed... Because the lib-dems were strategically putting their people in the places where the exit polls were being taken. They skewed the polls themselves instead of allowing a true report. What good did it do them?? The exit polls are EXIT polls -- the votes have already been cast. It doesn't matter how you skew the polls, the results are already collected.

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Blanket Theory: Media wanted it to be close so we'd all watch the news and they'd sell ads.

Or the media wanted to make Kerry appear to be the frontrunner, so wishy-washy voters would be persuaded to follow the crowd.

 

[Mill]

Cause exit polls have never been accurate.

 

[smashp]

id bet the House on the Media and their love of advertising revenue.

I feel The media is destroying this country all for the love of money.

 

[EXman]

Originally posted by: Mill
Cause exit polls have never been accurate.

They are proven CRAP

that is a fact

 

[GasX]

If I was running an exit poll, I'd be talking to the good looking women voters. This would likely skew my results, but for a good phone number or 2, what do I care?

 

[T2T III]

Originally posted by: EXman

Originally posted by: Mill
Cause exit polls have never been accurate.

They are proven CRAP

that is a fact

Sadly, the exit polls - favoring Kerry, had the Kerry campaign doing "high-fives" all day yesterday. However, early this morning, reality set in.

* Note to self: Pay no attention to exit poll results during the next election.

 

[BigJelly]

Originally posted by: OZEE

Originally posted by: chess9
The undecideds broke 50/50, or closer to that number.

Why would anybody have assumed that the undecideds would have gone 2-1 for Kerry? I thought that was absolutely, positively the most STUPIDEST assumption anybody could have made... The logical assumption would have been that the undecideds would have gone 50/50 -- just exactly like it really ended up...

Why/How were the exit polls screwed... err.. skewed... Because the lib-dems were strategically putting their people in the places where the exit polls were being taken. They skewed the polls themselves instead of allowing a true report. What good did it do them?? The exit polls are EXIT polls -- the votes have already been cast. It doesn't matter how you skew the polls, the results are already collected.

actually zogby or one the main polls was 9:1 Kerry:Bush

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: OZEE

Originally posted by: chess9
The undecideds broke 50/50, or closer to that number.

Why would anybody have assumed that the undecideds would have gone 2-1 for Kerry? I thought that was absolutely, positively the most STUPIDEST assumption anybody could have made... The logical assumption would have been that the undecideds would have gone 50/50 -- just exactly like it really ended up...

Why/How were the exit polls screwed... err.. skewed... Because the lib-dems were strategically putting their people in the places where the exit polls were being taken. They skewed the polls themselves instead of allowing a true report. What good did it do them?? The exit polls are EXIT polls -- the votes have already been cast. It doesn't matter how you skew the polls, the results are already collected.

The dem-slibs got a skewed projection of their presence due to their squeaky-wheelness. I think they believed they had far more support than they really did and forgot to take the silent majority into consideration (something I mentioned a couple of weeks ago in P&N that was going to happen).

Then there's the biggest problem with the dems-libs in that they simply cannot understand why people don't believe exactly as they do. They can't fathom it and comprehend the fact that this country has a widely varying number of moral opinions that differ from their own. They'd rather discount those people as stupid, ignorant, rednecks, full of sh!t, etc. instead of trying to understand them. You don't win converts by calling them names constantly and alienating them. It's that simple.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Why were the polls inaccurate & why were the exit polls so far off?

I have my own theory, just wondering what everyone else thinks...

Exit polls havent been close in the past 3 elections.

I would probably just disregard them all together.

 

[Train]

I Think liberals are just more vocal in thier opinions and campaigning, and pre-election day make much more noise (like this forum for example) A lot of conservatives go about thier daily lives, not getting all heated about politics, then show up and vote.

I was talking to my mother the other day and she gets phone polled quite frequently, but she doesnt answer the questions, whenever someone asks her who shes voting for, or her party affiliation, she says "none of your business" she feels very strongly about her privacy. She wouldnt even tell me who she voted for, though I'm assuming it was Bush.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Train
I Think liberals are just more vocal in thier opinions and campaigning, and pre-election day make much more noise (like this forum for example) A lot of conservatives go about thier daily lives, not getting all heated about politics, then show up and vote.

I was talking to my mother the other day and she gets phone polled quite frequently, but she doesnt answer the questions, whenever someone asks her who shes voting for, or her party affiliation, she says "none of your business" she feels very strongly about her privacy. She wouldnt even tell me who she voted for, though I'm assuming it was Bush.

I think you would be wrong. I see a lot of noise from both sides, this forum just happens to skew more liberal, as we saw from the election polls. But keep telling yourself conservatives are better if that's what floats your boat, hey, who am I to judge?

I think the REAL reason the polls were "off" is because there is a margin of error in any polls. By definition, the results are within the margins of the polls, I don't think most people realize this. Those talking about liberal media conspiracy or vocal liberals are missing the point that if the polls predict a Kerry win in Ohio, for example, they are usually given as +/- 5%. So actually the polls are perfectly accurate, or at least as accurate as they said they were.

 

[Valvoline6]

I am talking about exit polling, as some of the standard polls were right.

1. Pollster placement was obviously mis-allocated. I believe the polsters are placed in more populous urban areas. Suburban and rural areas are under represented or the formulas used to project that vote are skewed.

2. Self fullfilling Polling. The media polled to get the result they wanted.

3. Turn out was higher than projected, and the type of turn out was misrepresented. The conventional media wisdom was "a high turn out means new voters and a Kerry win". Actually the high turn out was from the Bush voters.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Train
I Think liberals are just more vocal in thier opinions and campaigning, and pre-election day make much more noise (like this forum for example) A lot of conservatives go about thier daily lives, not getting all heated about politics, then show up and vote.

I was talking to my mother the other day and she gets phone polled quite frequently, but she doesnt answer the questions, whenever someone asks her who shes voting for, or her party affiliation, she says "none of your business" she feels very strongly about her privacy. She wouldnt even tell me who she voted for, though I'm assuming it was Bush.

I think you would be wrong. I see a lot of noise from both sides, this forum just happens to skew more liberal, as we saw from the election polls. But keep telling yourself conservatives are better if that's what floats your boat, hey, who am I to judge?

I think the REAL reason the polls were "off" is because there is a margin of error in any polls. By definition, the results are within the margins of the polls, I don't think most people realize this. Those talking about liberal media conspiracy or vocal liberals are missing the point that if the polls predict a Kerry win in Ohio, for example, they are usually given as +/- 5%. So actually the polls are perfectly accurate, or at least as accurate as they said they were.

Did I say conservatives were "better"? and margin of error doesnt consistently repeat itself in every state, your theory may prove right in a single state, but across several, it doesn't hold up.