Is there any evidence that exit polls in previous presidential elections

[spooked911]

have been as wrong and as far off as the 2004 exit polls? Is 2004 really such a standout? Could it be in earlier exit polls they also got it wrong, badly but it wasn't disseminated so widely because the internet wasn't widely used or wasn't invented yet?

I'm just wondering if this is a valid possibility.

If anyone has data on exit polls from elections before 2000, could you please share it?

Thanks!

[Up2Late]

1. I think this one was the start of a very bad trend

But I would write to or go through one or both of these two web sites. The top one, electoral-vote.com, I was very familiar with this election, and I think he wrote about this subject, either before or soon after the "election."

<http://www.electoral-vote.com/info/welcome.html>

<http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00270.htm>

[louis-t]

2. 2000 is when it started. That is when Repubs learned how to cheat

and not get caught. 2002 was just as bad in Congressional elections. I'm afraid no Dem will ever win again except by landslide.

[Freddie Stubbs]

3. They've been wrong to varying degrees going back to 1988

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005178.php

If you believe that the exit polls are fool-proof, you have to believe that Dukakis actually won.

[demo dutch]

4. That's disappointing!

[RaulVB]

5. Good!

The only link you have.

Wrong info but keep posting it if that makes you happy...

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. What is wrong about the info?

:shrug:

[RaulVB]

7. Dukakis WAS NEVER AHEAD IN EXIT POLING ON 1988

Besides that, is the only link you'll find trying to "debunk" the exit polling validity in that way.

That's good since the writer doesn't have a clue, anyways.

[mpmusicny]

8. RaulVB, didn't you explain yesterday...

..that the figures quoted are raw, unweighted data?

[RaulVB]

10. About this post above?

Or the general concept?

What we have here after November 2nd, is DATA BEING MASSAGED TO FIT the "results."

I haven't seen the "non-massaged" raw data yet.

[Up2Late]

13. Is this RAW enough for ya?

Make sure you check out the "corrected to fit the Lie" data, near the bottom of the page.

<http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/pdfs/Mitofsky4zonedata/>

Warren Mitofsky was really pissed when He found this on the web, see the January "smoking Gun" at Slate.com :evilgrin:

[RaulVB]

14. Hey thanks!, I forgot about that link (n/t)

[Up2Late]

21. So , with the RAW data in hand

Have you reached any conclusions now?:shrug:

[ROH]

9. Can you give a link for the correct 1988 exit polls?

[RaulVB]

11. Yes. Dukakis, in some states in very early exit polling...

Was very close to Bush Sr. But BEHIND.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/analysis/back.time/9611/26/

That's it

I'm looking for actual numbers

[spooked911]

15. RaulVB-- you seem to know a lot about this--- could you tell me how

specifically the democratic shift seen in several pres. exit polls is different from what happened in Nov 2004?

[RaulVB]

19. Exit polls give you voting patterns accurately...

In other words, even including shifts in population and so forth, you can get tendencies and you can tell how the voters behave on election day.

Then you contrast that with the final numbers.

It was argued by the regime that "*" got almost 40% of Hispanic votes.
It was false. The exit polls allowed to uncover that lie.

It was argued by the regime that he got 18% of black votes. Thas is false. Exit polls again.

It was argued that the Jewish vote shifted to "*". False. Exit polls helped with that too.

It IS KNOWN THAT KERRY WON 36% OF THE CUBAN VOTE IN MIAMI. That pretty much matches the exit polls.

It is known that he gained a huge amount of votes among undecided and first time voters. KNOWN fact. Against, thanks to the exit polls.

So, there you have it. All the examples I gave you repeat themselves during American history.

The last "election" challenges every single one of them, if you believe in miracles!

I don't in politics.

"*" underperformed pretty much in all the American voting groups, but he "gained" 10+ millions of new votes respect to 2000???

No way on earth.

[leyton]

20. Look at GHWBush's quote:

""To those who supported me, I will try to be worthy of your trust," he said, "and to those that did not, I will try to earn it, and my hand is out to you, and I want to be your President too.""

Too bad his son is not so classy.

[anaxarchos]

18. You are quoting a source that is quoting the "raw data"...

..not the exit-poll. It is not true that the exit polls were wrong. It is a strawman or "red herring" arguement. The distinction is pretty well understood on this board.

[RaulVB]

12. This is great info by carolab

Great articles on exit polling

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x225492

[garybeck]

16. I thought TIA posted some data before that showed 2000 was right on

I think the national exit poll in 2000 was off by something like .1%

I can't seem to find that thread...

[ROH]

17. Link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x271424#271681