What Happened to Polls in New Hampshire?
January 10th, 2008Via: Rasmussen Reports:
Hillary Clinton’s victory in New Hampshire was a shock to anyone who followed the pre-election polls. At Rasmussen Reports, our final numbers suggested a 7-point victory for Barack Obama. In the end, Clinton won by three. Other polls also foreshadowed a solid victory for Obama, some projecting a double digit margin. The campaigns themselves expected a significant victory for Obama (the Clinton campaign was even saying that anything less than a double-digit loss would be a victory of sorts for their candidate).
It is hard to remember a time when the polling and expectations were so universally different from what really happened.
More: Black Box Voting
Posted in Dictatorship | Top Of Page
“It is hard to remember a time when the polling and expectations were so universally different from what really happened.”
It’s not that hard to remember: recall the exit polls in Ohio in the 2004 Presidential race vs the outcome of that election.
As most of us here probably agree, elections in the US are a facade to allow the doggedly ignorant to hold onto their faith in “democracy”.
On a lighter note, hats off to the dramatic flair with which TPTB are playing this: “Oh my goodness, Obama took Iowa! Hillary’s on the ropes! Oh my goodness, Hillary’s taken New Hampshire! She’s back and better than ever! It’s a real nailbiter!” Sure it is.
I live in NH and the pollsters drove us mad. We would get 2 and 3 calls every evening. My husband got so fed up that he started to give misleading answers. The Obama volunteers made a huge phone effort compared to the Hillary calls we got. But there were plenty of Hillary signs on the roads and lawns and I don’t find the results all that surprising. That being said, we must urgently support the current effort toward ballots with a paper trail. Call your representative this week!
Vote early and often!
“It’s been nearly eight years since the debacle of Florida and nearly six since the miracle Chambliss win against Cleland. Surely we have reliable, verifiable voting systems in place? It’s been almost four years since the nationwide disaster of the 2004 election with irregularities still emerging.
Hasn’t all this been fixed?
You’d think so. But, the answer is definitely no. Votes are still taken by voting machines produced by vendors highly sympathetic to the Republican Party. The machines are still off limits to those who want to examine how they operate and observe real vote counting. And good luck if your candidate loses and there’s fraud or voting machine problems suspected.
You’re out of luck. You can’t hire outside experts to look at the mission critical software in the optical scanners (Sec. 1.5). You’ll have a great deal of difficulty examining the paper records with voter marked choices. Don’t count on seeing any recounts either.”
http://carolynbaker.net/site/content/view/272/
What I’m struck by is the “Short Attention Span Theater” aspect of the whole New Hampshire polling hullaballoo.
Real Clear Politics has tracked pre-primary poll results going back almost a year, and until the first of this year the results were overwhelmingly Clinton.
The article states “At the same time, It is worth remembering that polling was generally on target for the Republican race.” but, according to Real Clear Politics’ Republican poll results, Romney was polling higher than McCain until the beginning of January.
So the polls were spot on for the Republicans unreliable for the Democrats… within the past week.
Anybody who both paid attention to the polls and has a memory that spans more than a week will only be shocked by how easily They lie, and how many people take Them at their word.
I hate to beat the Orwell horse, but all I can think is that They are getting us used to seeing the Memory Hole up & running, in full view, and not think twice.
Clinton was never the favorite, McCain was always the favorite, we have always been at war with Eastasia.
Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.
This issue can be easily explained since Rasmussen Reports is apparently unaware of The Bradley Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect). “Specifically, there have been instances in which statistically significant numbers of white voters tell pollsters in advance of an election that they are either genuinely undecided, or likely to vote for the non-white candidate, but those voters exhibit a different behavior when actually casting their ballots.”
Let’s see now.
When the exit polls don’t tally with the vote count in lets say Venzuela, election monitors declare VOTE FRAUD!
Let’s go overthrow that damn election stealer!
But when the same thing happens in the U.S.?
Oh its those damn pollsters, they don’t have a clue.
This anamoly is NOT an anamoly no matter how many times it gets spun in the news washer.
The U.S. election system has been stolen by the vote counters.PHFFT!!