[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > In a message dated 8/29/06, Michael Pooles writes: > >>> It makes no sense in this case to define "wrong" as anything other >>> than a wrong count of how people actually voted. Therefore, the >>> official results of an election are just as capable of being wrong >>> as exit poll results. >> >> Sure, but in practice, the count that actually matters is the one that >> is called "official" (perhaps after a court or political contest). >> That is the count that third-party polls try to predict, and the one >> that they are usually judged against. > > Matters to whom and for what purposes? Have you been paying > attention to the controversies surrounding the multiple problems > with the increasing use in the U.S. of electronic voting machines > produced by poorly regulated private companies? Are you aware > of recent studies showing the extremely easy hackability of some > machines? Are you aware of the large discrepancies between > different states and even different counties in the same states > regarding how elections are administered? If you were living in > Ohio in 2004, as I was, and observing the extreme politicization > of the election process by the Republican secretary of state > who was overseeing the process, and if you had paid attention > to the investigations by independent researchers in the months > after the election showing more than enough evidence of error > and fraud to warrant skepticism of the accuracy of the results > officially certified by the same secretary of state, who arbitrarily > delayed a recount until after the legal deadline for official > certification had passed (for many of the Ohio details, see > http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005), your > thinking about what "actually matters" surely would be very > different.
To paraphrase: Since you are convinced that there was official bias in favor of Republicans during that election, I should stop trying to convince you that well-structured exit polls are comparable to well-structure telephone polls. You have almost convinced me to give up but first please consider this: The US is not the only place that exit polls have shown serious errors. Emotion-driven appeals to authority are not convincing and do not address the substantive accuracy of exit polls. My original mail was not trying to make a general point about official poll accuracy, but about exit polls. I agree that there are lots of problems with the newer electronic systems. I am glad my state uses optical bubble-scan systems rather than systems like Diebold's. Older systems, harder-to-use systems, and purely electronic systems need to be fixed so that votes are accurately counted. Human sources of error must be remedied. But that is all a separate question of whether exit polls are inherently more accurate than phone polls. Michael Poole ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
