Submitted by entrepreneur on Mon, 03/09/2020 - 9:25pm
Lee Camp confirms what many of us pretty much knew. The exit polls in many of Joe's big "comeback" miracle states showed evidence of rigged results, always favoring Joe.
New research from TDMS Research took the exit polls before they were adjusted to match the results and found shocking results.
I've lied on every one of them.
I'm not saying that cheating of some sort isn't possible, it's just that I have as much faith in exit polls as I have in the voting machines themselves.
None.
up
6 users have voted.
—
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
as the gentleman in my sig. code says, exit polls that have nothing to do with George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton are often quite accurate. Since 2016, you can include in that statement Bernie Sanders, albeit in the opposite direction.
But I have my own reasons for thinking that the Super Joe Comeback was fraud.
I've lied on every one of them.
I'm not saying that cheating of some sort isn't possible, it's just that I have as much faith in exit polls as I have in the voting machines themselves.
None.
up
5 users have voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Exit polls are the best check available on the honesty of elections. It is the only time that anyone asks a representative sample of voters, "how did you vote?" It is not the same as a pre-election poll, where voters are asked, "how do you think you will vote", with the possibility that they will change their mind, or not vote, or whatever. Any good exit poll will start with the direct question, "who did you vote for?" Since the exit poll is anonymous, most people will answer honestly. And in most countries in the world, exit polling has been shown to be accurate enough to detect electoral fraud pretty consistently. So Pricknick, if you choose to lie to exit pollsters, that's your business. Most people tell the truth to the exit pollsters.
In 2016, exit polls showed Trump losing in North Carolina by 2 points, Pennsylvania by 4.4 points, Wisconsin by 3.9 points and Florida by 1.4 points. After the official and final election results came in, Trump beat Clinton by 3.8 points in North Carolina, 1.1 percent in Pennsylvania, 0.9 percent in Wisconsin and 1.3 percent in Florida. https://www.newsweek.com/what-are-exit-polls-reliable-released-2018-1204101
Exit polls are the best check available on the honesty of elections. It is the only time that anyone asks a representative sample of voters, "how did you vote?" It is not the same as a pre-election poll, where voters are asked, "how do you think you will vote", with the possibility that they will change their mind, or not vote, or whatever. Any good exit poll will start with the direct question, "who did you vote for?" Since the exit poll is anonymous, most people will answer honestly. And in most countries in the world, exit polling has been shown to be accurate enough to detect electoral fraud pretty consistently. So Pricknick, if you choose to lie to exit pollsters, that's your business. Most people tell the truth to the exit pollsters.
up
3 users have voted.
—
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
In 2016, exit polls showed Trump losing in North Carolina by 2 points, Pennsylvania by 4.4 points, Wisconsin by 3.9 points and Florida by 1.4 points. After the official and final election results came in, Trump beat Clinton by 3.8 points in North Carolina, 1.1 percent in Pennsylvania, 0.9 percent in Wisconsin and 1.3 percent in Florida. https://www.newsweek.com/what-are-exit-polls-reliable-released-2018-1204101
up
12 users have voted.
—
In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man is declared mentally ill for describing colors.
Yes Virginia, there is a Global Banking Conspiracy!
In 2016, exit polls showed Trump losing in North Carolina by 2 points, Pennsylvania by 4.4 points, Wisconsin by 3.9 points and Florida by 1.4 points. After the official and final election results came in, Trump beat Clinton by 3.8 points in North Carolina, 1.1 percent in Pennsylvania, 0.9 percent in Wisconsin and 1.3 percent in Florida. https://www.newsweek.com/what-are-exit-polls-reliable-released-2018-1204101
up
2 users have voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
post-2016, designed to make me discredit exit polls, given that I think the media, post-2016, is deeply invested in disrupting the public's ability to ascertain whether election fraud happened or not.
In 2016, exit polls showed Trump losing in North Carolina by 2 points, Pennsylvania by 4.4 points, Wisconsin by 3.9 points and Florida by 1.4 points. After the official and final election results came in, Trump beat Clinton by 3.8 points in North Carolina, 1.1 percent in Pennsylvania, 0.9 percent in Wisconsin and 1.3 percent in Florida. https://www.newsweek.com/what-are-exit-polls-reliable-released-2018-1204101
up
2 users have voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
In 2016, exit polls showed Trump losing in North Carolina by 2 points, Pennsylvania by 4.4 points, Wisconsin by 3.9 points and Florida by 1.4 points. After the official and final election results came in, Trump beat Clinton by 3.8 points in North Carolina, 1.1 percent in Pennsylvania, 0.9 percent in Wisconsin and 1.3 percent in Florida. https://www.newsweek.com/what-are-exit-polls-reliable-released-2018-1204101
In 2016, exit polls showed Trump losing in North Carolina by 2 points, Pennsylvania by 4.4 points, Wisconsin by 3.9 points and Florida by 1.4 points. After the official and final election results came in, Trump beat Clinton by 3.8 points in North Carolina, 1.1 percent in Pennsylvania, 0.9 percent in Wisconsin and 1.3 percent in Florida. https://www.newsweek.com/what-are-exit-polls-reliable-released-2018-1204101
Exit polls are the best check available on the honesty of elections. It is the only time that anyone asks a representative sample of voters, "how did you vote?" It is not the same as a pre-election poll, where voters are asked, "how do you think you will vote", with the possibility that they will change their mind, or not vote, or whatever. Any good exit poll will start with the direct question, "who did you vote for?" Since the exit poll is anonymous, most people will answer honestly. And in most countries in the world, exit polling has been shown to be accurate enough to detect electoral fraud pretty consistently. So Pricknick, if you choose to lie to exit pollsters, that's your business. Most people tell the truth to the exit pollsters.
up
2 users have voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Apart from the silliness in IA, where (I think), something actually went wrong. The perpetrators of that fraud made some sort of silly mistake, or their software did, and it didn't work as planned. That's my best guess.
But since then, their fraud has been much less "let it all hang out" than it was in 2016. I guess they're exhibiting learning behavior.
I was wondering if I'd ever get factual confirmation of what my logic and experience tell me must have happened. I guess the answer is yes.
But what can be done about it, other than to make a big public stink? And will that change anything?
up
3 users have voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
It's a variation on the "Bradley effect". about 5% of people who vote racist lie about it. Actually it's fascist, or rather corporatist. People know it's wrong, so they're ashamed and refuse to admit it, but they vote immorally.
But lying by polls for the benefit of corporatists has become so widespread people think that lying to polls is meaningless. It's a sign of how far our society had degenerated.
But lying by polls for the benefit of corporatists has become so widespread people think that lying to polls is meaningless. It's a sign of how far our society had degenerated.
I'm certain social scientists have a way of dealing with the fact that a certain percentage of their respondents lied in their analysis, since the possibility exists on every poll. And it's fine to state that the data captured isn't perfect. It's quite different to dismiss them altogether which, as Pricknick's example points out, is exactly what the media has been wanting us to do since roughly 2017/2018, and I think we all know why.
That's a hell of a baby to throw out with the bathwater.
EDITED to correct a mistaken attribution
It's a variation on the "Bradley effect". about 5% of people who vote racist lie about it. Actually it's fascist, or rather corporatist. People know it's wrong, so they're ashamed and refuse to admit it, but they vote immorally.
But lying by polls for the benefit of corporatists has become so widespread people think that lying to polls is meaningless. It's a sign of how far our society had degenerated.
up
2 users have voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
polls have been adjusting for an assumed percentage of liars for about as long as there have been polls. But there is a reason that exit poll results haven't been reported since 2004.
But lying by polls for the benefit of corporatists has become so widespread people think that lying to polls is meaningless. It's a sign of how far our society had degenerated.
I'm certain social scientists have a way of dealing with the fact that a certain percentage of their respondents lied in their analysis, since the possibility exists on every poll. And it's fine to state that the data captured isn't perfect. It's quite different to dismiss them altogether which, as Pricknick's example points out, is exactly what the media has been wanting us to do since roughly 2017/2018, and I think we all know why.
That's a hell of a baby to throw out with the bathwater.
because it was after that that the media went into full spin mode about how we can't trust exit polls.
I could be misremembering.
#4.1
polls have been adjusting for an assumed percentage of liars for about as long as there have been polls. But there is a reason that exit poll results haven't been reported since 2004.
up
1 user has voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I figured statisticians would have methods of assessing them, comparing them to polls and machine results, looking for patterns, but Lee brings it to life. Of course the discrepancies favored the establishment. Hope this gets written up and published widely.
Thanks, @entrepreneur.
up
11 users have voted.
—
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
These are the essential hallmarks of an honest, verifiable election; the gold standard for insuring accurate election results. The fact that all of these elements are increasingly absent in our current excercise of our right to vote tells you all you need to know. Our voting process is designed to be manipulated.
The establishment hates unpredictability. They create an illusion that voters can actually chose their representatives with their votes. The reality is that we are only allowed to validate preselected candidates. There will be no revolution at the polls until we return to hand counted paper ballots. The inscrutable counting and tabulation technologies we now use introduce avenues for wholesale manipulation of the vote while leaving no independently verifiable audit trail.
It’s no accident that this is the system we are givin to exercise our right to vote.
up
12 users have voted.
—
“The story around the world gives a silent testimony:
— The Beresovka mammoth, frozen in mud, with buttercups in his mouth…..”
In Oregon you can't even have meaningful exit polling because everything is vote by mail.
No paper trail is absolute BS (I think Oregon does have it - the sort of thing you should *know*, though, and I don't).
Do know that Ron Paul was experiencing problems like this in the 2012 Republican primary - machines were apparently programmed to flip votes. Couldn't find the original work on this on Google but, amazingly, someone on DK reported on it back in 2012.
Blackboxvoting.org has been on this stuff for years - excellent resource but might raise your blood pressure.
Note that in the chart showing the vote shift between EP and official results in Massachusetts the biggest screwee, percentage-wise, is (not too surpisingly) Tulsi Gabbard - who loses 60 percent (going from 1 to .4 percent).
In 2004, word was that that vote-flipping technology was called "Flip-Flopper," after the epithet they attached to Kerry. Cute, huh?
In Oregon you can't even have meaningful exit polling because everything is vote by mail.
No paper trail is absolute BS (I think Oregon does have it - the sort of thing you should *know*, though, and I don't).
Do know that Ron Paul was experiencing problems like this in the 2012 Republican primary - machines were apparently programmed to flip votes. Couldn't find the original work on this on Google but, amazingly, someone on DK reported on it back in 2012.
Blackboxvoting.org has been on this stuff for years - excellent resource but might raise your blood pressure.
Note that in the chart showing the vote shift between EP and official results in Massachusetts the biggest screwee, percentage-wise, is (not too surpisingly) Tulsi Gabbard - who loses 60 percent (going from 1 to .4 percent).
As long as the voting process is designed to give the results wanted by those who control the machines, the reported results are a damned lie, put out by the Stalinists who run this country. I don't need an exit poll to know that.
Comments
I put little faith in exit polls.
I've lied on every one of them.
I'm not saying that cheating of some sort isn't possible, it's just that I have as much faith in exit polls as I have in the voting machines themselves.
None.
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
Maybe some do lie on them. However--
as the gentleman in my sig. code says, exit polls that have nothing to do with George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton are often quite accurate. Since 2016, you can include in that statement Bernie Sanders, albeit in the opposite direction.
But I have my own reasons for thinking that the Super Joe Comeback was fraud.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
O Ye of little faith...
Exit polls are the best check available on the honesty of elections. It is the only time that anyone asks a representative sample of voters, "how did you vote?" It is not the same as a pre-election poll, where voters are asked, "how do you think you will vote", with the possibility that they will change their mind, or not vote, or whatever. Any good exit poll will start with the direct question, "who did you vote for?" Since the exit poll is anonymous, most people will answer honestly. And in most countries in the world, exit polling has been shown to be accurate enough to detect electoral fraud pretty consistently. So Pricknick, if you choose to lie to exit pollsters, that's your business. Most people tell the truth to the exit pollsters.
Sure
Most will. I'm proof that many do not.
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
But...why???
I'm a firm believer that lies will catch up to you in the end.
In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man is declared mentally ill for describing colors.
Yes Virginia, there is a Global Banking Conspiracy!
Probably because many believe
It's nobody's damn business how they voted. OTOH, why don't they just say "None of your damned business?"
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I imagine exit polls are imperfect, like everything.
But I would hardly take the 2016 election results as a benchmark against which to measure anything.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Also, I'm extremely dubious about media reports
post-2016, designed to make me discredit exit polls, given that I think the media, post-2016, is deeply invested in disrupting the public's ability to ascertain whether election fraud happened or not.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Actually you're proof of nothing.
by admission you've lied so we have no way to know that you may be lying now about even being exit polled.
And this . . .
proves that the official results were more accurate than the exit polls how?
Better response than mine.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Well didn't we KNOW the DNC was screwing the results?
But what can be done about it, other than to make a big public stink? And will that change anything?
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
I knew it, but they were being much more circumspect this time.
Apart from the silliness in IA, where (I think), something actually went wrong. The perpetrators of that fraud made some sort of silly mistake, or their software did, and it didn't work as planned. That's my best guess.
But since then, their fraud has been much less "let it all hang out" than it was in 2016. I guess they're exhibiting learning behavior.
I was wondering if I'd ever get factual confirmation of what my logic and experience tell me must have happened. I guess the answer is yes.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
This is believable
It's a variation on the "Bradley effect". about 5% of people who vote racist lie about it. Actually it's fascist, or rather corporatist. People know it's wrong, so they're ashamed and refuse to admit it, but they vote immorally.
But lying by polls for the benefit of corporatists has become so widespread people think that lying to polls is meaningless. It's a sign of how far our society had degenerated.
On to Biden since 1973
I don't agree with this--and I think we dismiss exit polls
at our own risk.
Here's what I don't agree with:
But lying by polls for the benefit of corporatists has become so widespread people think that lying to polls is meaningless. It's a sign of how far our society had degenerated.
I'm certain social scientists have a way of dealing with the fact that a certain percentage of their respondents lied in their analysis, since the possibility exists on every poll. And it's fine to state that the data captured isn't perfect. It's quite different to dismiss them altogether which, as Pricknick's example points out, is exactly what the media has been wanting us to do since roughly 2017/2018, and I think we all know why.
That's a hell of a baby to throw out with the bathwater.
EDITED to correct a mistaken attribution
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
You are right
polls have been adjusting for an assumed percentage of liars for about as long as there have been polls. But there is a reason that exit poll results haven't been reported since 2004.
On to Biden since 1973
I thought they were, initially, reported last time
because it was after that that the media went into full spin mode about how we can't trust exit polls.
I could be misremembering.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Exit polls be damned!
The DNC will adjust the final results to fit their agenda. That is why senile Joe is in the lead. SMH
This is excellent work from Lee Camp
I figured statisticians would have methods of assessing them, comparing them to polls and machine results, looking for patterns, but Lee brings it to life. Of course the discrepancies favored the establishment. Hope this gets written up and published widely.
Thanks, @entrepreneur.
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
Paper. Pencil. People counting votes. Exit polls.
These are the essential hallmarks of an honest, verifiable election; the gold standard for insuring accurate election results. The fact that all of these elements are increasingly absent in our current excercise of our right to vote tells you all you need to know. Our voting process is designed to be manipulated.
The establishment hates unpredictability. They create an illusion that voters can actually chose their representatives with their votes. The reality is that we are only allowed to validate preselected candidates. There will be no revolution at the polls until we return to hand counted paper ballots. The inscrutable counting and tabulation technologies we now use introduce avenues for wholesale manipulation of the vote while leaving no independently verifiable audit trail.
It’s no accident that this is the system we are givin to exercise our right to vote.
“The story around the world gives a silent testimony:
— The Beresovka mammoth, frozen in mud, with buttercups in his mouth…..”
The Adam and Eve Story, Chan Thomas 1963
Been going on for a while...
In Oregon you can't even have meaningful exit polling because everything is vote by mail.
No paper trail is absolute BS (I think Oregon does have it - the sort of thing you should *know*, though, and I don't).
Do know that Ron Paul was experiencing problems like this in the 2012 Republican primary - machines were apparently programmed to flip votes. Couldn't find the original work on this on Google but, amazingly, someone on DK reported on it back in 2012.
Blackboxvoting.org has been on this stuff for years - excellent resource but might raise your blood pressure.
Note that in the chart showing the vote shift between EP and official results in Massachusetts the biggest screwee, percentage-wise, is (not too surpisingly) Tulsi Gabbard - who loses 60 percent (going from 1 to .4 percent).
Maybe in retaliation for trying to force a return to paper ballots and Securing America's Elections?
Thanks for bringing up BBV.
In 2004, word was that that vote-flipping technology was called "Flip-Flopper," after the epithet they attached to Kerry. Cute, huh?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I don't bother to look at exit polls any more.
As long as the voting process is designed to give the results wanted by those who control the machines, the reported results are a damned lie, put out by the Stalinists who run this country. I don't need an exit poll to know that.
Venezuelans have the right idea, as long as the machines are replaced with paper ballots counted by hand, in public. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-51800316