Consider the absence of exit polls, the wide mischanneling of independent voters (nap) into not casting valid ballots, misregistrations (see below), and the California primary yesterday in the light of my account of New York. This is written for any person who cares about the fairness of American elections...
Once again, the putative error they invoke, even were it substantial, could not, by itself, explain the discrepancy. But this malpractice is very good for Edison’s business model. The corporate media rely on their “authority.” No questions are asked or answered.
Talk about the Emperor’s gauzy clothes…
standard sampling margin of error calculation that I assume that you are using so I wouldn’t agree
with your statement about how many of the exit poll surveys were within the margin of error.”
vote discrepancies exceeded an ordinary margin of error but not the one Edison’s exit poll surveys
use. If for instance, that explained half the discrepancies, that might be reassuring, but still leave the
question about the others in tact. So he just doesn’t say. Earlier he explains to Hatlem that the latter
combined with a margin of error from only sampling a limited number of voters within that polling
would make sense that the errors would be larger on the Democratic side because the differences in
vote between younger and older voters on the Democratic side in this primary season are much larger
than on the Republican side. Bernie Sanders has been typically receiving 70+% of the vote among
17-29 year olds in the 2016 primaries while Hillary Clinton has been receiving 70+% of the vote
among voters 65+. [But in earlier interviews, Lenski has shown that this isn’t so big a deal to
differ by ten points or less. It would then make sense that if the exit poll were overstating the number
of younger voters it would have much more effect on the Democratic side.”