Pollster Harris on Election Day 2004.

*********************************************************************
"If this trend is real, then Kerry may actually do better than these numbers suggest. In the past, presidential CHALLENGERS TEND TO DO BETTER against an incumbent President among the UNDECIDED voters during the LAST THREE DAYS of the elections, and that APPEARS TO BE THE CASE HERE. The reason: undecided voters are MORE OFTEN VOTERS WHO DISLIKE the President but DO NOT KNOW the challenger well enough to make a decision. WHEN THEY DECIDE, they frequently split 2:1 to 4:1 FOR the challenger".
*********************************************************************

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index...

Harris expected 67-80% of the undecideds to vote for Kerry.
In the Election Model, the BASE CASE assumption was 75%.
The sensitivity analysis range was 60-87%.

I have provided evidence that Kerry led the pre-election polls.
The usual suspects said I "cherry-picked" registered voter (RV) polls.
The RV polls included newly-registered voters who were not included in
likely voter (LV) polls. Most of them were Democrats.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.p...

On The Other Hand constantly refers to the Pew LV poll in his attempt
mislead others into thinking that Bush led the pre-election polls.

There were 18 National pre-election polls in the Election Model.
Nine were RVs and 9 were LVs.
Pew was one of the RV polls.
THAT'S NOT CHERRY-PICKING.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.p...

Bush was ahead by 3% in the Pew LV poll.
Kerry was ahead by 1% in the Pew RV poll.
Heads I win; Tails you lose.

He's obsessed by the Pew LV poll and Bush's 3 point lead.
Does this invalidate the 18 national polls in the model?
Why the fixation on Pew?
THAT'S CHERRY-PICKING.

Why not just accept that Kerry led the Pew RV poll?
Harris said Kerry had the BIG MO: he was winning the late undecideds.
Kerry gained 8% from Oct.1. to Nov.1 in the Pew RV poll.
Pew and Harris agreed it was a tight race.

Harris and Zogby aren't exactly chopped liver.
It's more evidence that Kerry won the undecideds.
He also won the exit polls by more than is generally known.

On the Other Hand, since since they were pre-election polls,
there was no "cluster effect"; no "false recall".

OTOH wants very much to convince us that Bush won.
He claims the 12:22am NEP was biased, but that the 1:25pm Final
which was matched to a corrupt vote count, was just fine..

On the Other Hand, he ignores all this:
1) the Final NEP overstated the Bush 2000 vote by 5 million.
2) the overwhelming evidence of fraud in Ohio and other states.
3) the big Democratic registration edge.
4) Kerry winning over 60-70% of the undecided vote.
5) Kerry winning nearly 60% of those who did not vote in 2000.
6) Kerry winning over 70% of the Nader 2000 vote
7) the 12:22am NEP, which Kerry won by 51-48% and matches the
pre-election polls with undecideds allocated.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.p...

OTOH wants us to disregard all of these VERIFIABLE FACTS.

His argument is based on FAITH-BASED, IMPLAUSIBLE MYTHS:
1) "False recall" on the part of Gore voters (15% voted for Bush)
They forgot that in 2000 Bush stole it in broad daylight?
2) "Reluctance" on the part of Bush voters to be exit polled.
Like their reluctance in 2000 to riot at the Dade recount?
3) "Inexperience" on the part of Exit Poll workers.

OTOH says his associates are writing books on how Bush won.
More RW disinformation for the masses.
Will they say the fundies came out in droves?
Or was it the Bin Laden tape?
These guys aren't fiction writers, are they?

OTOH never CREATED an election forecast model.
He claims that INCUMBENTS win the undecideds.
He mistates the facts: undecideds break 2:4-1 for the challenger.

He ignores the Bush 48.5% pre-election approval rating.

He disparages RV polls which counted millions of new, young,
motivated, cell-phone-equipped Democrats - mostly women concerned
about Roe v. Wade.

He obfuscates the impossibility of Final 43/37 NEP weights.
Even though they were necessary to MATCH the Bush vote.

On the Other Hand, it's no Mystery that Harris knows more
than naysayers who trash any polls which show Kerry won.

Are OTOH and MP so much in denial that they would ignore
the experience and expertise of Harris and Zogby?

Lou Harris is a world-class pollster.
He's got 40 years experience.
He's not a Mystery Pollster.
He's not a purveyor of misinformation.
He's got nothing to hide.
No "on the one hand this; on the other hand that".
No shilling for paymasters.
Harris was polling BEFORE these guys were born.

Harris, Zogby, ARG, etc. are KNOWN professional pollsters.
They are the BEST in their field.
No Mystery Pollster in the group.

They KNOW about scientific polling methodologies.
They KNOW that polling sample size, margin of error, late undecideds,
demographic trends and party-id are all critical.

OTOH, FEBBLE and MP: will you guys ever get it?

Quere mas?
OK.

http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/

Kerry was projected at 51.63% in the Election Model, based on 18 National
polls and at 51.80% in the State Poll-based Monte Carlo model (2-party).
The 3rd-party vote was 1%, so deduct 0.50% from the 2-party vote.

Therefore, the equivalent projection was: Kerry 51.2%-Bush 47.8%
Quite close to the 51.4-47.6% in the 12:22am NEP "How Voted 2K".

But, lest we forget: the Bush 41/Gore 39% exit poll weights were IMPOSSIBLE.
Assuming EQUAL 98% turnout, we have a PLAUSIBLE 39.02/39.45% mix.
The vote share becomes: Kerry 52.4%, Bush 46.6%, Other 1%.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.p...

Now here is what Harris said on Deflection Day....
____________________________________________________

The Harris Poll® #87, November 2, 2004

Final Pre-election Harris Polls: Still Too Close to Call but Kerry Makes Modest Gains

The final Harris Polls show Senator John Kerry making modest gains at the very end of the campaign in an election that is still too close to call using telephone methods of polling.. At the same time, the final Harris Internet-based poll suggests that Kerry will win the White House today in a narrow victory.

Harris Interactive’s final online survey of 5,508 likely voters shows a three-point lead for Senator Kerry. The final Harris Interactive telephone survey of 1,509 likely voters shows a one-point lead for President Bush. Both surveys are based on interviews conducted between October 29, 2004 and November 1, 2004. The telephone survey is consistent with most of the other telephone polls, which show the race virtually tied.

Both surveys suggest that Kerry has been making some gains over the course of the past few days see Harris Polls

#83
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index...

and #78
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index....

*********************************************************************
If this trend is real, then Kerry may actually do better than these numbers suggest. In the past, presidential CHALLENGERS TEND TO DO BETTER against an incumbent President among the UNDECIDED voters during the LAST THREE DAYS of the elections, and that APPEARS TO BE THE CASE HERE. The reason: undecided voters are MORE OFTEN VOTERS WHO DISLIKE the President but DO NOT KNOW the challenger well enough to make a decision. WHEN THEY DECIDE, they frequently split 2:1 to 4:1 FOR the challenger.
*********************************************************************

About one percentage point of the current difference probably reflects the inclusion in the online sample of people with CELL phones but no landline (and therefore not included in the telephone survey) who FAVOR Kerry by a wide margin (see The Harris Poll #86 released yesterday at

www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll.

The surveys both suggest an increase of a few percentage points above the 51.3% turnout (of all adults) in 2000, but not as big an increase as some reports have suggested.

Three Key States (Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio)

Another piece of evidence pointing to a likely Kerry victory is that online Harris Polls in these large, key states, which may well determine the Electoral College result, all show modest Kerry leads. However, all these leads are within the possible sampling error for these surveys. Assuming the forecast is correct, Kerry is likely to win all three large states, and almost certainly the White House along with it. The sample sizes were well over 1,000 likely voters in Florida (1,433), Pennsylvania (1,204), and Ohio (1,218).
snip

more...

http://progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?a...



These FACTS are never discussed in the media.
- election fraud
- undecided voters break for the challenger, especially if the incumbent is unpopular. Bush was at 48%.
- Many newly registered voters are not included in LV (likely voter) polls.
- Since 1988, Democrats have won 60-70% of new voters. In 2008, Obama had 71%+.
- MILLIONS of mostly (70-80%) Democratic votes are uncounted in every election
- The 2004/2006/2008 Final National Exit Polls indicated there were millions of returning phantom Bush voters from the prior election (more than were alive).
- The Final National and State exit polls are always FORCED TO MATCH the recorded vote.
- By definition, the RECORDED VOTE never reflects the TRUE VOTE since millions of votes are UNCOUNTED in EVERY election.
- Uncounted votes alone provide overwhelming evidence that elections were stolen in 1968, 1988, 2000 and 2004.
- 1968: 6 million net uncounted votes.
Nixon won the recorded vote by 500,000.
- 1988: 10.6 million net uncounted votes. Bush won the recorded vote by 7m.
- 2000: 5.4 million net uncounted votes. Gore won the recorded vote by 540,000.
- 2004: Nearly 4 million uncounted votes.
Bush won the recorded vote by 3.0 million.
Kerry won the True Vote by 10m.
Approximately 5 million were switched from Kerry to Bush on UNVERIFIABLE voting machines.

- 2006 midterms: Democrats won by more than double the recorded 52-46%% margin.
10-20 House seats were stolen.

- 2008: Obama won by more than double his recorded 9.5m margin.

1988-2008: the average Democratic TRUE VOTE margin was reduced from 10% to a 4% RECORDED MARGIN by Election Fraud.

VOTER FRAUD was virtually non-existent.

What a shame Harris and Zogby won't go out on a limb to let us know the Truth.

Obrador for President Site

for another important jog to the collective memory.

Just look at Liddle's latest, which she is now telling on other web forums:
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=151562

To support her newest phoney hypothesies --

First Liddle correctly states that:

"Sampling error, e, is not dependent on Kerry vote share, k."

(where E is estimation error for the best fit linear approximation)

so she correctly infers that when:

-2e = bk +E

then b must equal zero

Good so far, but now she "proves" that her latest bunk theory that "exit poll discrepancy cannot be plotted by exit poll share" is correct by

incredibly claiming that when

-2e = bk + be + E

then b is NOT equal to zero!

Therefore sampling error IS dependent on Kerry vote share in this case.

Liddle sees no problem with her two conflicting statements:

"Sampling error IS dependent on Kerry vote share."

and

"Sampling error IS NOT dependent on Kerry vote share."

To Liddle both of the above statements are true depending on what she wants to prove at the time.

Her mathematics depend on what lies she wants to convince people of at the moment. Her latest invalid invention is that "WPD should NOT be plotted by exit poll share" which she approves in her typical way by distorting mathematics beyond belief.

Mathematics is obviously not Liddle's forte, but deceit is.

Liddle instantly spouts any invalid mathematics that pop into her head as long as it supports her position. She is a highly skilled enemy of democracy with no conscience or respect for the truth whatsoever.

Liddle does not want exit poll discrepancy to be plotted by exit poll share because it may reveals the evidence of vote miscounts.

because that allows him to scrap the exit polls and election fraud to continue uninhibited.....

liddle definitely has no interest in the truth...once one of her arguments realizes itself to be invalid, she then simply twists the WPD again and comes up with another argument which you think makes sense until it cancels out her new argument...

she makes two arguments at once most of the time which cancel eachother out....both based on the same line of narrow thought, warren mitofsky's delusion of grandeur.

You need to start charging tuition to these students.

"We are the ones we've been waiting for...." The Elders, Hopi Nation.

Past liberal, past progressive, all the way to full blown dissident.... Me