Correction: Texas Exit Poll Glance [TX Hispanic vores: Bush 49%, Kerry 50%; not Bush 59% Kerry 41%]

AP via yahoo ^ | Nov 29, 2004 | unknown

[Mike Fieschko]

In the Nov. 3 BC-ELN--Texas Glance and BC-TX Exit-Poll Excerpts, The Associated Press overstated President Bush (news - web sites)'s support among Texas Hispanics. Under a post-election adjustment by exit poll providers Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International, 49 percent of Hispanics in the state voted for Bush, not a majority. The revised result does not differ to a statistically significant degree from Bush's 43 percent support among Texas Hispanics in a 2000 exit poll.

The revised BC-TX-Exit-Poll Excerpts showed that 20 percent, not 23 percent, of all Texas voters were Hispanic. They voted 50 percent for Kerry and 49 percent for Bush, not 41-59 Kerry-Bush.

[Mike Fieschko]

Mark Blumenthal has analysis at his site.

[Mike Fieschko]

Title should be 'votes', not 'vores'.

[SteveMcKing]

Exit poll.... multiply by what day of the month it is, divide by the exact time right now, and you have an equally reliable result.

[Cicero]

Do we believe this? No. Maybe the experts know what the numbers were, but none of these polls is trustworthy.

[Common Tator]

I think it was President Kerry who proved that Exit polls are very accurate.

The problem is huge numbers of voters won't even talk to exit pollers.

It is impossible to get good information when a huge number of actual voters will not let Exit Pollsters poll them.

Exit polls are no longer worth a pitcher of warm spit. They are worthless.

[bayourod]

In politics there are only two types: Winners and Losers.

Those who don't appeal to Hispanic voters will be the losers of the future.

[Bloatedgoat]

Woopty dooooo...

[InterceptPoint]

..49 percent of Hispanics in the state voted for Bush, not a majority. The revised result does not differ to a statistically significant degree from Bush's 43 percent support among Texas Hispanics in a 2000 exit poll.

Well that makes sense doesn't it? After all 43 and 49 are all the same, statistically speaking. Losing by 57 to 43 or losing by 51 to 49 is, statistically speaking, just the same.

It this guy and idiot or am I missing something? Did Bush improve his percentage by 6/43 or about 14% or didn't he. Is a 14% improvement insignificant? If the Republicans get another 14% increase in 2006 or 2008 do you think that will be significant?

[lawdude]

They just NOW calculated an exit poll?

[digger48]

Maybe we should dig up Dick Nixon and make him president again. I just revised the polls and they show that he actually WAS loved by the masses and Clintons Job Approval was really only 18% during Impeachment.

[seastay]

[Mike Fieschko]

I wonder if anyone has gone to Blumenthal's site and read how he, a professional pollster, analyzes this. Did you read what an expert has to say?

There have been a lot of postings here about how Bush increased his support among Catholics, married women, and Jews. (I'm probably forgetting some groups.) Are we to throw out all analysis and go only with total / gross, votes?

If you don't like Blumenthal, say why, or look at Patrick Ruffini's analysis.

[Dan from Michigan]

I'm still shocked that Bush won the county with Brownsville.

[Mike Fieschko]

They just NOW calculated an exit poll?

No ... the data have been trickling out slowly.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Bush got more white votes than he did in 2000-- mostly Catholic whites and some evangelical white voters who stayed home in 2000. That's why he won. I knew this already.

[Common Tator]

I wonder if anyone has gone to Blumenthal's site and read how he, a professional pollster

I wonder how all those expert exit pollsters produced numbers saying Kerry was going to win. The noon, 2pm, 4m and 6pm Exit poll numbers on election day said Kerry was going to win in a landslide.

They were way off in the 2000 election as well. The exit polls in 2000 had Georgia and North Carolina too close to call and Florida a big win for Gore. Exit polling is just plain worthless. Exit polls have a terrible track record.

Exit polls are not worth anything... because so many voters refuse to be polled. Guessing how the voters who refuse to be polled voted is worthless. The pollsters are at best 50 percent accurate on how these people voted. Their methodology is little better than flipping a coin.

With the high number of people refusing to even talk to exit pollsters, the results are worthless.

[Mike Fieschko]

I wonder how all those expert exit pollsters produced numbers saying Kerry was going to win.

Since you ask, it was because the raw data was released (by Kerry's people?) to people with no or little idea how to analyze data which, for example, over sampled women. (That's just off the top of my head. There might have been other problems with the data.)

Exit polls are not worth anything... because so many voters refuse to be polled.

If that's your position, then I suppose you toss out polling which showed Bush got more whites, blacks, Jews, Catholics, and perhaps other groups, to vote for him.

Is there something special about exit polls, or do pre-election polls also suffer from the 'refuse to be polled' problem?

[raybbr]

Woopty doooo.

[SolidRedState]

"Moops, it says moops!"