Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

lostnfound

(16,623 posts)
Mon Nov 18, 2024, 07:36 AM 21 hrs ago

Democracy-ism is the biggest ISM and perhaps must not be talked about.

Kamala talked about democracy way more than about racism or sexism. And her voters responded:
Harris voters thought these issues were most important:
DEMOCRACY: 56%
ABORTION: 21%
ECONOMY: 13%
FOREIGN POLICY: 3%
IMMIGRATION: 2%

Trump voters thought these issues were most important:
IMMIGRATION: 11%
DEMOCRACY: 35%
ECONOMY: 31%
FOREIGN POLICY: 4%
ABORTION: 14%
https://thebannercsi.com/2024/11/05/preliminary-exit-poll-results/

My actual lived experience is this I'm old enough to remember when UNWEIGHTED EXIT polls ROUTINELY predicted outcomes within 0.2% or 0.4%. When i was a kid, the TV showed the actual exit polls as they came in. They basically never varied from election outcomes. I watched them roll in, race after race — senate, president, governor, representative — and as a teen interested in current events (and math), I knew that differences of 0.1% or 0.2% were not surprising, but higher than 0.5%? No, highly doubtful.

Funny thing is that starting IN 2000, that changed. The exit polls became farther off from election results with every election. For one election you could click a button and see the unadjusted results or the adjusted results. Now, you have to pay money to access the unadjusted numbers, say for a university study. They don't want the public to worry their pretty little heads. They pretend that the most important function of exit polls is…wait for it — “to understand what motivated the voting choices of different identity groups”. But for a few democratic decades, it reassured people of the accuracy of the count — and back then, the counts could be observed by human eyes, your neighbors.

You can all claim that reluctant bush responders or lying racists or white women not supporting a nonwhite woman are the reason for the election losses. You can claim “certainty” out of fear of looking like an idiot. But as I’ve indicated, I wasn’t born yesterday, and I’m old enough not to care if i look idiotic. Here’s what I know:
1) There used to be a mechanism called exit polling that was pretty damn accurate, but now it’s distorted by weighting to equal the official results, and whisked out not to corroborate outcomes but only to divide us up by the same ISMs that some here complain about. And
2) The GOP was the image of doom and gloom at the end of the campaign, swaying to songs like a drunken old nightclub act and
3) Kamala Harris should not be faulted for one single thing because she ran a damn fine campaign and any critics can go try to earn their own place at the top of the ticket

Exit polling — surveying people leaving voting locations about the ballots they cast — debuted in the 1960s, as news organizations (and on a small scale, candidates) sought to gather demographic data about voters that could be used to predict election results. Legendary polling pioneer Warren Mitofsky conducted the first major exit poll for a network during the 1967 Kentucky governor’s race and by the 1970s, exit polling had become an industry practice. But in 1980, NBC reported Ronald Reagan’s 1980 victory over Jimmy Carter nearly three hours before polls closed on the West Coast, leading to a large-scale examination of exit polling and Congressional hearings on whether it depressed voter turnout. As a result, networks vowed not to project a state’s winners until polls there are closed. States have tried and failed to restrict exit polling, which is protected by the First Amendment. (Ironically, the U.S. government is a big supporter of exit polling abroad: the practice is widely used by pollsters hired by NGOs and monitors to verify that elections are being conducted legitimately. The U.S. government has even financed exit polls in former Soviet republics and satellites to ensure votes are counted accurately.)

In the 1990s, the major news networks and the Associated Press formed a polling consortium called Voter News Service (VNS) to cut costs, eliminating the redundancy of reports from multiple sources. But redundancy isn’t always a bad thing, as proved, disastrously, in 2000 — when VNS (and the networks soon afterward) declared the race for Al Gore around 8 p.m., only to switch to George W. Bush at 2 a.m. and declared the race locked at “too close to call” two hours later.

An embarrassing computer glitch in 2002 sealed the consortium’s fate; it was shuttered soon after and replaced by a different set of pollsters that serve the National Election News Pool. But this organization suffered its own scandal in 2004 when exit poll data was leaked online around midday on Election Day, prompting bloggers to declare John Kerry the presumptive winner. In 2006, the pollsters began quarantining representatives of the NEP to prevent such leaks from occurring.
https://time.com/archive/6936516/a-brief-history-of-exit-polling/
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Democracy-ism is the biggest ISM and perhaps must not be talked about. (Original Post) lostnfound 21 hrs ago OP
I remember Brokaw saying the 2000 exit polls weren't available on election night Dennis Donovan 21 hrs ago #1
I find it astonishing that anyone is still trying to pretend... Think. Again. 20 hrs ago #2
I kind of get your point but need to point out too that- AkFemDem 19 hrs ago #3
That's true, i noticed it too. Bigger issue: if all polled were 45% trump 53% kamala, they won't say it. lostnfound 10 hrs ago #4

Dennis Donovan

(25,360 posts)
1. I remember Brokaw saying the 2000 exit polls weren't available on election night
Mon Nov 18, 2024, 07:40 AM
21 hrs ago

I don't recall his reason, but I definitely remember him saying that the exit polls had some sort of issue and they wouldn't be relying on them that night.

Think. Again.

(17,824 posts)
2. I find it astonishing that anyone is still trying to pretend...
Mon Nov 18, 2024, 07:52 AM
20 hrs ago

...that any republican anywhere is actually considering any of those issues when they think or act politically.

Rightwingers are simply reacting emotionally to very basic triggers fed to them by people trying to take away our country from the American public. Rightwingers don't care at all about any of those issues, they only care about the rush their ego gets from opposing "liberals".

Period.

AkFemDem

(2,166 posts)
3. I kind of get your point but need to point out too that-
Mon Nov 18, 2024, 08:49 AM
19 hrs ago

the way we present data, matters. This is part of digital literacy, it's how data gets skewed- (WARNING: Lots are not going to like this next part)

In actuality, Democracy was also the #1 for Trump voters. Why did this push immigration to the top in this reporting? Was it accidental that immigration was listed first for Trump voters but every other issue was in ranked % order? Of course not.

Of course exit poll data matters- but the media is doing the interpretation of that data and as we can see *in this very example*, that interpretation is subject to slants and biases to sell the story that's being told. Why does it even matter if we're trying to illustrate a point helpful to democrats? Because if we're not able to interpret data correctly it sets us all up to feel safe in unsafe elections, to get lazy about GOTV, to feel "safe" indulging 3rd party candidates, to address the wrong issues in our outreach and debates with those outside the party, to put our money on the wrong horse, to question legitimate election results, to storm the capital when things don't go the way we really thought they'd go, etc.

You can't trust exit poll data being reported, because they're not reporting it honestly.

If honestly "reported" then it would be way more accurate to say:


"Most important issues of Kamala voters…
DEMOCRACY: 56%
ABORTION: 21%
ECONOMY: 13%
FOREIGN POLICY: 3%
IMMIGRATION: 2%

Most important issues of Trump voters…

DEMOCRACY: 35%
ECONOMY: 31%
ABORTION: 14%
IMMIGRATION: 11%
FOREIGN POLICY: 4%"



lostnfound

(16,623 posts)
4. That's true, i noticed it too. Bigger issue: if all polled were 45% trump 53% kamala, they won't say it.
Mon Nov 18, 2024, 05:53 PM
10 hrs ago

Even within a state. If those polled were 45% for trump and 53% for kamala, they will still shoehorn the data into boxes that fit with a 51% Trump / 47% Harris outcome — by weighting independents or white females a little differently. They are not reporting the unadjusted numbers.

We are treated like mushrooms and kept in the dark.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Democracy-ism is the bigg...