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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Showing Original Post only (View all)

NWCorona

(8,541 posts)
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 03:35 PM Apr 2016

To Clear the Air, Sanders Should Challenge New York Vote [View all]

In November 2004, the officially announced results of the Ukrainian presidential election differed from exit polling by 12%.

U.S. officials officially cried fraud.

Last Tuesday, the results of the New York primary between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders differed from exit polling by 12%.

Tim Robbins has cried fraud, and the Washington Post’s most consistent Clinton hack this cycle is leading the charge in mocking him.

A friend of mine, a Sanders supporter who acted as a poll worker in Brooklyn, initially saw nothing wrong, suggesting that a bunch of people, who were ineligible to vote, cast provisional ballots for Sanders and then told exit pollsters that they voted accordingly. My friend, who has not given me specific permission to use their name, worked a precinct in the Greenpoint neighborhood, Sanders’ best in New York City. About one-third of all ballots were cast provisionally in that precinct.

But that would not explain why exit polling has been so bad in fifteen other states, missing consistently to Clinton’s benefit and outside the margin of error in eight states with open or mixed primaries."
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/26/to-clear-the-air-sanders-should-challenge-new-york-vote/

19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why is it easier to believe the difference is election fraud instead of poor exit polling? LonePirate Apr 2016 #1
I'm not saying NY is election fraud. NWCorona Apr 2016 #2
Exit polling has long been used as an indicator of possible fraud. rhett o rick Apr 2016 #3
Exit polling is pretty straight forward. -none Apr 2016 #7
It may be straight forward but it doesn't mean it is scientific or representative. LonePirate Apr 2016 #18
yes, Bernie, do it. wyldwolf Apr 2016 #4
can we still use a single asterisk? reddread Apr 2016 #6
The fact that Sanders hasn't challenged any election results is telling Tarc Apr 2016 #5
I think the results should be frozen and not included in the delegate count for either. PyaarRevolution Apr 2016 #9
Oh, how we miss the wisdom of 2000. Betty Karlson Apr 2016 #10
You really don't have much of an understanding of how exit polls work Tarc Apr 2016 #13
Don't condescend please. Besides, we can see fraud. Betty Karlson Apr 2016 #14
And yet you cannot scrape up a reason as to why Sanders himself has not filed a challenge Tarc Apr 2016 #15
Because unlike Clinton, he doesn't burn bridges unless he really has to? Betty Karlson Apr 2016 #16
Good idea but Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #8
It's hard to say but a 5% sample audit wouldn't take long at all. NWCorona Apr 2016 #11
Good start Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #17
There wasn't fraud, just voters trying to vote who were not properly registered, some poll worker Jitter65 Apr 2016 #12
You misspelled "concede." NuclearDem Apr 2016 #19
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»To Clear the Air, Sanders...»Reply #0