|
I bow to election fraud experts here; I know the problem, I know the stolen elections, but the area is not my specialty. I heard presentations last night, however, from both Bill Schneider on CNN and Keith Olbermann on MSNBC on the NH polls. I'm calling it "NH Polls for Dummies." I'm not really making an argument either way, or prepared to defend what was said -- just passing along.
While some polls had Obama with a double-digit lead, his average lead in the polls was 7 points. Showing in the polls was a large number of undecideds, and an even larger number of "could change their minds," as well as a large number of Independents who were difficult to predict (wavering between Obama and McCain). The polls accurately predicted the vote for Obama (seemingly negating charges of the "Bradley Effect") and the votes in the GOP race. It was only a surge in Clinton votes that did not show up in the polls.
From articles, I've seen various accounts of Clinton's trending upward as the last polls were taken, but three-day averages had to be noted, not the latest number. Also, every article notes the women's vote as a component of Clinton's win. As soon as it was called on MSNBC, Russert (not my favorite) said that "the women of New Hampshire" had given Clinton her victory. There have, of course, been many anecdotal references about a backlash from women against the press for its treatment of Clinton in the days before the primary.
Again, I'm not prepared to defend any of this information, even with figures -- I'm just, as I most often do here, reporting press reports.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
