Read ’em and weep: Exit polls in Massachusetts PROVED Trump’s victory, DISPROVED Hillary’s

The Suspect Massachusetts 2016 Primary


In the Massachusetts March 1, 2016 primary Democratic Party race, the computerized vote count declared candidate Clinton the winner but the exit polls indicated candidate Sanders to be the winner by a margin of 6.6%. These same exit polls accurately predicted the results of each and all of the Republican candidates. Until the US joins a long list of many other countries that protect the integrity of their elections through publicly observed hand counting of paper ballots, our elections are liable to be suspect.

Exit polling has been performed in the US and other countries for decades and the science and proper methodology is well established to obtain an accurate prediction of the final vote. For years, many researchers have pointed to the discrepancies between exit poll results and the unverified computer counts in US elections. The main response by the defenders of computerized voting, while expressing blind faith in the unverified computer counting, has been to claim that the exit polls may go wrong because respondents, more enthusiastic for a particular candidate, would be more likely to agree to be polled. The recent Massachusetts Super Tuesday primaries did not support this theory.

(image by Ted Soares)   License   DMCA

[1] Exit polls published by CNN immediately after close of polls.

[2] Reported computer vote count from results. 100% vote count. Exit poll projected winner is highlighted in green. Reported winner for the state is highlighted in yellow.

[3] Discrepancies are the reported vote count percentage less exit poll percentage. Negative result indicates lower vote count than predicted by the exit polls. Positive result indicates higher vote count than predicted by the exit polls. In contrast to the low discrepancy in the Republican Party race, the discrepancy for the Democratic Party race is much greater than the exit poll margin of error of 5.4% (95% confidence level) for the difference between the two candidates.

[4] Margin of error for differences (at 95% CI) calculated according to: Franklin, C The ‘Margin of Error’ for Differences in Polls . University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. October 2002, revised February 2007.

Read More 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.