If you scroll down and read the rest you'll see the discrepancies were within the bounds and shouldn't have been published before they were weighted
More interesting reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2004_United_States_presidential_election_controversy%2C_exit_polls#Disputed On 6/14/06, Dana Tierney wrote: > you passed over a statement like this to focus on a 6% discrepancy? Who says > the women voted Democratic? From the wikipedia article: > > "Voting locations that used electronic or other types of voting machines that > did not issue a paper receipt or offer auditability correlate geographically > with areas that had discrepancies in Bush's favor between exit poll numbers > and actual results. Exit polling data in these areas show significantly > higher support for Kerry than actual results (potentially outside the margin > of error). From a statistical perspective, this may be indicative of vote > rigging, because the likelihood of this happening by chance is extremely low. > A study of 16 states by a former MIT mathematics professor places the > likelihood at 1 in 50,000. [9]" > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:209392 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
