Lots of discussion today about why the polls were so wrong. Even Hillary's internal scorekeepers thought she was going to lose.
Without going into detail, a report has come out suggesting that the new voting machines which replaced the old ones that cost Al Gore the election in 2000 don't work very well. To put it mildly. In fact, the state of the art computer-driven top of the line technology that should prevent "chads" and hackers and who knows what else just DON'T.
So it was suggested that maybe the reason the polls and pundits were so off in their New Hampshire predictions is that the vote was screwed up by the machines.
Or, when pollsters asked people who they had voted for, they lied. Apparently people do that. Who knew?
And we're just getting started.
2 comments:
I say Wooo Hooo! This is fun! I love it when the press is wrong! HA! This can be like a soap opera. Probably the same pollsters that told Bush the war was over! HA! Those machines should shoot out a receipt saying who you voted for. I know I wouldn't tell a pollster who I voted for. Or hmmm maybe I'd say Robert Redford or someone...I think we should all say Oprah or something.
I shudder to think about these new voting machines. I'm going to use an absentee ballot at least then I know what I'm marking. How come for years the old machines worked quite well, never had a problem with "hanging" chads until 2001. My theory is that it was the grade of paper card that was tampered with so that the thing wouldn't punch through all the way...all they needed to do was screw up Florida or California. Let's just see what happens in this coming race...Sandi
Post a Comment