Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Chris Matthews Final Tally Results in New Hampshire

Stunning results
Polsters got it wrong!
Even the polls fooled Hillary

Headlines from MSNBC

CNN Clinton Comeback: Defies Polls to Win New Hampshire

Heads Up. Is the joke on us? Why the discrepancy between forefront polls, exit polls, vote results?

Chris Matthews. We're going to be watching closely these discrepancies like we've seen in New Hampshire, and if there are still these differences - dramatic - I'm going to be looking for culprits. (Hardball, Chris Matthews)

Matthews made the comment after lengthy discussion with his panel on tonight's Hardball programming. We must hold Matthews to his promise - should this same situation happen in other states down the road - Matthews said he'll be looking for the culprits.


This all needs to be investigated, now, in New Hampshire.

Though Matthews didn't note where he got info to lead him to say was the bump up for Hillary because she cried... it is apparent he got the hint from What Happened to Polls In New Hampshire? January 09, 2008 Rasmussen Reports.

so nobody else polled like Rasmussen, heh, and Zogby didn't figure in the women for who was that ah Obama, ah Clinton, ah Ron Paul?

What are the voter registration regulations in New Hampshire anyway? Do they have same day voter registration? Early voting? When do they count any absentee ballots? Do they offer provisional ballots which may go uncounted until close to the tabulating of votes for the official results?

I'm real skeptical that the hand-counted paper ballot are any more secure than the paper ballot optical-scan. Both could engender fraud and abuse. I'll admit, the electronic reader/counters and tabulators should be investigated for any potential tampering...

Related for your information and assessment

Rasmussen: What Happened to Polls In New Hampshire?
January 09, 2008 Rasmussen Reports ^ |
Posted on 01/09/2008 1:43:15 PM PST by Aristotelian

Hillary Clinton’s victory in New Hampshire was a shock to anyone who followed the pre-election polls. At Rasmussen Reports, our final numbers suggested a 7-point victory for Barack Obama. In the end, Clinton won by three. Other polls also foreshadowed a solid victory for Obama, some projecting a double digit margin. The campaigns themselves expected a significant victory for Obama (the Clinton campaign was even saying that anything less than a double-digit loss would be a victory of sorts for their candidate).

It is hard to remember a time when the polling and expectations were so universally different from what really happened. At the same time, It is worth remembering that polling was generally on target for the Republican race. John McCain won, as expected, by splitting the Republican vote with Romney and winning big among Independents. Independents accounted for 37% of the Republican Primary voters, a bit higher than projected.

So what happened with the polling on the Democratic race? There are several possibilities.

First, there may truly have been very late changes in the race. Hillary’s tearing-up moment may have played a role (another powerful moment came in the debate on Saturday night where the only woman in the race reminded everyone that she embodies change). There is some evidence to support this theory, even if we only recognize it in hindsight.

In Rasmussen Reports polling, our final trend was in Clinton’s direction—our tracking poll showed Obama’s lead declining from 10-points following the Sunday interviews to seven points after the Monday night calls. Extrapolating that trend another day would have pointed to a much closer race. Additionally, the Rasmussen Reports surveys showed that Clinton supporters were somewhat more certain that they would stick with their candidate than supporters of Obama or Edwards. If this is the case, why didn’t the late trend get more notice? Perhaps because few other firms polled on Monday night. So, the last polls reported by many continued to show an uptick for Obama.

Further support for this theory comes from Exit Poll data showing that an astonishing 38% of voters made up their mind in the final three days of the race (after Iowa). Of these, more than a third ended up voting for Clinton. These last minute decisions gave Clinton 14% of the vote overall (more than a third of her total vote). It’s easy to imagine that many of these voters had been leaning towards Clinton before Iowa, were impressed by Obama during his weekend “wave,” but came back to Clinton by Election Day.

Another possibility is that the polls simply understated Clinton’s support. At one level, Clinton’s campaign organization may have been great at getting out the vote. One analyst noted that “The Clinton turnout operation in Manchester their strongest area, was very good, and turnout soared 33% over 2000. In Rochester-Dover-Somersworth, another strong Clinton area, turnout was up 94% from 2000.” That could account for a several percentage points, but not the ten point gap between our final poll and the actual results.

Polling the New Hampshire Primaries: What Happened
John Zogby
Huffington Post January 9, 2008
There was no shortage of polls going into the New Hampshire primary in 2008 and it looks like we all missed the mark on the Democratic side. This will require a lot of scrutiny in the coming days and weeks, but here are some initial thoughts on what has been happening:

1. According to the exit polls, 18% of the voters said that they made up their minds on primary day. That is just an unprecedented number. I have polled many races, especially close ones, where 4% to 8% have said they finally decided on their vote the day of the election and that can wreak havoc on those of us who are in the business of capturing pre-election movements and trends. But nearly one in five this time?

2. It looks like the always feisty voters in both Iowa and New Hampshire have rejected pre-election coronations. In the case of Iowa, Democratic voters said that Mrs. Clinton is not inevitable, while in New Hampshire they were not ready to endorse the Obama train without checking the engine.

3. The compressed schedule of the two events may have had an impact. Normally the winning candidate gets an initial big bounce out of Iowa, and then plateaus. Then the next primary race begins. With less than five full days, Obama got his bounce in New Hampshire, then the settling down period began on the last day -- under the radar screen.

4. My polling showed Clinton doing well on the late Sunday night and all day Monday -- she was in a 2-point race in that portion of the polling. But since our methods call for a three-day rolling average, we had to legitimately factor the huge Obama numbers on Friday and Saturday -- thus his 12 point average lead. Unfortunately, one day or a day-and-a-half does not make a trend and we ran out of time.

5. Going into the New Hampshire primary, we certainly did see Clinton holding on to a significant lead among women and older voters. But we were focusing on Obama's massive lead among younger and independent voters. We seem to have missed the huge turnout of older women that apparently put Clinton over the top.

Iowa's Numbers & New Hampshire
By: Devvy Kidd
January 7, 2008

© 2008 -

Interesting read had to post this obviously from viewpoint of hand-counting paper ballots

Warning: The Content in this Article May be InaccurateReaders have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate

No comments: