<p>Well, I've never receiving a polling call period. Your experience is probably like the way lawyers immediately get kicked out of jury boxes if their number is called. They don't want anyone who knows about the system?</p>
<p>Or maybe they think all journalists are biased.</p>
<p>Carolyn, LOL. Like the rest of us aren't.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>And another question: if I am understanding things correctly, the youth vote, aged 18-30, was overwhelmingly pro-Kerry although for the most part too apathetic or disorganized or busy to vote. </p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Based on the exit poll data, Kerry carried the 18-29 age group, 54% to 45%. Solid, but not overwhelming. Bush carried every other age group, including the elderly.</p>
<p>A very striking number is that Bush polled 5 points higher with women in this election, only losing the women's vote 51% to 48%.</p>
<p>As far as eductation, Kerry barely eeked out a win among voters with no high school education: 50% to 49%. He won decisively among voters with post-grad education: 55% to 44%. However, Bush won comfortably among all others: high school education, some college education, and college degree.</p>
<p>The most striking number, of course, is that Bush won with landslide percentages among white voters: 58% to 41%.</p>
<p>You can peruse the full exit poll data at:</p>
<p>But as someone else pointed out elsewhere, and as I heard discussed on NPR yesterday, the exit polls were way off, at least as to choice of candidate? But still: if Kerry, with all the liabilities you have so carefully pointed out in previous posts, was able to garner such a big edge, how much better could a GOOD candidate do with the young? Hard to imagine that he had an edge because the young liked him personally so much, since no one else seemed to.</p>
<p>The main problem with the exit polls on Tuesday was the interim data released throughout the day. Apparently, women tend to vote early and men late. So the first rounds of partial totals released starting at noon had bad samples with women significantly over-represented. The final exit poll data I linked to has the final national vote correct: 51% for Bush. </p>
<p>It's a very large sample (13,000+), so assuming the precincts were picked properly, it's probably pretty good data for a retrospective snapshot.</p>
<p>Interesting, thanks. Sorry the early ones weren't right ;)</p>
<p>What happened? We forgot about the rest of America. We started believing that EVERYONE hated Bush, because we never met Farmer Joe. Father of 4, goes to Church every Sunday, agrees with Bush's stance on abortion/stem cell research, does not want to live to see 2 guys making out on the park bench. That's the America we never see past the skyscrapers. The blind, folksy America.</p>
<p>check this out for some fun</p>
<p>It links to about 10 different maps of election results. Make sure you scroll down far enough to see them. The youth vote is interesting. I couldn't remember if someone already posted a link to that one. You'll find the jesusland one too.</p>
<p>"Here's what the electoral map would look like if it were up to people ages 18-29:" Hmmm...but it's not.</p>
<p>i guess ill just rant, off subject looks like this thread has about had its run anyways. time to put a damper/ the tedium of mediocrity is upon us. basically we are doomed. but thats all old news. somebody mentioned the pendulum swing. well, theres gonna be one in every situation dictating all possible turn of events. it just doesnt mean f-ing scum as long as were caught in a continuous loop of muddled cyclical directive (eludes to progressiveness x rate)(effective tapering/splitting the difference). any given analysis is just a microcosm of our infinite doom. this two party scheme is f#$&s, such a pendulum could swing wildly for another 400 years before a collective sentiment to move on to something else would fully emerge. im ready, id rather do it now. but what we should really be worrying about is facilitating extensive efforts in searching for breaks in the space time continuum, and establishing means of exploiting them (allocate a resourcefulness). we either gotta set ourselves way way back on a backwards track before nano-tech has the implicit ability to synergize its own momentum, or we must take absolute preemtive measures regarding options for progressive elusion (researching intuitive lines that would allow us to adequately perceive and interpret additional x parallel dimensions + functional synthetic proliferations). maybe societies could get by with the manifestation of such internal outreach manipulations, but you gotta wonder whether anything of this here plane of reality is gonna have a chance to survive tech extrapolation. thus, alternate reconstruction may be necessary - someday the only way the popular majority will believe they can save themselves is by supporting a phenomenological approach of 'elemental x visceral' constructionism. we are out of the loop of getting out of the loop and im sure everybody expects/wants it to stay that way. cyclical demise remains duplicitous while hypothetically there are possible clauses for inevitability, influx of said paradox would dissipate potential theories. i say we all all turn away at the same time/ but how to evade perpetual predisposition of inverse palpitating centrifugal stresses. what about straight up convergence, bah. all or nothing or a little bit of each here and there and we havent budged a smudge. just be very scared, Popular Minority, who from a generalists standpoint, is far beyond the progressive cusp, and understands the potentiality of highly exploitable mediums. before you know it i could be cloning aspects of your S or Ds dna, if they make the cut. sounds like rudimentary science, but dont worry, i need not any government funding. why cant we live in harmony or mere indifference of a society that, without prejudice, would realize effective endeavor in cloning its not like it has to adversely effect our perception. its just more crazy se46 to deal with like when an insane new lip gloss hits the market. Kissyfit, kissyfit. i may be behind the curve in some cut-up respects/ checks and balancing is skum. in spite of the seemingly palpable ontology of the world, ironically, nostalgia is our only endlessly renewable commodity. throwing some hardcore cloning antics and activity into the mix could only bolster the cause.</p>
<p>correction to post #131. I tried to edit it but it's not Shakespeare , author is unknown.</p>
<p>Cupboard: Are you the UNABOMBER? I think you are writing this from behind prison walls.</p>
<p>i am sure no one on this thread is willing to admit that we don't know what the h-ll you are talking about! Except for me...one of the lowly educated losing voters of the last election.</p>
<p>My verbal SAT score was slightly higher than BUSH but I couldnt get into Yale.</p>
<p>No legacy here.</p>
<p>I have not read this whole thread but just came on now to see the most recent posts and I, too, will admit, I have NO idea what Cupboard is saying in that post. All my well regarded degrees have not educated me enough to interpret that post. </p>
<p>Cupboard, are you a student? If so, I hope you have your college essays edited because with all your big vocab words and lines of thought, mere mortals like myself do not have a clue what you said. </p>
<p>Susan</p>
<p>Well sgio and suzievt,ahem,Stand aside ,let me give it a try. </p>
<p>The eidactic of his prosthetic is clearly to fabricate a "Thessalonian Mirage" ,so to speak. LOL. Concomittantly speaking, the extra-wordly versissitude of the palabre does leave one doubting, (dare I say fumilgating rancidly?), the pedalogistical versimile that has explanted the normal "raison d' etre" of phrenological facts. To what purpose I can not emulsify further. Need I say more? Hope this helps,</p>
<p>(For the truly old TV viewers, I sure did love when Norm Cosby appeared on the Tonight Show.)</p>
<p>curmudgeon, now I'm scared . . . I almost understood that. And yes, I remember Norm Cosby.</p>
<p>So let me get this straight......Norm Cosby and the UNABOMBER...could they be one and the same? By extrapolation, of course! Or cloning, as the case me be.</p>