reply to post by theindependentjournal
Again, if it's a conspiracy, how many people know? Why havent these people said anything? Are entite news agencies 'in on it'?
It's totally legit to ask how news agencies can determine winners and losers with less than 1% of the vote in. Totally get that. The only real
question is will you, the royal you, accept the honest answer, or continue to chase the rabbit down the hole.
1). Ron Paul has been polling in the high single digits and low teens for, essentially, the whole race. His results are entirely predictable, unless
the pollsters (and all those responding to them) are 'in on it'.
2). Extensive polling across the entire state for weeks before the first vote is cast. What this polling indicates is that certain counties tend to
"go" for certain candidates. Really, only few counties are up for grabs. Meaning, the candidates, pollsters and those that read them, know far in
advance where the trends are, which counties are solidly behind which candidate & which counties it's going to come down to, to decide the election.
That's the recall answer. Or, you can follow the rabbit further down the hole.
3). Statistical modeling plays a large factor in predicting the above. Decades and decades of statistical modeling tells us about the past & informs
us on the *most likely* future. See above. I said most likely; not definitive outcomes. Most often, these are right - sometimes, quite wrong.
4). The desire to be "first" with the news pressures news organizations to take risks. Clearly, the data indicated just a few, perhaps even just
one, county would (based in all the above) *probably* decide the election. As soon as they had those votes counted, they took a risk & called it.
like you, I think they called it too early; statistical modeling or not.
These are the answers. Not perfect but, there you go. What you, the royal you, decide to do with this information, is entirely up to you. Believe it,
don't believe it; I don't care.