So after pouring over all the exit poll data and conducting an “exhaustive analysis” on what California voters were telling surveyors about which lever they pulled compared to how they actually voted, the International Humanities Center’s Election Defense Alliance has reached this pretty startling conclusion over how Prop 8 passed: voter fraud is at hand. Woah now.
The group writes in a report:
Exhaustive analysis of exit polls conducted in Los Angeles County has led to the inescapable conclusion that the vote count for Proposition 8 (the ban on same-sex marriage) may have been corrupted. The data were drawn from questionnaires filled out by 6326 voters at 10 polling places scattered across Los Angeles County, and were properly adjusted to match the gender, age, race, and party affiliation of the electorate.
For Proposition 4 (which would have required parental notification and a waiting period for minors seeking abortions), the official results differ from the adjusted exit poll data by only 0.64%. But for Proposition 8, the disparity between the official results and the adjusted exit poll data is 5.74%, enough to affect the margin by 11.48%.
Because Los Angeles County comprised 24.23% of the statewide electorate, an error of that magnitude would have affected the statewide margin by 2.78%, accounting for most of the official 4.48% statewide margin of victory.
There were not enough Republican voters to account for the disparity between the exit poll and the official results even if every Republican non-responder voted for Proposition 8. The Edison-Mitofsky exit poll showed a similar disparity statewide, indicating that altered vote counts may not be limited to Los Angeles County.
The gross disparities leave four options, EDA claims: (1) a basic flaw in the exit poll methodology; (2) many voters lying on the questionnaire; (3) a non-representative sample of voters responding; or (4) the official results being erroneous or fraudulent. And it’s the last one they’re all but concluding is the truth.
The interpretation that the disparity between the exit poll data and the official results for Proposition 8 is due to a corrupted vote count is bolstered by the fact that the official results for Proposition 4 are so easily explained by data from the very same exit poll – the same voters, the same day. The official results for Proposition 8 may very well be fraudulent.
The interpretation that the official results for Proposition 8 are true and correct not only requires that Republican exit poll responders were very different from Republican non-responders, but that Democratic, third-party, and unaffiliated exit poll responders were likewise non-representative of the electorate. This argument would render useless and invalid any exit poll conducted anywhere – in Ukraine, Georgia, Iran, Iraq, Mexico, Ohio or California – because it would allow the results of any exit poll to be dismissed on the unwarranted assumptions that the official results are true and correct, that the exit poll responders must not be representative of the electorate, and that the exit poll results must therefore be wrong. But exit polls have a long history of being remarkably accurate reflections of the electorate. In Germany and elsewhere, exit polls are relied upon to forecast the winners of the elections, and citizens are content to wait for days to hear the official count.
Read the entire, exhaustive report here.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Ian
That definitely explains a lot. I remember driving around LA and seeing much more support on NO ON 8 than YES ON 8.
This also shows that a repeal on 2010 could actually produce positive results, particularly if the margin has grown in our favor (which is most likely the case, based on voter demographics themselves)
ron
Oh you plain lost…get over it. Spend more time and energy helping people with HIV/AIDS instead of gnashing your teeth over a failed campaign to denigrate marriage.
Justin O.
It’s fairly common on controversial issues for exit polls to be wrong. People don’t want to admit they’re anti-gay even on a confidential exit survey.
AndrewW
It is very likely “religious” people lied about how they voted. They are homophobic, but ashamed of it.
That’s all changing rapidly as more and more people put equality before religion. It’s just that old habits die hard and slowly.
B
One thing missing from the report was an analysis of first-time or infrequent voters – are these more or less likely than other voters to participate in exit polls and do they vote the same as other voters in their demographic groups?
There was a substantial “get out the vote” effort due to the presidential election, yet the impact of that is not even considered.
Ironyman
Ron
Thanks for denigrating our marriages.
naghanenu
Religious groups are not ashamed of it. I was not. I would have happily sang it to the world.
The issue is people are not stupid. They do not want to be blacklisted by others or the media as being antigay. You would be surprised how many people do not really support gay marriage btw. Religious or not. At least the religious folks and repubs are honest about it.
Your problem is the people that smile and hold signs and do blogs supporting gay marraige but come voting time…it is repeal time. You need to check so called straight allies.
merkin
This is just lazy and irresponsible “journalism.” I went to the website for this International Humanities Center, and it looks pretty hokey. Im as anti-Prop 8 as they come, but asking people on the street in L.A. if theyre against gay marriage isnt going to get you accurate data. Plus, there are other parts of the state that are much more conservative.
Our energies should be used toward changing minds and rallying the troups, not crying “do over!”
ksu499
I think it’s the “Bradley Effect”. Oddly enough, some people are embarrassed to tell others about their true beliefs and preferences for fear they will be thought to be bigots, backwards, etc. I don’t find it strange at all that someone would vote for Prop 8 and then tell an exit poll that they didn’t.
Kree
naghanenu,
Voting to have the civil rights of gay people revoked is anti-gay.
tinkerbell
@Kree: It’s also a bigoted and shamefully discriminatory belief that one class of people is better than another class, simply because they have the strength of numbers. Naghanenu should be ashamed of himself. His children and grandchildren will look upon him and his views the same way we look upon racists and sexists of the past.
Sarah
Gonna throw out there that this prop passed by the seat of its self-righteous pants. Regardless of what factors are at play, ANY increase in the margin of error places serious doubts on the legitimacy of the vote.
Then consider the sheer number of states calling backsies on gay marriage in the popular vote and that while no state kept gay rights, not one of those states revoked it by a landslide–or by much at all. Is this a sign of our times, that we stand only on the verge of equality in every place where we have taken a stand? Or perhaps the wool has been pulled over our eyes, with every narrow loss just narrow enough to be believed?
And yes, this smells, I dare say, of rabid, nonsensical conspiracy theory. Yet I call you all to doubt and mistrust. For people who are so determined as those who fight gay rights, at what measures shall they cease? If there is even a possibility of fraud, why would you not leap to investigate in order to KNOW you have been dealt with at least (somewhat) legally? Be suspicious, if nothing more. DISSENT! For America is FOUNDED on the right to DISSENT!
PEACE.
naghanenu
Hellooo
I visit this site a lot. Obviously it implies a mind change. I never supported gay rights for marriage until my brother came out to me last year. It shocked me to be honest but well im on board now…
I am only trying to stress that as someone who used to think that way who is also religious i happen to know how the thinking works.
Religious groups do not support gay marriage and they will gladly tell you so. The only problem is no one wants the bad press.
The issue is the so called straight allies. You know, the ones that sign polls and go in the voting booth and vote against it.
Tyler
Okay, so what does that mean then, is the verdict going to be reversed or is that it.
schlukitz
No. 2 · ron
“Oh you plain lost…get over it. Spend more time and energy helping people with HIV/AIDS instead of gnashing your teeth over a failed campaign to denigrate marriage.”
We can chew gum…and walk at the same time, thank you.
We don’t need the likes of you telling us how we should be doing it!
schlukitz
No. 10 · Kree
naghanenu,
Voting to have the civil rights of gay people revoked is anti-gay.
Co-sign.
B
No. 9 · ksu499 wrote, “I think it’s the “Bradley Effect”. Oddly enough, some people are embarrassed to tell others about their true beliefs and preferences for fear they will be thought to be bigots, backwards, etc. I don’t find it strange at all that someone would vote for Prop 8 and then tell an exit poll that they didn’t.” … alas the “Bradley Effect” may be to a large extent an urban legend, although there are a variety of opinions.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect#Causes :
“Prominent Republican pollster V. Lance Tarrance, Jr. flatly denies that the Bradley effect occurred during that election, echoing the absentee ballot factor cited by DiCamillo.[9] Tarrance also reports that his own firm’s pre-election polls done for the Deukmejian campaign showed the race as having closed from a wide lead for Bradley one month prior to the election down to a statistical dead heat by the day of the election.”
“Sal Russo, a consultant for Deukmejian in the race has said that another private pollster working for the campaign, Lawrence Research, also accurately captured the late surge in favor of Deukmejian, polling as late as the night before the election. According to Russo, that firm’s prediction after its final poll was an extremely narrow victory for Deukmejian.”
“Blair Levin, a staffer on the Bradley campaign in 1982 said that as he reviewed early returns at a Bradley hotel on election night, he saw that Deukmejian would probably win. In those early returns, he had taken particular note of the high number of absentee ballots, as well as a higher-than-expected turnout in California’s Central Valley by conservative voters who had been mobilized to defeat the handgun ballot initiative mentioned by DiCamillo.”
“In 2008, several political analysts[60][61][62][63] discussing the Bradley effect referred to a study authored by Daniel J. Hopkins, a post-doctoral fellow in Harvard University’s Department of Government, which sought to determine whether the Bradley effect theory was valid, and whether an analogous phenomenon might be observed in races between a female candidate and a male candidate. Hopkins analyzed data from 133 elections between 1989 and 2006, compared the results of those elections to the corresponding pre-election poll numbers, and considered some of the alternate explanations which have been offered for any discrepancies therein. The study concluded finally that the Bradley effect was a real phenomenon, amounting to a median gap of 3.1 percentage points before 1996, but that it was likely not the sole factor in those discrepancies, and further that it had ceased to manifest itself at all by 1996. The study also suggested a connection between the Bradley effect and the level of racial rhetoric exhibited in the discussion of the political issues of the day. It asserted that the timing of the disappearance of the Bradley effect coincided with that of a decrease in such rhetoric in American politics over such potentially racially-charged issues as crime and welfare. The study found no evidence of a corresponding effect based upon gender – in fact, female Senate candidates received on average 1.2 percentage points more votes than polls had predicted.[64]”
One might note that a median gap of 3.1 percentage points is fairly close to the accuracy of most election polls (about 3 percent).
Russell
I think the problem lies with: “properly adjusted to match the gender, age, race, and party affiliation of the electorate”. If there’s something we’ve discovered, it’s that gender and race are poor predictors for whether somebody supports marriage for gay and lesbian couples. While party affiliation and age are better, I think neither are that great either. I think religiosity might be a better measure, and that’s not controlled for.
Thus, I think they may be overweighting some sort of “fraud” here.
Wen
The whole voting business on gay rights is fraudulent.
Wen
Ok so maybe it was indeed fraudulent (prop8), then now what?
JasonS
the entire prop system has to go. nothing will ever seem right in California until the constitution is rewritten to be modern and make sense.
B
No. 18 · Russell: “If there’s something we’ve discovered, it’s that gender and race are poor predictors for whether somebody supports marriage for gay and lesbian couples. While party affiliation and age are better, I think neither are that great either. I think religiosity might be a better measure, and that’s not controlled for.”
Except they used the same sample for Proposition 4, which (would have required parental notification and a waiting period for teenage abortions.) That’s also a hot-button issue for many religious people, and those specific religious people are frequently anti-gay as well.
So, they’ve partially controlled for religiosity – the weighting they used for various categories predicted the Prop 4 vote to within 1 percent, and that should have been a hot-button issue for conservative religious people too. Why Prop 4 came out pretty accurately and Prop 8 didn’t, when the same individuals were in polled for both, is not clear.
WasProp8Straight?
New website launched to help people understand this particular study and the issues that surround it. Come check it out at http://www.wasprop8straight.org.
The site includes:
–introduction and executive summary for the report that aren’t included at the report link above but that are easier for most people to understand than the report itself
–frequently asked questions
–links to election integrity organizations
–ACTIONS you can take if you’re pissed off about this situation. We’re set up for you to write emails directly to the Secretary of State, calling for an investigation and a DIVORCE. The marriage of electronic voting and California’s elections must end!
Thanks for publishing the article and for all the comments, especially the thoughtful ones. One little note about the article title: It’s not *voter* fraud. The voters did nothing wrong. It’s the possibility of *election* fraud we’re talkin’ about!
Charlie
This analysis is flawed. It’s a gay “bradley effect”. People simply lie to the exit polls so they aren’t viewed as bigots, or the questions were leading or biased which caused the population to diverge from the actual results. That election watchdog group HAS no credible academics in it.
Charlie
@ No. 17 · B
That study denys a broad generalizable theory of a “bradley effect”, it does not reject the notion that a bradley effect can’t happen in certian political contexts. My research analysis has indicated for the gap between pre and post exit polling for gay marriage issues in the last few election cycle shows a divergance of at least 7-8 percent for more than half of the states.
Charlie
P.S the author of the article is not a political scientist. His PH.D was in Ph.D. in geomorphology. He has a bunch of really bad blogs during the 2004 elections about the bush administration. I’d take anything that he says with a grain of salt.
WasProp8Straight?
@Charlie #24-26:
Some people probably did lie. But probably not as many as 17.7%, which is the biggest difference between polling results and official results found in the study.
You’re right that the analyst and author of the study, Richard Hayes Phillips, has a Ph.D. in geomorphology. His specialty is finding anomalous data. In other words, looking at a sea of data and finding the data points that jump out as peculiar. He learned this studying geomorphology and has spent the last five years applying it to analyzing elections. A person being smart and flexible enough to apply something they learned in one field to another field does not make them a charlatan.
He is not a blogger and never has been.
jazlynn
Im gonna let you in on something black people Learned a while ago…NOBODY LIKES YOUR GAY ASS!!! No they don’t all where Protect Marriage badges and they don’t all express their opinions vocally but they have no love for the gay lifestyle. They smile in your face and in front of cameras to look…progressive. That’s why prop 8 passed evryone who claims to be on your side isn’t.