Defending Democracy

Watch The Exit Polls

By Jack Random

When Florida was called for Albert Gore on the evening of November 2, 2000, it was based on tried-and-true exit polling data. When the call was subsequently reversed, the company charged with exit polling came under intense criticism. In the end, when the day was done and the last ballot cast in the United States Supreme Court, few media outlets recanted that criticism despite the indelible fact: the exit polls got it right.

In the 2004 election, every mainstream media outlet will practice a policy of extreme caution. Data from the exit polls in all battleground states will be cast in a shadow of doubt. Broadcasters and pundits will discuss margins of error and flaws in methodology, drawing upon diversionary tactics to avoid making logical inferences. In past elections, there has always been a race to be the first to pronounce winners and losers. This year, no one will want to lay his or her journalistic integrity on the line.

The people should look at it quite differently. If the exit polls run contrary to the eventual results, it is compelling evidence of election fraud.

Exit polls are separate and distinct from pre-election polling in that there is no significant bias in the data pool. Pre-election polls are dependent on telecommunications technology. It is estimated that only 40% of the electorate is accessible to pollsters. Cell phone users are beyond their reach; many monitor calls and do not answer automated calls, while others simply do not cooperate. One frequently cited poll was exposed when it was revealed that a disproportionate number of respondents were members of the Republican Party. By contrast, exit pollsters ask real voters emerging from the polls one simple question: For whom did you cast your vote? Barring corruption of the pollsters, themselves, exit polls have an outstanding record of accuracy.

On Election Day, watch the exit polls closely. In all likelihood, they will tell the hard, cold truth of numbers. If the numbers say (as they did in 2000) that the Democrat has won the state of Florida, yet the president issues a denial and the president’s brother (Florida Governor Jeb Bush) dashes for the phone, it is a clear signal that the operatives are in play and democracy is in peril.

After the travesty of the millennial election, there is much more than the White House at stake in this critical election. The biggest loser in the year 2000 was neither Al Gore (loser of the electoral college poll) nor George Bush (loser of the popular vote). The biggest winners were the political operatives, who gamed the system from every conceivable angle, but the biggest loser was American democracy.

As it stands now, the world is wondering if we even care. Even as we carry the banner of democracy in foreign lands, even as we wage war in democracy’s name, our citizens do not appear disturbed that our president failed to receive more votes than his chief rival did.

As our founders so frequently reminded us, democracy is a treasure that must be constantly and vigorously defended. If we once again allow the operatives to determine our leadership and, therefore, the course of the nation, we will have failed in our most sacred duty.

Defenders of democracy took a vow after the fiasco in Florida 2000. It was not a vow of partisanship for the Democrats were equally to blame for that betrayal. It was a pledge of allegiance to democracy itself: Never again.

Jazz.

JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES (CROW DOG PRESS) AND GHOST DANCE INSURRECTION (DRY BONES PRESS). HIS COMMENTARIES HAVE BEEN POSTED ON DISSIDENT VOICE, COUNTERPUNCH, THE ALBION MONITOR, THE AGONIST, BUZZLE.COM, TRINICENTER, MATRIX MASTERS AND OTHER SITES. SEE WWW.JACKRANDOM.COM.