The Washington post has a story about the “Acknowledged Inaccuracies in 2004 Exit Polls.” But the reasons are still unclear. They seem to want to blame Republican voters’ reluctance to talk to exit pollsters.
The differences between the final exit poll results and the vote count revived criticisms of the exit polls fueled by consecutive election-night debacles in 2000 and 2002. They also fueled assertions that the exit poll results were accurate and that it was the vote count that was flawed or deliberately manipulated to deliver the election to Bush.
The analysis found no evidence of fraud resulting from the rigging of voting equipment, a contention made repeatedly by those who question the 2004 vote.
[Report authors] Lenski and Mitofsky compared the exit-polling results with the final vote tally in 1,460 precincts where interviews were conducted and vote returns were available.
“Our investigation of the differences between the exit poll estimates and the actual vote count point to one primary reason: in a number of precincts a higher than average within-precinct error most likely due to Kerry voters participating in the exit polls at a higher rate than Bush voters. . . . While the size of the average exit poll error has varied [in past elections], it was higher in 2004 than in previous years for which we have data,” Lenski and Mitofsky wrote.
But they acknowledged in the report that they remain at a loss to explain precisely why Bush supporters, or Republicans generally, were more likely to refuse to be interviewed than Kerry voters.
I have another question: Are Republican voters less likely to participate in an exit poll than, say, a telephone poll? That they were in exit polls seems a pretty easy answer with, as the authors admit, no evidence to back it up.