I just want to comment on the tweet shown here that exit polls are ânot very goodâ. That is generally bull pucky. Exit polls were the gold standard of polling, used in many countries that take a long time to hand-count their votes to give a preliminary outcome. It was nearly the same here - until 2004 - because exit polls are also good for something else, detecting election fraud. That year, the exit polls in Ohio were consistently showing John Kerry winning the state. Then suddenly, after Midnight, the vote totals suddenly flipped for Bush and the networks said it must be faulty exit polls, instead of what it really was - Karl Rove and Ohio Sec. of State Ken Blackwell effing with the voting results by running them through a Republican-controlled server in Tennessee to steal the state, and the election for Dubya. After that, the corporate media suddenly decided that exit polls were unreliable. They werenât and certainly donât have to be. After all, youâre asking people in carefully selected representative precincts around the country what they already did, not what they might do. They usually are accurate to within 2%. So, if the exit polling looks squirrely, that is when your spidey-sense should start tingling about election fraud, not faulty polling.