QuoteErm, isn't the premise of this thread how Obama will lose in the fall due to other minorities' racism toward blacks (and especially black politicians)? And citing polling data showing how flawed that premise is makes it somehow "off point"? Continuing to blather on without addressing this glaring discrepancy is making me question your intelligence, vercingetorix.
i was pointing out the flaw in bringing up the kerry/bush, gore/bush comparison. these are not on point because both candidates in that poll were white. the fact that Latinos in LA may or may not find McCain less palatable as a candidate does not speak to the issue of racist leanings within the Latino community towards blacks. the data i use shows a trend in this area. ex post data is always better than pre-vote polling data. the reason for this is that people are not candid when asked racially loaded questions. never rely on people to truthfully answer for whom they voted. instead use census data, voter registration records and statistical analysis. this is how you determine what demographics voted for whom. these numbers show that latinos don't vote for blacks in large numbers when they are up against hispanics or whites.
Ooooooo-K. First things first: this poll is not a poll of "Latinos in LA," but a Los Angeles Times article about multiple nationwide polls of Latinos. Second, you provide no evidence on why one cannot rely on exit polls or "pre-vote polling data" instead of your "census data, voter registration records and statistical analysis," none of which, I might add, you actually do in this thread. What the polls the LA Times cites indicate are that Latinos nationwide are moving toward the Democratic Party, which is fairly in line with what the rest of the country is doing. Now if you actually want to make the opposite argument, back it up. But don't try and distract with some meta-issue such as exit polls and pre-voting polls being unreliable due to some bizarre Wilder effect that you aren't interested in actually proving.
exit polls are notoriously unreliable. or did you forget the whole kerry-bush election?
Do you even read the links you cite? All of those are stories about *EARLY* exit polls, those that are released in the afternoon without all of the exit polling having been completed. The notoriety of these early polls is why networks this year (and 2006) waited until later in the evening before starting to cite data from them.
So yes, *EARLY* exit polls are bad. But that does not make *exit polls* bad. Jesus. And yeah, way to continue pushing your retarded meta-argument about exit-poll and polling reliability instead of actually addressing the flaws in the topic of your own god damn thread.