I was proven wrong? Just because I did not bother to address the rest of your erroneous response, both because I felt it was just an attempt by you (ironically) to divert from the theme of this thread and out of pity, does not mean I acquiesced.
But since you have challenged me;
Let us first go to
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/ for the actual EC map.
Then quickly click back to the ARG pre-election map that I had provided at
http://www.electoral-vote.com/2004/p.../American.html.
Now, in that web page, click on the names fo the other well-known pollsters; Gallup, Mason-Dixon, Quinnipiac, etc, to see their equivalent maps.
Of course, you can't count EC points on any of these pre-election maps, because many of the states are just "barely Kerry", "barely Bush", "too close", etc. ARG was recognizing that many of the states, like Ohio, were just too close to call (and they were proven right about that too). If you
were counting EC points for those, then you probably shouldn't admit that.
But just using plain eyesight and looking at the color spreads on these maps makes it pretty clear how astoundingly accurate ARG's predictions were compared to all of the other pollsters. Are you unwilling to accept that? Are you going to tell me that Research 2000 or Quinnipiac did a better job predicting the results than ARG did? And ARG is the polling firm that you are now trying to convince us is unable to conduct a simple one-question one-state telephone poll? As John Stossel says "Give me a break".