HA! HA! HA! CNN ignores their own poll numbers and calls Clinton the winner!

[FourScore]

CNN's current headline says:
CLINTON'S CONFIDENT SWEEP
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/13/politics/democratic-debate-updates/index.html

Even though their own online poll (changing by the split second) basically says this:

Clinton 11%
Sanders 82%
O'Malley 4%
Webb 2%
Chaffee 1%

https://www.facebook.com/cnn/app_1667241686824039

wow.

(The poll links to their facebook page where anyone can vote, whether you have a facebook account or not.)

[hrmjustin]

1. Online polls are meaningless unless they are scientific.

[Scootaloo]

5. However they're the method by which CNN "calls" debates

[hrmjustin]

26. They declared her the winner because in tgeir opinion she was.

You can argue it but online polls are meaningless.

[Scootaloo]

49. However, they are the means by which CNN calls their debates.

I'm not sure what your struggle with understanding this is.

[hrmjustin]

51. Not their online poll. They don't use their online polls.

They uuse a phone poll.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

6. Honestly, would you be saying that if the numbers were reversed? Keep it 100, now! nt

[hrmjustin]

21. The same thing. Have you ever seen me tout online polls? No you haven't.

[tritsofme]

28. I certainly would. These polls are meaningless.

It's the sort of thing Ron Paul was famous for dominating, in a way that in no way reflected his real world support.

[mythology]

46. Are you admitting that you are fine with touting something that you know is meaningless?

Non-scientific polls are no different than random noise.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

52. Where have I said they mean something? I'm saying if the numbers were reversed, you would be

posting them too. Don't act like you wouldn't because everyone knows full well you would.

[MissDeeds]

61. Yup

If HRC was ahead in the polls, her supporters would be singing a different tune.

[Drunken Irishman]

75. Online polls are woefully unreliable...

Case in point:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/kucinich-the-surprise-winner-in-virginia-dems-poll-58926692.html

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2007/08/kucinich-wins-debate-poll-abc-covers-results

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread314452/pg1

That last poll is important because it had him beating both Hillary and Obama, with Mike Gravel coming in a strong third. In no way did the final results of the 2008 primary mirror those polls. You could combine and double Kucinich's and Gravel's support from that election and it wouldn't have put a dent in either Hillary or Obama's poll numbers.

Online polls also favored Ron Paul immensely in 2012 and he came nowhere near winning the GOP nomination.

They're not scientific. They can be voted on by anyone - whether eligible to vote or even American - and generally favor a demographic that appeals to Paul, Kucinich and Sanders voters (namely online folks).

I remember years ago there was a Facebook poll where over 200,000 people voted and called Obama the worst president in American history.

Should we take that as scientific?

[Fawke Em]

32. They're more of a bellweather than a pundit poll.

Good God.

[hrmjustin]

39. No they are not. Some of them you can vote vote than once.

You can get your friends to vote in them as well. DUers regularly ask people to Du a polls.

It is meaningless.

[840high]

60. I was allowed one vote.

[hrmjustin]

62. It is still not scientific.

[Fawke Em]

84. So a pundit's opinion carries more weight than the average

person's enthusiasm in your book?

I wish there was a "point and laugh" smiley.

While some online polls can be rigged by clearing your cookies, many more now use your IP address and won't allow you to vote more than once.

I'm sure some tech savvy folks can and will use proxy servers to vote more than once, the average person doesn't have time for that and only vote once.

But, the fact that you think that a person who earns their money by cheerleading the status quo carries more weight than all the polls and focus groups is telling.

[hrmjustin]

85. I take pundits and internet polls for what they are.

Noise.

[hrmjustin]

82. I mean methodology.

[upaloopa]

2. On line polls don't mean shit

They are not a random sample so the mean nothing

[Fearless]

14. They are literally exactly a random sample! Seriously!?

A random sample isn't cherry picking areas or cold calling the elderly.

[Metric System]

29. Self-selecting sample.

[Fearless]

56. People also self-select to GO VOTE

[mythology]

55. No. Just no

It's really frustrating how little people understand about polling. A self-selected online poll is worthless. Absolutely worthless. It's just as worthless as the old MSNBC poll that alleged to show that 85% of people wanted Bush impeached.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=110x9869

A random sample does not mean picking numbers like you would in the lottery. It means getting a representative random sample of a known population. Online polls pre-select for people who have internet access - a population that skews younger and whiter. Oddly also where Sanders draws most of his support.

The only real way to know who "won" a debate is to look at multiple representative scientific polls after the debate to compare to before the debate.

[Fearless]

57. Do you not think that 85% of MSNBC viewers during the Olbermann era wanted Bush impeached??

Serously?

[Lorien]

45. .

[Lyric]

3. Online polls are never accurate.

How many times have we seen a poll Freeped? Du'ers really ought to know better :/

[ChisolmTrailDem]

7. Honestly, would you be saying that if the numbers were reversed? Keep it 100, now! nt

[stevenleser]

10. Yes, we all would. DUers have been saying this since DU began. nt

[ChisolmTrailDem]

12. No you wouldn't. You would be posting them with glee! nt

[stevenleser]

16. Nope, I don't believe online polls mean anything. A properly conducted scientific poll it isnt. nt

[Robbins]

13. when you start attacking polls

your in trouble.2012 comes to mind.

[stevenleser]

19. Correct. Attacking real empirical polls means you are in a bad place. Not online polls. nt

[Godhumor]

33. Please, please tell me you understand why these online polls aren't the same as the unskewed guy

Because a little piece of my statistician soul will die if you don't.

[Roy Ellefson]

50. except

except an online poll for an already self selecting population (viewers of the debate) is actually reliable. There is no way to poll a random sample of the population on something that the population did not participate in. Online polls are every bit as valid as any poll in this case.

[kcjohn1]

4. You should have heard

Their focus group. Overwhelming Bernie. Their reporter said majority said Bernie cares about them the most (huge drop for Hillary). When they went back to Jake, main announcer, no comment on how that goes against their dribble about Hillary knocking it out of the park, but straight into "where was Bernie weak?"

[in_cog_ni_to]

17. That was GREAT! Bam, bam,bam 3-4 in a row for Bernie. Talking heads ignored it, of course. n/t

[workinclasszero]

8. Online polls are meaningless unless they are scientific

But you Bernie fans keep on keepin on.

[Fearless]

18. You are parroting the same meme the other Hillary supporters are...

What exactly do you consider scientific??

[workinclasszero]

24. When a scientific fact becomes a meme to you

Its time to stop and think if you really want to go down that road, you know?

[Fearless]

30. Again, I asked you how you define "scientific"

And you respond with gibberish.

[workinclasszero]

71. I'm not here to work for you

Do your own research jeez

[Fearless]

72. It's ok, I know "scientific" is just the new meme.

[workinclasszero]

73. You know what you want to know

Good luck with that.

[Fearless]

74. I know that "scientific" is the word being used to discredit Bernie's victory tonight.

It's used in more than a dozen posts by Hillary supporters across this board in the last two hours.

It's not a coincidence. But have a nice day regardless.

[Metric System]

34. Take a stats class. Seriously.

[Fearless]

37. Again, not hearing an actual definition for your meme "scientific" poll requirement

[Metric System]

42. Jesus, it's not a meme! Explanation from Gallup in pdf at link:

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://media.gallup.com/muslimwestfacts/PDF/PollingAndHowToUseItR1drevENG.pdf&ved=0CDEQFjAGahUKEwjj8obTkcHIAhXBOz4KHYLmDks&usg=AFQjCNG4PCHCbXCixaQb8HnzCM4GVg6X9g&sig2=bi6fwIZ8rBafDQW2EG9NJA

[Fearless]

53. Ahh finally, a definition of "scientific"

Funny thing is, it's irrelevant.

The larger the sample size, the less it matters. When tens of thousands of people vote versus 500 to 1000 in PPP polls, any possibility of bias tends to 0.

[HooptieWagon]

9. The elites are always the last to know a revolution is coming.

They live in their little bubbles, in their high rise offices, their country clubs, their gated communities. In the real world, people are hurting and pissed.

[Cheese Sandwich]

11. And their focus group had similar results for Sanders

The disconnect is very noticeable between the corporate media reaction and the people's reaction.

[senz]

27. ^^^ this ^^^

The people vs. the corporations.

No wonder righties want to make voting as difficult as possible.

[moobu2]

15. The poll showing Bernie Sanders winning was a Facebook poll.

[Fearless]

22. Also Slate, Time, CNN, CNN's panel, and HuffPo... But yeah they must be ALL wrong

Regardless of the fact that they're all showing the same results.

[moobu2]

31. Anybody that really thinks Bernie Sanders won

will change their tune in the next few days when they see Hillary's lead widen. Bernie won? That's funny.

[Fearless]

36. Ahh... based off "scientific" polls no doubt.

Good luck.

You'll need it.

[Fawke Em]

40. Flat, nasal voices don't win. Saaahhh rrrryyy.

[Godhumor]

41. Right or wrong implies those polls can accurately show a winner. They can't

Failure to understand that is a failure to understand statistics.

[Fearless]

43. They do accurately show what they're supposed to.

The polls ask for people's opinions. People give them.

It's very simple.

[FourScore]

25. Go on CNNs website to vote, and you will see that their homepage poll links to their facebook page.

Laugh if you like, but it is what they are making analysis of.

[Lorien]

47. EVERY online poll shows benie winning by at LEAST 74%

Time, CNN, Fox, NBC, you name it. They are all the same.

[JaneyVee]

20. Hillary did win it.

What debate were you watching?

[Fearless]

23. The one anchored in reality?

[workinclasszero]

35. Everybody outside of the Bernie Underground is giving it to Hillary

But I knew this was going to happen in any event here. Online click-bait polls for Bernie LOLZ

[moobu2]

38. Somebody must have fallen asleep

when Bernie was talking and had a dream he won or something.

[alcibiades_mystery]

59. They were watching with their crew in GD:Primaries

They really are going to need a sad nap when Hillary wins Iowa and then New Hampshire. It's pretty clear at this point that they believe their own hype.

[workinclasszero]

63. "It's pretty clear at this point that they believe their own hype."

Yeah cause all the BS internet polls and all their friends support Bernie. And they think that's the whole world.

Look at Rmoney's campaign with the unskew the polls guy and "everybody I know is voting for Romney" LOL

Hundreds of online unscientific polls and Fox news agreed that President Obama was toast! LOL

Bernie's backers are totally going down the same road. Super Tuesday next March will be a shocking day for them, undoubtedly.

[alcibiades_mystery]

64. Reality will set in for the smart ones with New Hampshire

I agree it will take the duller blades through Super Tuesday to gather that they've been deluding themselves.

[workinclasszero]

70. I hope you are right

eom

[DaveT]

44. I think online polling has one thing in common

with scientific polling -- not worth a hell of a lot, when the goofy question is who "Won"?

The polling, the analysis of the polling, the analysis of the analysis of the polling -- it all wraps back around itself as part of the 24/7 campaign. All the corporate media always put their collective thumb on the scale when they tell you who "won" a debate. Sanders is doing as well as he is mainly because a lot of people are just not paying attention to the instruction coming out of the idiot box. It remains to be seen whether enough people share that notion for him to become President. Personally, he's got my vote. Beyond that, eventually the Democrats will have a convention and we'll all find out together who won.



Does anybody remember Al Gore and Ross Perot? The "analysis" was unanimous. Gore chewed up the little Texan and spit him out. About half a decade later, Gore offered the exact same kind of condescending gas in his debate with W. Bush -- but the "analysis" condemned him for his poor debate performance.

America, you gotta love it.

[R B Garr]

48. Because they knew it was unreliable. I saw

It being slammed with disagree voted before she started speaking.

[dilby]

54. Sanders was awesome, he has 8 voters in this house right now.

Did a little debate party tonight and it was great seeing the excitement in everyone here tonight.

[Dem2]

58. I felt that she won.

I would ignore the online polls and use my own opinion. What did you think?

[ChiciB1]

65. So Polls For THIS Debate Are For THIS Debate And

I do think Bernie got the big bump and I feel great about it. But for now it's just something for him to build on and leap forward. I don't give a rat's ass what the MSM has to say right now they have their own agenda and will do what their masters tell them.

This is just beginning and people are just getting to know WHO Bernie is. People posting polls at this point in time for one state or another are premature.

As a Bernie supporter I think he will keep climbing. People know who Hillary is, they're just beginning to know Bernie so I'm happy about tonight. The American people seem to be warming up to him nicely!

[in_cog_ni_to]

66. To all the sore losers poo-pooing the Facebook poll - Anderson Cooper just Announced the (rerun)

"CNN FACEBOOK Debate." His words, not mine. CNN sent REAL PEOPLE, the VOTERS, to their Facebook page to vote. People voted. Hillary lost, BIG, so stop being sore losers and poo-pooing their online poll.

[StevieM]

69. I'm sorry, but Hillary did not lose, let alone lose BIG. It doesn't matter who sponsored the debate.

The point about FB is that it is not a scientific poll. And none of these on-line polls can be considered indicative of victory or defeat.

In the coming days there will be scientifically conducted polls released, ones that use proper sampling methods. Maybe Sanders will win one of those polls and get to be called the winner of the debate. For the time being, however, it has not yet happened.

[Starry Messenger]

67. Wow, people really think these online self-selected surveys are legit!

Oh dear! Well, keep on keeping on.

[moobu2]

68. Only when it shows their candidate in the lead

otherwise polls don't matter.

[RichVRichV]

76. I would say the polls saying Bernie won are about as meaningful as the pundits saying Hillary won.

Both are entertaining, neither are worth a damn in reality (unless your reality is about shaping reality).



The only online thing that makes me happy from tonight (other then the constant entertaining bickering on this site over "my candidate was better&quot was the massive google search spike on Bernie Sanders name right after the debate ended. I didn't care that he tried to debate with anyone or that he needed to beat anyone or "win the debate".

All I really wanted Bernie to do going in was get his message out to as many people as possible from the debate. Based on the search spike after the debate ended about him I'd say mission accomplished. That brought a very big smile to my face.

The tweet about search for "'Socialism' spiking off the charts" from Merriam-Webster also made me very happy. People are finally starting to wake up little by little.

[yuiyoshida]

77. WAIT! WAIT! WAIT!

DOES THIS MEAN, we will have to have a DEBATE to settle who won the debate? If that's the case, I am not playing this any more.

[nxylas]

78. So, what *did* CNN based their assessment on?

Online polls are meaningless, I don't dispute that. But a CNN headline is somehow authoritative?

[kelliekat44]

80. Clinton is simply more experienced and more Presidential than Bernie...there is more to running the

than free college tuition, hating billionaires. Bernie is very appealing to a lot of us but realistically he will not win for the Dems nationally and if debt, and deficit mean anything the notion of Social Security bowing to free tuition will bury us.

[FourScore]

86. so you haven't heard him speak, I guess.

The free tuituon is to be paid for through a tax on Wall Street speculative transactions.

[workinclasszero]

83. Unscientific pseudo-polls are widespread and sometimes entertaining,

but they never provide the kind of information that belongs in a serious report. Examples include 900-number call-in polls, man-on-the-street surveys, many Internet polls, shopping mall polls, and even the classic toilet tissue poll featuring pictures of the candidates on each roll.

One major distinguishing difference between scientific and unscientific polls is who picks the respondents for the survey. In a scientific poll, the pollster identifies and seeks out the people to be interviewed. In an unscientific poll, the respondents usually "volunteer" their opinions, selecting themselves for the poll.

http://www.ncpp.org/?q=node/4