Did Media Declaring Hillary Won Debate Influence Polls? -TYT

[HerbChestnut]

Thought this was a pretty good segment, and despite the title was actually pretty fair to both sides by the end. Worth watching through even if you might not agree with the sentiment.

[link:

|

[reformist2]

1. So 60% of those polled didn't even watch the debates. Wow.

[cprise]

10. They could break it down by who watched and who didn't

but they didn't and even though they have the data... I think they won't go there.

By showing only the combined data including the non-watchers, they are protecting Clinton's incumbent lead... using it to reinforce itself.

[uponit7771]

14. The NH Poll that had Hillary winning by wide margin did break it down by who's watched

[cprise]

16. How much did she gain? :)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. In New Hampshire, please judge for yourself

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251696854

[sufrommich]

15. Do you think polling questions were changed just to make

Sanders look bad or do you think these questions have also been used to gauge public opinion in the past? I'm just curious to know if Sanders supporters who buy into this conspiracy have ever looked at debate polls from past debates.

[reformist2]

20. It shouldn't surprise anyone if some of those campaign funds find their way into pollster pockets...

Just saying. It's not a "conspiracy" - it's everyday corruption. You don't have to be a big bad multinational corporation to play that game, you know.

[elleng]

2. Ignorance, the preferred way of doing 'business' in this country.

[ohheckyeah]

3. LOL

They wrapped up with how irrelevant these polls are after discussing who won for over 8 minutes, not to mention all the time spent researching the methodology.

[Uncle Joe]

4. The answer to OP title question is yes, without a doubt.

Thanks for the thread, HerbChestnut.

[Skwmom]

5. Of course. That is what you call a no brainer.

Even some people that watched can have their opinion swayed when all they hear is Hillary Won! Hillary Won! Hillary Won! Hillary Won! Hillary Won! Hillary Won! Hillary Won! Hillary Won! Hillary Won! Hillary Won! Hillary Won!

[Scootaloo]

7. And now back to the trump-talk!

Other candidates? Who? where? What?

[Bernblu]

6. Of course they did.

It's reprehensible, what the media did. As soon as the debate was over they shouted out "Hillary Won" and then they took polls that included people who did not watch the debate. Of course they are going to say "Hillary Won" because the media told them she won! Then the media uses these polls to confirm that she did in fact win. Unbelievable! I feel like I'm living in the old USSR where Pravda told the public who won!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. Let's do this exercise:

If you believe that the consensus among the public that Hillary Clinton won the debate was the product of media influence let's submit a tape of the debate to ten randomly chosen college debate coaches and ask them who they believe won based on the commonly used criteria to determine debate winners:

-Organization And Clarity
-Use Of argument
-Use Of Cross Examination And Rebuttal
-Presentation

If I am compensated for my time and their (college debate coaches) time I will do all the leg work. In fact, if at least eight out of the ten don't give the debate to Hillary I will eat all the costs.

[HerbChestnut]

12. You think there might be a difference...

between what professional debate coaches see in a debate compared to regular people?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. They actually saw it the same way. Hillary won, as I predicted.

The suggestion that the public said Hillary won the debate because the pundits told them to say so is patently absurd. If you were scoring it like a fight it was as close as the recent Mayweather-Berto fight.


That being said it is my dispassionate opinion that all our stellar candidates acquitted themselves admirably and provided a stark contrast with their Republican opponents.

[cprise]

9. Corporate media like to pretend corruption isn't *their* problem

But they are embedded in the oligarchy like the rest of the establishment. They wouldn't be working there if they were really objective or if they weren't predisposed to see outsiders negatively... there is too much concentrated interest in money and power there.

And I don't think they ever atoned for the way they derided Gore and coddled Bush in 2000. They repeated accusations of lying about Gore without any examples other than the erroneous one about his 'Internet' quip. Gore was a regulator, and big business wanted to DE-regulate further. It wasn't enough that Gore had capitalist bona fides like co-founding the DLC; The establishment wanted the kind of capitalist scoundrels that Karl Marx would have recognized from his day.

These days, Hillary doesn't hang with the Gores much if at all. She actually prefers Bush associates for company. If Gore comes out against her, I won't be surprised.

[Smarmie Doofus]

11. The presidential debate is the very birthplace of "spin".

So: of course.

One thing these people are good at ( and they're aren't MANY) is selling bad products to a lightly-informed and insufficiently discerning audience.

[uponit7771]

13. Sanders was unprepared on many questions and was not the better debater than Hillary that night