When will the 'scientific polls' start polling all potential primary voters?

[sabrina 1]

Just wondering, so far I've seen just one poll of Independent voters which showed Bernie way ahead of Hillary.

And while it's hard to poll non-registered voters, we have been signing up people from that huge demographic for Bernie, getting them back into the system, in open primary states they cannot be tracked by polls.

Here in NY however, a closed primary state with a ridiculously early registration date, planned to occur before the first debate, we managed to get some previously non voters registered as Democrats. So far, not one of them has been polled.

[Cali_Democrat]

1. Don't worry. Sanders is winning all 50 states. nt

[sabrina 1]

3. Stalkers give me the creeps. I appear to have a couple of them. Tells me

they are extremely worried about Bernie's success, however following people around internet forums with lame comments like this, IS very creepy.

I can't imagine doing such a thing. But then I don't have a stalker personality and would prefer to openly and honestly discuss issues.

Which stalkers I know, never do.

[Amimnoch]

7. If they are, shame on them.

Having a couple myself, I sympathize. Even on different sides of the aisle, wrong is still wrong.

Of those who do much posting from the other candidates side, I've found you refreshing, respectful, and focused on the positive more than going after the negative.

[questionseverything]

63. cali democrat and bravenak are the same person?

[sabrina 1]

66. Thank you, I thought it was fairly obvious to whom my comment was directed Someone is in the wrong

thread apparently!

[sabrina 1]

64. Thank you, I appreciate that and return the compliment. I respect the choices other people

make and have noticed those who support Hillary, such as yourself, who do not engage in the kind of behavior you mention, and what I referred to. Thank you for making DU a better place!!

[MineralMan]

12. Hmm...me, too.

Following people around and making lame comments. It is creepy. On the other hand, when someone comments on something I posted as an OP on DU, I never think of their comments as stalkerish. I mean, I did post the OP and expected that people might read it and, with luck, remember it.

Commenting about an OP someone has posted isn't anything like stalking. Not even close.

Now, following people around and commenting on what they said a decade or so ago somewhere else? That's a bit suspicious, it seems to me. But not commenting on recent OPs someone has posted. That's just normal DU behavior, I think.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. I have several stalkers but I can no longer hear them because they are on ignore.

eom

[MineralMan]

33. I never use DU's Ignore feature.

That way, nobody can talk behind my back in public. I see it all. I tried Ignore for a while, during the time the Meta Forum was still alive. Then I emptied my list one day. What a revelation that was! Now, I'll never Ignore anyone again. Nope.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. You are of the nicest posters here. Sad folks would speak ill of you...

eom

[MineralMan]

44. Well, I'm one of the most careful, anyhow.

I learn from experience.

[sabrina 1]

68. I haven't noticed anyone following you around. You are not informed on this situation.. Better to

NOT comment on situations you are not familiar with. This wasn't about you at all.

[MineralMan]

88. Oh, yah, OK then.

I remember. I do.

[sabrina 1]

90. We all remember ....

[bravenak]

28. Some are very rude to me.

[bravenak]

30. Of course! I believe certain people are angered by truth.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. What did Ice Cube say ?

"Speak the truth and people lose their mind."

[bravenak]

34. As we have seen this past few months!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. I am here to comfort them but that doesn't mean I won't stand my ground.

eom

[bravenak]

46. They will need us to be there to keep their spirits up.

As Hillary continues to climb to the sky, we will need to be extra kind to others. Be magnanimous, if you will...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. They can lean on us

[bravenak]

50. My Jam!!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. That was an awesome movie...

Remember how he handled that chubby kid?

[bravenak]

55. Aww! Yep! I think I watched it this month.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. Go ahead and jump..

eom

[bravenak]

57. Ha!nt

[sabrina 1]

74. Yes, they are to the point where they engage in stalking, plotting to 'goad' people etc into

getting hides.

I will tolerate stalking for so long, then I will do as I did here. You were not even in the thread, so nothing to do with you at all, which has now been clarified.

Let me ask you though, why did you NOT correct Democratsincebirth when he mistakenly confused the poster to whom I WAS referring with you? I know I would have immediately done so.

[bravenak]

78. I have no clue what you mean by goading.

If you mean that person who was harassing my via pm, they are now blocked.
Someone else alerted on them and they WERE very rude so I can understand. Them harassing me and accusing me was very disturbing and I needed that to end.
If you think I will sympathize on one hide from a random poster, I cannot. I was alert trolled into four in one day... Why I should care more about whomever than myself?
As far as stalking is concerned... Have you also recieved hate mail threatening hides and alerts from a self described duer who says they outnumber you? If you are accusing me of stalking, that is a serious charge and I'd like to see your evidence or ask that you refrain from further accusations.
My replying to DSB has nothing to do with you and was not intended for you, therefore any accusations of stalking are unfounded.

[sabrina 1]

82. I am referring to the cave-like site which, from one visit there, appeared to be all about

attacking this site and its members.

And where we witnessed a poster admit 'I am goading Cali into a hide'. How sad. I do not remember the name of the site, and won't be visiting it again. I saw no one, from what I witnessed from my short and last visit there, tell that person that they disagreed with that kind of thing.

Skinner says there is no alert stalking going on.

I imagine he has access to the facts.

Your replying to DSB was confirming something that did not happen. I would have corrected him and told him I was not even in the thread at the time of the comment. You did not.

He however has had the courage and decency to apologize for his mistake.

[bravenak]

83. What does that one post you read on your one visit have to do with me?

[sabrina 1]

87. This is now beyond boring. This wasn't about you at all. Sorry if that is a disappointment.

Personally I am always happy to learn that not everything is about me.

But to each their own!

Enjoy the rest of your evening!

I'm off to work on Bernie's election!

[sabrina 1]

71. I think you need to delete this post now that you realize your error, have apologized for it

and the apology has been accepted. Leaving this sub thread continues the impression that Bravenak was in any way involved in this. She was not in the thread as you now realize.

Thank you in advance.

[MineralMan]

36. Personally, I think that is unconscionable behavior.

It's not one of the best things on the internet, that kind of behavior.

We have your back, bravenak. Just roll with it, and we'll back you up.

[bravenak]

45. Thank you, MM.

The primary will soon end and I hope we can all get behind the candidate without further rancor.
I appreciate you guys being a great support.

[MineralMan]

47. A clear Democratic nominee

can't come too soon. I'm ready to work to get our nominee elected. This place will get friendlier again.

[bravenak]

51. I agree. I will do my part!!

I should have already signed up but I keep thinking that after I pick my classes and know my schedule I will decide how to volunteer. I haven't figured out which skills to offer. I'm okay on the phones but hate calling unless it's to gotv.. Calling for money bugs me.
Maybe I can sign up to do outreach on campus. Get some shirts and hand out flyers. Design a website for info and call to actions. Still trying to figure it out.

[sabrina 1]

84. You realize that a false accusation was made here. The poster has apologized

for his mistake. The apology has been accepted by me. The situation had zero to do with anyone but the poster to whom my comment was directed. A jury has made its decision.

So you now have all the information needed to discontinue the false impression you are creating here. It's up to you of course. It's not my credibility at stake.

As I said, you need to refrain from commenting on situations which you are unfamiliar with. As is the case here.

I personally have EVERYONE'S back who is the target of nasty behavior. Not just a select few. I'm sure you are aware of that. Even people with whom I do not normally get along.

I believe in pointing out behavior, as I have here, that is damaging to this site and to its members.

[MineralMan]

85. I take instructions from nobody on what

I need to do on DU. I don't need to tell you why that is. I will post as I see fit here, thanks.

[sabrina 1]

86. I teke no instructions from ANYbody on what I can do here. So I repeat, you are continuing

to promote a false impression, which has now been thoroughly clarified, apologies made and accepted, a jury decision on the issue rendered.

I will continue to point out false claims or impressions being created, especially if they are occurring in my threads, and nobody's 'concerns' about that will prevent me from doing so.

I totally reject advice, which we are treated to regularly as you surely know, from people unless I have the utmost respect for those people.

[MineralMan]

89. Then we are much the same, I suppose,

in that, eh?

[sabrina 1]

91. Well, I've never been in a position here where I had to listen to anyone about my actions.

So probably no, not really!

[sabrina 1]

65. Please, read the thread. I do not see Bravenak in this thread. Go look at the poster to whom I was

referring.

Bravenak has never acted towards me or anyone else I know, as the poster to whom my comment was directed has. It simply amazes me that people do not read before they jump.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. I apologize...I replied in haste and messed up...I apologize again...

But CaliDemocrat responded to a thread...

That's different than commenting on your comments.

[sabrina 1]

69. No problem. You are however uninformed on this situation. I can and do take care of myself and I

have.

Hopefully I will not have to deal with it again.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

70. If anybody is following you around from thread to thread you have every right to be upset...

I do make a distinction between responding to a thread and responding to a post though...


Again, I apologize...

[sabrina 1]

72. Thank you!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

73. You are welcome and again another apology. I messed up badly.

eom

[sabrina 1]

76. We all do that sometimes. I appreciate your acknowledgement though, not everyone is willing to

correct their mistakes ...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

77. I am embarrassed... That was a really big mistake...

eom

[DeadLetterOffice]

62. Results of your jury service

On Tue Oct 27, 2015, 01:46 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Stalkers give me the creeps. I appear to have a couple of them. Tells me
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=733482

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling another poster a "stalker" is uncivil. It's a public message board and she posted an OP. Cali Dem has a right to respond without being called a stalker "with stalker personality."

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Oct 27, 2015, 01:56 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: And your stalker just alerted on you. I just found out my stalker is now a host of DU---he even locked a thread of mine today. Fuck Stalkers--fuck them all.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This doesn't seem like a particularly relevant reply to the previous post, but not hide worthy.

[RandySF]

2. Everyone over 18 is a "potential" voter.

But not necessarily likely to show up.

[daleanime]

54. With the effort, time and money spent trying to ensure some don't show up.....

is that surprising?

[NCTraveler]

75. Not surprising at all.

That's why a poll like this would hold no validity pertaining to the election. With proper questions such a poll could tell us a lot though.

[mythology]

4. When there is some evidence those people will vote

Or vote in significant numbers.

Historically they don't.

To be usefully predictive, it makes sense to only survey people most likely to vote.

[HassleCat]

5. Primary voters

Even in states where independents may vote in either party's primary, most don't, at least compared to those registered as D or R. We have an unusual situation this time, with Sanders troops working to get non-affiliated voters to support Sanders in open primary states, but the polls tend to stick with those registered as Democrats. Some polls even narrow it down further, polling those "very likely" to vote in the primary. It's probably accurate, because it falls into the category of self-fulfilling prophecy. Many independent Sanders supporters will see the constant barrage of polls assuring them that Sanders stands no chance, and they will not bother to vote.

[questionseverything]

61. yes it is called manufactured consent

in 08 everyone was supposedly surprised that hc came in a distant 3rd

[frazzled]

6. They're polling almost exclusively in early primary/caucus states right now

with the occasional anticipated important swing states sometimes as well. Since NYS is neither an early nor swing state, it is not surprising it is not being polled at this time.

Primaries are often difficult to poll. Caucuses are almost impossible to poll. Everyone chill with the polls, whether good or bad for your candidate.

[workinclasszero]

8. You realize that a poll doesn't have to sample every single eligible voter

to be valid if they use the correct scientific methodology right?

[brooklynite]

9. "we have been signing up people from that huge demographic for Bernie, "

You sure about that? I remember a post complaining that this was DNCs job.

[workinclasszero]

11. Yes I remember that thread too

In the meantime while Bernie fans were spamming internet polls...Hillary's ground game in Iowa was signing up every person they could.

And we see some results this morning.


Awesome for Hillary. Bernie, not so much.

[frylock]

100. Then you probably remember the poster stating that Sanders people WERE registering voters..

at those events. Maybe not. It might have been a late night of dinner and drinks with Senator So-and-so and his wife.

[zappaman]

10. I thought they already did?

"Wow! Latest ISideWith Results Show Sanders Winning in All 50 States"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251650529

[MineralMan]

13. Hey! Why are you linking to another OP on DU?

That's not fair. I mean...

[zappaman]

14. It was very memorable.

In this regard...

[MineralMan]

15. Yes, I remember it too, but I'd never bring up something someone

wrote a long time ago like that. That would be rude and, you know, stalkerish.

[zappaman]

18. Maybe 3 weeks ago is "a long time ago" to some people.

Not to most.

[MineralMan]

21. Oh, was it that short a time ago?

Seems like forever to me...so much has happened since then. And now the polls in Iowa. How quickly things change, eh?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. The suggestion there is some inchoate mass waiting to be mobilized that...

The suggestion there is some inchoate mass waiting to be mobilized that only the special people know exists would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

[MineralMan]

31. Oh, that. It's called "The American People"

Everyone talks about that mass of people as if it agrees with them. Democrats, Republicans, individual politicians. They all say, "The American People want...whatever they are trying to sell."

Corollaries are things like "Democrats want..." or "Millennials all vote for..."

I think there's a logical fallacy that uses those as examples. Argumentum ad populum, I believe it is, or "Bandwagon."

As a fallacy, it's one of the most popular in use by political writers.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. It's actually the delusion of grandeur...

Argumentum ad populum just means something is right because a lot of folks say so.

[MineralMan]

41. Well, Wikipedia calls it the reverse of argumentum ad populum.

One claims widespread support for pet ideas, without any actual evidence of that support. It's sort of a different way of using the fallacy, one we see very often in political discussions.

When it's used to claim that "Democrats want Sanders as President," and someone calls the poster on that, the word "Real" is placed before "Democrats" in a lame attempt to qualify the statement, as if there were a definition of "Real Democrats." It's funny stuff, using logical fallacies is.

We see it here very, very often.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. I am always wary of anecdotal data.

eom

[NuclearDem]

16. You would probably benefit from taking a statistics course.

[zappaman]

60. +1000!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. In matters of conscience the law of majority has no place. Gandhi

[NCTraveler]

22. Might want to write the Sanders campaign to see if they will...

release the 'BernPolls' they are commissioning. I'm sure that would provide you with what you are looking for.

Might show fifty state landslide results.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251650529

"I'll remember all this when the next corporate poll shows Bernie beating Hillary and we are told again that they are not relevant!"

"Not my fault if there are no UNscientific polls where Hillary is the winner. I looked to be fair but just couldn't find one."

"Regardless, Bernie wins hands down in all Internet polls, scientific or not."

"And how do we know that they are not calling the same numbers more than once?"

"Voters are voting in all these online polls and Bernie is winining in all of them."

[winter is coming]

23. They won't. The closer we get to the primaries, the more "likely voters" polls you'll see.

It's a decent predictor for many elections, but you can go badly wrong if large numbers of casual voters go to the polls.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. Senator Sanders has hired a pollster...

Let him release his internal polls and then we can speak to the veracity or lack thereof public polls.

[workinclasszero]

40. Senator Sanders has hired a pollster...

Didn't Bernie say he would never hire a pollster, or is that wrong?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. Nothing wrong with being flexible.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/26/politics/bernie-sanders-howard-dean-pollster/

[workinclasszero]

53. Except when they claim Bernie has never changed his views since the beginning of the world

to date.

And if any other mere mortal does they are flip floppers of the worst kind with their finger in the air etc.

Looks like Bernie has his finger in the air now, a day late and a dollar short, I might add.

[frylock]

101. That's wrong..

but I'd be happy to retract my statement and apologize if you can post a link of Sanders making that statement.

[azurnoir]

38. apparently some here don't like that question

we keep seeing polls of REGISTERED Democrats registered with who? In my state you do not name a party when you register to vote, no such question on the form and if there was I'd consider it an invasion of privacy

[Skidmore]

58. That's your state.

We register by party to vote here and you can always change parties even at the door on rhe day of the caucus.

Might I add that our state isn't gerrymandered all to hell either.

[azurnoir]

59. yes I know some states do that

[msongs]

49. people who are non-registered are NOT voters lol nt

[Agnosticsherbet]

79. Get the together and hire a polling company to poll everyone 28 and older.

What do you expect to learn from such a poll?

[George II]

80. The polls have been of DEMOCRATIC voters, not independent voters.

[restorefreedom]

81. when they figure out

how to reach cell using millenials AND become impartial enough to share the real results.

so, never.

[wyldwolf]

92. what weird alternate universe are we in?

[sabrina 1]

94. That was my question.

[wyldwolf]

95. your question is from a weird, alternate universe

Where math and statistics don't exist.

[riversedge]

97. Bingo!!

[aspirant]

99. ...and then there is the alterative universe

where people believe in "junk science"

[wyldwolf]

102. That's true. But polling is only 'junk science' to those losing in the polls or Republicans...

... who are well known science deniers - including deniers of polling.

[Skidmore]

93. So you finally figured out that

you have to do some groundwork?

A poll is a SAMPLE of a group, and not every one in the group. I'm registered and vote in every election, and have been included in poll samples on a couple of times. Have you been polled? I doubt it.

[sabrina 1]

96. I've never been polled, didn't have a landline. No one I know who doesn't have a landline has

been polled. My MIL though has been polled many times, I have answered the phone to pollsters when staying at her home in the 2012 election eg.

I am well aware of how polls are conducted.

Traditional pollsters have admitted that their methodology is not keeping up with current technology. They are supposed to have added a % of Cell Phone users, but statistics are now showing that fewer and fewer voters are now using landlines.

[FlatBaroque]

98. 'scientific polls' start polling all potential primary voters

When such polling would benefit the corporate candidate.

[Art_from_Ark]

103. Have your read this, Sabrina?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/upshot/why-an-iowa-poll-is-unfair-to-bernie-sanders.html?_r=0

"Unfortunately, there are no recent polls that reported Mr. Sanders and Mrs. Clinton’s strength by party registration. But polls have asked voters about party affiliation, and voters who identify as independents are far likelier to support Mr. Sanders. In a recent NBC/Marist poll, Mr. Sanders led Mrs. Clinton by a huge margin, 59 to 21, among self-identified independent voters, while Mrs. Clinton led among self-identified Democrats by 57 to 28. Again, that’s not the same as party registration, but the same phenomenon will probably hold there as well."