Hillary Clinton Leads In Worthless Poll

[babylonsister]

http://alternet.org/blogs/peek/64658/#more

Hillary Clinton Leads In Worthless Poll

Posted by Ari Melber at 6:20 AM on October 8, 2007.

Ari Melber: Did reporters and pundits learn nothing from their misplaced faith in erroneous polls
This post, written by Ari Melber, originally appeared on The Nation

Hillary Clinton now leads her rivals in the crucial state of Iowa -- according to a meaningless poll released this weekend. Just last week, of course, politicos were buzzing about another worthless poll that showed Barack Obama leading the Iowa pack. These polls will continue to fluctuate wildly because it's very hard to determine likely caucus attendees at this point. But most Iowa polling is worthless anyway, since it doesn't factor in the state's unusual caucus and "viability" rules. (For more details, see my piece last week, Obama Leads in Worthless Poll.)

Even the professionals have trouble keeping all these polls straight. Here's how the AP described the Democratic horse race this weekend:

Hillary Rodham Clinton has taken the lead among Democratic presidential candidates in an Iowa poll, an encouraging sign of progress toward overcoming a big hurdle in the race.

And here's how the AP described the race, well, this weekend:

(Clinton is in) a much closer race in Iowa, where she is in a tight three-way contest with Barack Obama and John Edwards.

Clinton leads Iowa! No, it's a tight three-way race! No, Obama leads Iowa!

Is this really what we have to suffer through for the next three months? Did reporters and pundits learn nothing from their misplaced faith in erroneous polls last cycle? Does the AP fact-check articles by reading other AP articles? (Alright, that one's obviously a no.) After all the election problems in 2000, the media agreed not to broadcast premature exit polling on Election Day, since it can mislead the public and interfere with the voting process. By that logic, maybe we should also focus less on these polls over the next few months.

[wyldwolf]

1. Interesting that Alternet/Huff Po didn't call the Newsweek poll "worthless" last week that had...

..Obama ahead. It had a low sampling rate, too.

[babylonsister]

2. Knee-jerk much? From this article:

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?pid=238666

[wyldwolf]

3. well, thank you for clearing that up. The writer should have been my clue

[msongs]

4. please post all "worthless" polls that have a leader who is NOT hillary nt

[rocktivity]

5. At this point in time, ALL the polls are worthless

Especially if they sample fewer than 1,000 people and have a margin of error of more than three per cent.

:headbang:
rocknation

[MethuenProgressive]

6. All polls are worthless unless MY CANDIDATE is in the lead!!

All others are phony. Unless they've been DU'd so they become amzingly accurate.

[bluedog]

7. oh, I see its worthless, because Hillary is leading.LOL