Hillary Clinton Leads In Worthless Poll

[bpeale]

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/64658/

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 last cycle?

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:

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

read more at the link above...

[opihimoimoi]

1. A good Poll is only an indicator....

[damntexdem]

7. And a worthless poll at this point is NOT an indicator.

It's worthless.

[opihimoimoi]

9. I was referring to a GOOD POLL...they are not worthless

Worthless polls are worthless...there is a diff.

[Alamom]

2. Dupe

Posted earlier......,..still on this page.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3589151

[oasis]

3. And after Hillary wins in Iowa, the Iowa caucus will be worthless.

:eyes:

[opihimoimoi]

10. NO SHIT.....Aloha, sending beer and paka

[oasis]

12. Mahalos

:hi:

[gorekerrydreamticket]

14. It doesn't matter if Clinton wins Iowa or not....

Do you think she will pack it in if she doesn't win Iowa?

[oasis]

16. Who said "I'm your girl" and I'm in it to win it"? Hill's the real deal. (eom)

:toast::bounce::applause:

[smalll]

4. That headline of yours is hilarious.

Perhaps inadvertently.

[damntexdem]

8. I'm going to recommend this thread just based on 'worthless' in the headline.

It's about time these repeated early polls were correctly labeled.

[smalll]

11. I might rec too, although I think I'm coming at this from somewhere other than you -

"Hillary Clinton Leads in Worthless Poll" :rofl: How about -
"Hillary Clinton Raises More Useless Money in the Third Quarter."
"Hillary Clinton tops Barak Obama in Unnecessary Experience."
"Hillary Clinton Garners More Pointless Endorsements from Nobodies Like Madeleine Albright, George McGovern, Rob Reiner."
"Hillary Clinton Posts Consistently Masterful Performances in Annoying Debates That No One Even Watches Anyway So There."

[Apollo11]

20. Let me debunk those claims you are clinging to

- Most primary voters have yet to make a final choice on who they will vote for.

- If raising money was the main factor, Howard Dean would have been the nominee in 2004.

- Hillary Clinton has about the same amount of political experience as Obama or Edwards.
(Unless you count being married to the President - in which case Nancy Reagan would also qualify.)

- Some people who used to work for Bill Clinton remain loyal to the Clintons.

- Hillary laughs at serious questions, not just on FOX News, but also on MSNBC, HBO, CNN ...


Let me try a couple of more reality-based ideas on you:

1. Iowa will remain a tight race right up until caucus day.

2. History teaches us that everything changes after Iowa.

[MGKrebs]

5. Gravel could win?

[MethuenProgressive]

6. Are people taking turns posting this once every half hour?

:boring:

[CreekDog]

13. Better to lead in a worthless poll than to trail in one

And her trend in Iowa has been up in recent months even if her numbers are lower there than nationwide.

[bpeale]

15. the point i was making in posting this is

you can manipulate numbers to mean anything you want them to mean, but it doesn't make it so. just saying she's the front runner doesn't make it so. it will take a lot more than that. if dems want 4 more years of war, then vote for her ... by then we'll be in iran too (she voted FOR that one too). just be careful what you wish for, you just might get it. and trust me, a draft WILL be coming if we end up in iran.

[CreekDog]

17. Gosh, if that was your point, why didn't you make it in the first place?

You were taking shots at Hillary's supporters, even though they've never claimed to lead as strongly in Iowa as nationwide, but somehow saying that they are "manipulating" poll numbers to make her appear stronger.

If your point was to say that the Hillary voters are voting for four more years of war (no) and with Iran and with a draft and that she is not the "national" frontrunner, then you should have actually argued that --you would have gotten arguments back.

But you didn't do that.

Stop the stupid tangents and be brave and make your point up front. I don't know who I'm voting for yet, but you are not impressing me because you are being oblique about criticizing Hillary. Just make your point or don't bother posting at all. Don't make some other point to imply something else that you didn't state in the first place.

[rufus dog]

18. I am not sure her leading in a poll is worthless

It is a snapshot from a small sample. It does indicate recent strength. I hope like hell the numbers turn and the actual caucus results in a third place finish for her. But, leading in a poll, especially as it gets closer to the caucus is a good sign for her.

[AJH032]

19. but if you're candidate were leading

this poll would be the most valuable poll out there.


:eyes: