Trust the Polls as much as you trust the Media

[wowimthere]

All of these polls are sponsored in part or in whole by the media. Why keep reciting them? And while I'm at it... as long as switches can be flipped to determine the outcome of an election, electronic voting machines only serve to undermine democracy.

The media, like the polls are going to feed everyone the outcome they want - Republicans controlling at least one branch of the beast.

[LiberalFighter]

1. They've got our candidate down by 25 when he was within 4 points in 2006.

There is no way the numbers are right. The poll was done by our local 3rd rate university.

[onenote]

3. was that a media sponsored poll or an internal poll?

I saw a report of an internal poll by Stultzman giving him a 26 point lead over Hayhurst, but I haven't seen a media sponsored poll. Internal polls are generally bullshit but, unfortunately, I think there is no way we gain this seat, which is a vacant repub seat (it was souder's seat before he got caught with his pants down). Hayhurst ultimately lost by 8 in 2006 and McCain won the district in 2008. I doubt it 25 points, but it wouldn't suprise me if its between 10 and 15 (which is Souder's margin over a different opponent in 2008).

[LiberalFighter]

4. IPFW Mike Wolf's department

Montagano was a douche bag of a candidate in 2008. He pretended to be a hunter. He pretended to be farmer. He pretended to be a Republican. Whoops! I meant he ran away from Democratic beliefs.

[DrToast]

2. Oh

The media, like the polls are going to feed everyone the outcome they want - Republicans controlling at least one branch of the beast.

Why were the polls so favorable in 2008 if that's what they wanted?

[bemildred]

5. Trust them for what?

There is nothing I decide based on what polls say anyway.

I mean it is true that polls are an unreliable source of information, at best, but it's information you don't need anyway, "for entertainment only".

[JohnWxy]

6. It's so much easier to talk about poll numbers than talking informatively on issues (Ugh!)

Some years ago there was a great movie Broadcast News about, what else, television news broadcasting.

It was great in that it showed how the very intelligent, earnest and sincere character played by Albert Brooks found reading the news on the air too much for him. Meanwhile, another guy who was too dull to appreciate the meaning of anything in the news he was speaking of, cruised right through a broadcast with aplomb.

He was very nice guy, too. He gave Brooks tips on how to do it. They were all completely non-intellectual things, like disguising the fact that you were reading copy off a teleprompter. Or pulling your jacket down and tucking it under your butt so your collar doesn't stick up behind your neck. Brooks fully comprehended and CARED ABOUT the content of what he was reporting on. While the other guy didn't seem to know or care what the stuff he was reading about meant.


In England they don't call them 'anchor-men'. They call them what they are.... news readers!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092699/

[struggle4progress]

7. gotv

[akbacchus_BC]

8. The m,edia is anti-Obama! Plain and simple!