Who won the debate? Here's your chance, Bernie, Hillary, O'Malley Supporters:

[sabrina 1]

http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/11/14/poll-who-won-the-2nd-democratic-debate/


.

POLL: Who won the 2nd Democratic debate?
Posted 7:57 PM, November 14, 2015, by FOX 5 Digital Team, Updated at 08:03pm, November 14, 2015

Facebook70Twitter1RedditPinterestLinkedInEmail

DES MOINES, Iowa — Three Democratic presidential candidates gathered Saturday night in Des Moines, Iowa, for the second Democratic primary debate of this campaign cycle.

At 6 p.m. PST, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley gathered in the Sheslow Auditorium of Drake University for the debate, hosted by CBS News.

The debate was jolted by the terrorist attacks across Paris that killed more than 100 people and that the French President declared an “act of war.”

Thank you for voting!

Bernie Sanders 86.9% (1,598 votes)


Hillary Clinton 8.81% (162 votes)


Martin O'Malley 4.29% (79 votes)


TTotal Votes: 1,839

Hillary supporters CAN change these numbers!

Yes, we know, unscientific. So CHANGE the results. It's up to the people.

Bernie AGAIN the hands down winner of polls of people WHO ACTUALLY WATCHED the debate. So Far.

But Hillary supporters can change this poll.

Will check back later!

[bkkyosemite]

1. Wow Bernie with 85% 3,000 votes...........

[sabrina 1]

2. And that's just one of the many polls. Check OP for more polls as they come in!

[Metric System]

3. I have better things to do than click on online polls. They are meaningless. But hey, keep on voting

multiple times if that floats your boat.

[Fawke Em]

43. I have better things to do between 5 and 8 p.m. than to

answer my landline that never rings for polls.

Stick it.

I do have time to click something.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/08/europe/uk-election-polls-2016/

[reformist2]

4. The Berniebots are busy clicking buttons. Hillary's supporters are already fast asleep.

[sabrina 1]

7. Lol, is that supposed to mean something wrt the enthusiasm of each candidate's supporters? Why ISN'T

Hillary winning ANY of the polls taken of people who actually VIEWED the debate?

If her supporters don't have enough energy to click for her, then how will translate to them actually making it to the polls?

[reddread]

5. hard to see how HRC came out ahead of O'Malley

then again, twice OMalley isnt much for her to brag about.

[sabrina 1]

8. I know, I was very impressed by O'Malley tonight. Far better on the issues than Hillary.

[NuclearDem]

29. Or Sanders, for that matter.

[Jarqui]

6. Polls I gathered here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=809691
are similar.

Bernie didn't just win. Hillary reminded me of why she bugs me some. I don't hate her but I don't trust her. She simply can't be reliably honest and she's not that great a hiding it. Got the same feelings in 2008

[Jarqui]

9. Maybe this kind of describes it

https://twitter.com/MMFlint/status/665731532342956032

Michael Moore tweet ?@MMFlint
Hillary keeps sending me messages thru the TV machine: "Michael, don't vote for me...don't vote for me...don't vote for me" Stop! #DemDebate

10:22 PM - 14 Nov 2015

[sabrina 1]

12. I saw that, it was voted best tweet of the night I believe!

[sabrina 1]

10. She loses all the polls that are taken after each debate. I see her supporters claiming they are too

busy to click a link. But her supporters ARE clicking the links. Just not enough to overcome Bernie's supporters.

[bettyellen]

25. I'm too pragmatic to participate in unscientific fan circle jerks. Not seeing the point- as

they have never ever reflected voting patterns. Why would I?

[sabrina 1]

27. They sure did re Obama. But hey, if people are not enthusiastic enough about their candidates, then

those who are will win, just like in 2008. I am getting a sense of wonderful deja vu re online support for Obama/Bernie.

[bettyellen]

28. Ah, you "sense" they suddenly are scientific. Got it.

[Cerridwen]

11. Remember to clear your cache after each vote. n/t

[sabrina 1]

13. Actually I only voted in one poll. But it's remarkable that Bernie sweeps every poll taken right

after the debates. I would have voted for O'Malley too if that were possible as he was, imo, very good on most of the issues too.

[Cerridwen]

14. Then you were not my target audience. I was referring to those who like to (edited spelling)

"stuff the ballot box" and call it good.

I learned about that clear cache (and sometimes cookies) thing here at DU many years ago. That was the same time I was sure online polls mean squat.

edited for spelling/typo.

[sabrina 1]

15. Lol, everyone has the same opportunity. So that makes no sense. I guess hillary then just doesn't

have the enthusiasm that Bernie has. Some polls deny the possibility of voting more than once. Bernie still wins. So much for your theory.

Hillary supporters DID vote. Are you suggesting Bernie's supporters are cheating? I know many of them. They voted once, period

As for the 'scientific' polls which poll over 71% who did not watch the debate? Please.

[Weidman]

17. Correct. That Facebook polls won't take cleaned cookies.

[Cerridwen]

18. I wasn't suggesting anything except to remember to clear your cache

(and perhaps cookies) in order to vote as much as you like.

I'm talking about online polls; as were you. Why move the goal posts? Don't bother replying. I'm leaving for the evening. GD-P, i.e., rumor, innuendo, and spin central is less than entertaining tonight. I'd rather go "kill some draugr."

Bernie's racist! Hillary laughs at "news" of a dictator's death! Martin is...whatever. I'm not buying any of it. If DU had been indicative of anything out in the real world, John Kerry would have won in 2004; "warmonger" that he was.

Tired of the shit flinging. Youtube is starting to look sane by comparison.

See ya.

[MrMickeysMom]

16. 87% of the vote goes to Sanders and against 9% Clinton and 3% O'Malley

Frankly, I thought O'Malley did better than that. This is a Fox poll, I see.

Thank you for voting!
Bernie Sanders 87.42% (6,946 votes)


Hillary Clinton 9.21% (732 votes)


Martin O'Malley 3.37% (268 votes)



Total Votes: 7,946

[Renew Deal]

19. President Ron Paul won all of the online polls too

[sabrina 1]

21. Airc, so did President Obama at around this time in the process. I know i voted for him in online

polls.

[Jarqui]

20. Here's some more online polls

Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2015/nov/14/who-won-2nd-democratic-debate/
Sanders 95%
Clinton 4%
O'Malley 3%

Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/democrats/11996604/Democratic-debate-who-won.html
Sanders 87%
Clinton 7%
O'Malley 5%

FOX
http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/11/14/poll-who-won-the-2nd-democratic-debate/
Sanders 88%
Clinton 9%
O'Malley 3%

CSPAN
https://www.facebook.com/CSPAN?_rdr=p
Sanders 79%
Clinton 16%
O'Malley 5%

Sanders has clobbered her in every online poll but print media & PPP say/imply he lost? I've never seen anything quite like it. He's fighting a machine we can't see.

[sabrina 1]

22. Excellent. But we will be told that all those people are 'unscientific' viewers of the debate. We

have to wait for the Corp Media to tell us who THEY choose as the winner.

[Agschmid]

24. I just voted like 10 times in the Slate poll.

All for O'Malley just to mess with everyone.

[sabrina 1]

33. How sad. I would never think of doing that. But if that's your thing, great. I have never been

polled by the 'scientific' polls because I own a cell phone. But I did respond to calls from pollsters for my MIL who is a longtime Dem. They push polled me, which I resisted, then I received an angry 'you want a Repub to win' response to my attempt to ask about ISSUES.

How sad that you would do such a thing. Not a single Bernie supporter I know would do that.

So if Hillary's supporters are willing to cheat as you just did, how come even with CHEATING she can't win an online poll?

That says a whole lot more than the polls themselves. Even her supporters being willing to cheat still can't get her to win???

I think you just confirmed that these polls are far more accurate than even I thought.

So Hillary's supporters are cheating and even with that she still can't even come close to beating Bernie.

That's GREAT news!

[bettyellen]

39. Don't be sad, Sabrina! Internet polls have never been an accurate indicator of likely voters.

No harm done, lots of people vote 10-20 times.

[sabrina 1]

45. So far i see only one Hillary supporter voting ten times and she still can't beat Bernie. If that's

what her supporters are doing, then it's even worse for her than it looks. It never occurred to me to do that. I voted in ONE poll, ONCE as did all the people I know. We didn't have to go 'running around' to click polls, looks like Bernie has enough support without all of his supporters have to do that.

Funny, I remember Obama's online polls being dismissed also, same arguments, etc.

[bettyellen]

26. So.....you think they ARE scientific? Oh dear.

Poor dear poster. No.

[sabrina 1]

34. Aw, no I don't think any polls are 'scientific'. See above where a Hillary supporter admitted to

cheating on this poll and she STILL can't win. I guess the poster thought they were proving something, but the fact is, everyone has the same chance of winning or losing any poll. Hillary just keeps losing.

[bettyellen]

36. you think internet polls are as scientific as those contacting voters? Seriously?

That is adorable.

[sabrina 1]

41. Voters with landlines. Most people today do not own landlines.

[bettyellen]

44. Who polls only landlines these days? Aside from Republican push polls, LOL. No one.

[sabrina 1]

46. Pollsters themselves have admitted that their methodology has not kept up with technology.

Which is why they got, eg, the UK elections so wrong and Greece's elections. Old methodology isn't reliable anymore. Yes, the finally have tried to include a number of non landline users, but still not keeping up with the huge shift FROM landlines at all.

[bettyellen]

47. Uk and Greece- huh? I figured you had no US polls to point to, lol.

I guess I was right.

[NuclearDem]

32. Do they have vegan steak in that reality you live in?

I could really go for some right about now.

[William769]

23. Here we go with internet polls again.

[tammywammy]

31. I can only SMH. n/t

[sabrina 1]

37. How come hillary can't win a simple internet poll? Not enough supporters, not enough enthusiasm?

I don't think she's won a single poll so far other than the corporate polls which poll people who don't watch debates!

[William769]

40. Because Hillary supporters are not pathetic to sit there all night

Trying to skew the polls.

[sabrina 1]

42. Wrong, we just had one of Hillary's supporters in this thread admit to trying to skew the poll. Lol!

And apparently even doing so, hasn't helped her win.

Want a link, just let me know. I know of NO Bernie supporter who did anything like that.

[Matariki]

30. Until the tv people tell us otherwise...

[EndElectoral]

35. I thought Bernie did very well tonight, but I think those numbers on MOM are a little low

[sabrina 1]

38. Yes, I agree, I guess Hillary's supporters were voting but O'Malley hasn't gaiined enough support

yet to beat her in online polls. I thought he did great tonight.

[Live and Learn]

48. Butt... Our voices (and votes, I assume) don't count.

At least, according to some here.

[sabrina 1]

49. They are not supposed to count so it's probably a bit of a shock to those who thought

they had all this under control.

[mythology]

50. Please stop this. It should be embarrassing for you

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/net_election/2000/01/why_online_polls_are_bunk.html

The weekly poll on the Web site of the Democratic National Committee asked visitors: "As the nation approaches a new millennium, what are the most important priorities facing our next president? Saving Social Security, strengthening Medicare and paying down the debt or implementing George W. Bush's $1.7 trillion risky tax scheme that overwhelmingly benefits the wealthy?"

Thanks to an organized Republican effort, more than two-thirds of the respondents favored Bush's tax cuts, prompting an embarrassed DNC to remove the poll from its site. News coverage of the incident explained that the poll was non-binding and non-scientific. But you could go further than that. Online polls aren't even polls.

A poll purports to tell you something about the population at large, or at least the population from which the sample was drawn (for example, likely Democratic voters in New Hampshire). Surprising though it may seem, the results of a scientific poll of a few hundred randomly sampled people can be extrapolated to the larger population (to a 95 percent degree of confidence and within a margin of error). (For a primer on "margin of error" and "degree of confidence," see this Slate "Explainer.&quot But the results of an online "poll" in which thousands or even millions of users participate cannot be extrapolated to anything, because those results tell you only about the opinions of those who participated. Online polls are actually elections, of a kind. And elections, while a fine way to pick a president, are a decidedly poor way to measure public sentiment.

I don't know what idea scares me more. The possibility that you actually don't understand why online unscientific polling is meaningless, or that you are so blinded by your support for Sanders that you are effectively trying to replicate the unskewthepolls.com nonsense from the 2012 election.

[sabrina 1]

51. I know it's upsetting to people that times are changing and the old polling methodogy hasn't kept up

with technology. Eg, are you aware that a majority of people called by pollsters refuse to participate? That has been rising to the point where so few people respond now to traditional polling that the samples are so miniscule as to cause pollsters themselves to have to acknowledge their methodology, which failed if you recall in 2012 and in the UK recently, must either be updated or continue to suffer from huge mistrust among voters.

So maybe you should stop promoting what pollsters themselves have acknowledged is failing more and more often due to many factors, not the least of which is the distrust of those they NEED to participate.

You are free to remain trusting of the old methodology and if you think people DON'T LIE to pollsters then I can only say, you haven't studied this subject very much over the past number of years.

Yes, people will cheat, in ALL polls, traditional and online.

But to try to say that the disparity between online polls and traditional polls is believable, is simply ridiculous. Especially when the media is deleting its own polls to try to hide the results.