Am I the only one who questions the integrity of the polls?

[backscatter712]

Lately, I'm seeing a lot of discouraging (to me) polls - Hillary Clinton is beating out Obama and Edwards, while Kucinich is barely registering at all. Giuliani is beating out Romney in national polls, while Ron Paul doesn't even register.

In a nutshell, I don't buy it.

Everyone I talk to hates the establishment candidates. Hardly anyone likes Hillary, most of the Democrats I know are pulling for Kucinich or Gravel, or maybe Edwards or Obama. On the GOP side, most people are pulling for Ron Paul.

Granted, that's just in my circle of friends, but I'm less and less inclined to believe that the polls as they are seen when broadcast on the news or printed in the papers reflect reality. I think they're cooked, and they want them cooked in the same way that the elections themselves are cooked.

The polls are commissioned by, yep, the press, with all of our favorite outlets like FOX news, the Washington Times and all the other outlets that have been compromised and give us nothing but Bushie propaganda. I'm not inclined to believe they're even begin to be honest when the put up poll numbers.

Are there any polls out there that aren't compromised?

[cruadin]

1. IMO all polls are skewed by the way questions are framed

and by the selection of the participants -- especially if they were commissioned by an establishment entity.

[backscatter712]

5. Oh hell yeah.

I remember that the last few Democratic polls didn't even bother to include Kucinich as one of the possible responses.

There's a decent base of netroots for Kucinich, and at least a few people are seeing his name out there. But the mainstream media has already coronated Hillary, so they're going to use every dirty trick to bury Kucinich.

[Hydra]

2. Remember that poll where 70% said they supported war in Iraq

While Colin Powell was making a fool of himself in front of the UN and Bush was screaming about how we had to strike now, before it was too late?

I'm with you in not buying the polls...polls are dangerous- people instinctively go with the flow, so if they see overwhelming support for something, they often buy into it?

"How could that many people be wrong?"

[LSparkle]

3. I agree with you -- something doesn't add up

Are the polls only calling people with land lines (which increasingly leaves out younger voters)? When I look at the polls, I feel like I'm in Alice in Wonderland (kinda like I do the rest of the time anyway). War is peace, up is down ...

[backscatter712]

6. Since I've switched to having only a cell phone,

I've never been called by pollsters once. Never.

I hear claims saying they've used statistical wizardry to account for the cell-phone-only crowd, but like the rest of the polling shell game, I'm not buying it. I know so many people now that don't use land lines anymore.

[tbyg52]

34. Yup. Can you say "Dewey Wins"? nt

[TahitiNut]

24. VOIP ... DoNotCall Registry ... caller-id phone-screening

I have some serious doubts that the polling techniques are adapting to cultural changes. Even further, the 'normalization' techniques may not fully accommodate the shifts in party affilation we're seeing.

And that's just the 'science' of polling ... they're probably not able to filter out the poll-busting, either.

That said, however ... I feel absolutely no obligation whatsoever to go along with any herd. That way there be cliffs.

[Junkdrawer]

26. Remember: Pollsters correlate their result against questionable elections...

"Golly, I guess more Republicans hang up, otherwise, how do I explain these election results?"

[porphyrian]

4. Nope and yes, but probably not political ones. - n/t

[valerief]

7. Polls, electronic voting machines, campaign promises. Can't believe any of them. nt

[Froward69]

8. I Agree.

Something aint right. Biden wins the Debates time after time. and is barely on the screen? wrong. I have a difficult time believing America is this stupid. or so it would seem.

[Junkdrawer]

9. "Penn, Schoen and Berland has played pioneering role in the use of..exit polls to facilitate coups."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1990587

[LSparkle]

11. REALLY true ... We can't believe exit polls but THESE polls are OK?

It's just the "groundwork" before the coup ... getting the populace used to the idea of a Hillary-Rudy matchup.


:argh:

[Junkdrawer]

15. FYI Mark Penn is Hillary's chief strategist....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/portal/main.jhtml?xml=/portal/2007/09/20/nosplit/fttrends120.xml

[mmonk]

10. Polls before the first state primaries and caucus's are unreliable.

Candidates get swings in momentum and others fade when things get started.

[MonkeyFunk]

12. No

you're not the only one who thinks so. Everybody who doesn't like the outcome of a poll tends to think there's something wrong with the poll.

However, polling is generally very accurate, and it's people's own biases that make them disbelieve them.

When all the polls show the same thing, it's a safe bet that thing is the truth.

[mmonk]

14. It works the other way around as well.

[MonkeyFunk]

35. Huh?

What do you mean?

I assert that polls are almost always "correct". That is, they accurately reflect the reality they're trying to assess.

What works the other way around?

[Lerkfish]

13. If we'll recall, before the 2004 election, pollsters polled MORE republicans than democrats and

still the democrats won. In other words, the pollsters were gaming the poll in favor of republicans and acting like that was ok.

[Rhythm and Blue]

21. They actually account for that in their polling, if you read the expanded.

If they overpoll, they usually correct for that. They do the same to get difficult-to-reach groups; if they can't find enough 18-25 year olds, they extrapolate from the 18-25 year olds they actually got ahold of.

[grmamo]

16. I was thinking the same thing, I will not let media/polls tell me how I should vote

I don't care what they say, I will vote my own conviction. Automatically if they are DLC, that ends it for me, period!

The media (and republicans) have been pushing HC on us for awhile now. Remember - If it is repeated enough people start to believe.

Well, I know which person I want to vote for in the primary and it will NOT be HC. I do not know anyone who wants HC so I agree with what you are saying. Who is it that is supporting HC, hmmmm, maybe it is the republicans responding in those polls?????

This is a time we need to be strong and rally for someone for US!

[JuniperLea]

17. I used to believe exit polls...

But we don't have those anymore. The online polls are a joke... we know that first hand. Zogby seems to ask good questions, but I'm not 100% on the results.

I think it's safe to ignore all polls.

[Mme. Defarge]

18. Nope.

[Rhythm and Blue]

19. If you don't buy them, you're being foolish.

Your arguments are the same tired, easily-debunkable nonsense.

1. You open with an argument from incredulity. Your inability to believe that people do not like DK does not mean he is popular.

2. Your circle of friendship is self-selected and as such is not representative of the general public.

3. By reading the expanded versions of polls you can see the questions they ask. They go so far as to switch up the order they list the candidates in and the order the questions are asked for each person polled, so as to minimize bias.

4. You are suggesting that Gallup, Rasmussen, Newsweek, Time, USA Today, NBC, CNN, AP, Reuters, AFP, Zogby, Quinniapac, and everyone else is all on in some conspiracy. This is unrealistic.

Any other arguments you have?

[mmonk]

20. They are good for noting trends

but one of the frontrunners will do worse than expected and one of the non frontrunners will do better than expected. What the media does with that and how people view it will determine trends in the primaries as they progress.

[Richard Steele]

22. No. Many polls nowdays are designed to PRODUCE statistics, not measure them. nm

[nickinSTL]

23. hard for me to believe the polls as well...

of all the Dems I know, I don't know ONE who supports Clinton.

There are a number of Obama supporters - but then, I live in IL.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. I Should Introduce You To My Ex Boss

He told me in 1994!!! he never met anybody that voted for Bill Clinton... This is a man that managed over a dozen professional association with thousands of members... Yet he said he never met anybody that voted for Bill Clinton...

Imagine that...

[nickinSTL]

36. hey, I did know people who voted for Bill Clinton...

but, seriously, I really don't personally know ANY Hillary Clinton supporters.

Not saying they don't exist, obviously, but I have no idea where they are :shrug:

[bryant69]

25. Everytime you ask the question "Am i the only one" the answer is no!

On a planet of several billion there's at least one other.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Junkdrawer]

31. Well, looks like more than one other...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2001310

[The Backlash Cometh]

27. LOL!

As they say, my best work is on the cutting floor.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

28. there is absolutely no way that Hillary is ahead

as described.

I know many moderates, liberals, conservatives, neocons, religious reichists and more, and I deal with all of them every day. I can count one, ONE Hillary supporter among all of them. One. O N E . Not 30%, not 29%, not a 33% lead, not 41% vs. a GOP candidate. ONE. PERSON.

OK, so my experience is simply mine, and anecdotal evidence is simply that. But, when others, of every political bakcground and spectrum AGREE, and say that they don't see that kind of support displayed in the polls for her, something fishy is up.

[Blackhatjack]

29. Conducting and putting out a poll is like directing a movie....

The entity in charge of conducting the poll chooses the poll participants, the circumstances under which the poll will be conducted(time/geographic), and frames the questions to answer the inquiry which is the reason for the poll.

Legitimate polling by independent impartial polling agents is rare. Most published polls are 'push' polls, intended to support a particular individual, campaign, or issue.

However, when conducted according to sound polling procedures, polling gives a candidate the information they need to understand and implement strategic actions.

Many polls are conducted and the results are NEVER released to anyone other than the candidate's campaign who commissioned the poll. In many cases if the results are favorable to the candidate and his/her positions the poll results will be released to the general media for publication.

Without a full disclosure of all the above details you cannot determine the authenticity of the polling and its results.

Keep in mind that the 'richer' a candidate is in campaign contributions, the more 'polls' they can commission with an eye toward getting the results they want --which are eventually released to the public.

The closer to the actual election the closer the polling results should be to the official results of the election. That certainly was not the case with the Gore and Kerry campaigns --which should raise natural skepticism of the 'announced official results.'

Hope this helps.

[tom_paine]

30. Yes. It is hard to know what to believe.

The dilemna of all subjects of all totalitarian nations, not just Imperial Amerika (we are 40% of the way there now).

[RestoreGore]

32. Polls are an Assault On Reason