I Told You Polls Were Used For Propaganda

[gab13by13]

Hope that people watched Chris Hayes last night, he basically said the same thing. With all of the hand wringing over polls Hayes put up on the screen the latest special elections that have been held across the country, there were probably 16 - 18 elections. In all of those elections, yes, I said all, the Democrat overperformed, even in the few races where the Democrat lost.

Hayes talked about last Tuesdays election in Allegheny county, Pa. where the Democrat won by a blowout giving Democrats control of the House Senate.

Hayes said a race in N.H. that happened the same day was just as important to Democrats. The Democrat won in a district in N.H. where Trump won.

Hayes went on to talk about the bogus red wave that polls wrongly predicted for 2022.

Here is what Hayes said, paraphrasing, that stayed with me, he said that these special election results are the real indicators of where Americans stand, when the American people actually show what party they prefer by getting out and voting.

Democrats have been overperforming in every special election. Think about that when someone here posts another scary poll.

I tried to post the segment but I am a computer Troglodyte.

[honest.abe]

1. Or the polling methodolgy is obsolete.

I think they are missing a large voter demographic. These are people who refuse to answer calls from unknown numbers or simply refuse to take polls at all, most likely a younger demographic.

[waterwatcher123]

7. All of these polls rely on the assumption that the sample is random.

The bedrock principle behind any survey or poll that purports to represent the views of a larger population is the random sample. There are variations on the random sample design. However, the current state of affairs where people are so bombarded by crank calls makes it impossible to do a random sample. This means, as you aptly stated, that the design is obsolete. I am not sure pollsters will ever get back to where polls had some value as predictors (still have incredibly small sample sizes). But, no one ever holds them accountable. So, why would they change course?

[vlyons]

26. I get calls all day long from unknown numbers in other states

I simply turn them off unanswered. I also get unsolicited emails asking to poll me, which I assume are scams collecting my data. I deleted them unanswered.

But I ALWAYS vote. I'm 76 and have never voted for a Republican. I live in Dallas, which is trending more and more Dem. My congressman is a Dem. Biden has my vote 100%

Yes Texas stinks of degenerate GOPers, who are rural and have gerrymandered the shit out of Texas.

[docgee]

32. I have an app that sends all calls from callers who are not in my contact list straight

to voice-mail.

Like Joe Walsh said: "Leave a message, maybe I'll call."

[moniss]

41. They also now use a software

that hooks the call through your local area codes so it looks like they are right there by you but they may be in India making the call. I get the scam marketers doing it to me all day long on my business line.

[ShazzieB]

112. I get those, too.

That was what finally soured me on answering calls from ANY unknown numbers.

I really resent people trying to scam me like this. I'm old enough to remember when caller ID became a thing and what a great idea it seemed to be at the time. It's completely meaningless now, unless the caller is already in my contacts.

I wonder how long it'll be before those bastards figure out how to make it look like they're calling from a number in my contacts rather than just from my area code?

[flying_wahini]

44. Hello there from Ft Worth!

[vlyons]

89. Howdy

I love Ft Worth.

[yellowdogintexas]

90. another Cowtown voter here Is Colin Alread your Congressman??

He was the keynote speaker at the first annual Opal Lee Empowerment Luncheon. I was really impressed.
We raised a bunch of money too. He will make a wonderful Senator, and if we can get our folks and the ones who hate Cancun Cruz he can win this race.

Glad you love our laid back city! There are a lot of cool things to do over here.

We are working hard to get the rest of Tarrant County blue. Fort Worth itself and much of SE Tarrant already are, it's that Northern half that is keeping the whole county from flipping.

[vlyons]

92. Mark Veasey is my congressman.

TX 33rd congressional district. How's this for gerrymandering?

&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=de1a87266e7afcf5fe1c3ecd3e7377526d7e67109bf491c1f4488604c9221701&ipo=images

[yellowdogintexas]

115. oh I know, Marc's district is a piece of work.

You are so lucky to have him. I wish he were mine; one of the original maps for TX 33 would have included my precinct. However, I am stuck with Kay Granger.

We have been friends since he was in the State House of Representatives.

Did you know that the original idea was for the 33rd to be a Hispanic minority-majority district? Well, the first primary went to runoff, and Marc easily defeated the other finalist who was a major player in Hispanic politics.

[bullimiami]

30. A combination. Obsolete methodology by many. Purposeful deception by many.

Some actually good polls swamped in the bullshit.

Noone able to decipher good from bad.

[honest.abe]

99. Agreed.

[Hortensis]

43. If that was the only reason, it've been obsolete since the 1990s,

with the industry refining its obsoleteness.

How likely is it that much of the MSM is politically corrupt but not the polls they have to explain?

RW and mainstream media with a bias for wealthy-serving government need polls that back up their "analyses." So do the special interests that have made social media political warfare a major force.

[honest.abe]

66. Its more about cell phones with caller ID which have become more prevalent in recent years.

But I agree that MSM media is a big part of the problem.

[Johnny2X2X]

2. If the shoe was on the other foot

These off cycle elections are being dominated by Democrats. If it was the opposite, it's all we'd hear about on the news. "Democrats heading towards historic 2024 losses!" "As election losses pile up, Democrats contemplate replacing Biden at the top of the ticket." It would be endless, the media would lead every segment with these elections and how it spells doom for Democrats.

And the off cycle elections have historically favored Republicans as their key voting demographics are more likely to vote in smaller and off cycle elections like these.

Democrats are terrified of Trump and we want our democracy to continue, we're consistently making it to the polls to prevent a GOP takeopver of anything. 2024 is going to see a blue wave as people will vote to preserve our democracy and vote to restore women's rights. That's the big story here.

[getagrip_already]

3. The big story is the polls tell news outlets exactly what they want to hear...

They are designed up front to yield a specific outcome.

It's part of the science of the poll itself. Especially this far out.

Don't panic, participate. Don't cowar, contribute. Don't fear, fight.

But don't play the poll game.

[True Blue American]

5. Agree!

[Chi67]

121. Agreed

We have seen time and again in recent years that the polls aren't working, not even close. The abortion issue is going to drive lot of people to vote. The GOP is losing every single special election. Again, in many cases by a landslide. I have said for years that if the GOP ever got Roe overturned, it would cost them elections in a very big way. It has. Fuck around, Find out.

[True Blue American]

4. I saw the poll early this morning

And have said all along that the polls were manipulated to make the election a horse race. The media is corrupt to the core.

Even those shows who bad mouth Trump show them. They have there marching orders from a corrupt Corporation.

[True Blue American]

6. Truth

https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/-pro-democracy-dems-overperform-in-24-of-30-special-elections-so-far-in-2023-193416773961

[gab13by13]

10. Thank you for posting that segment,

It corrected my memory. Hayes showed 30 special elections and Democrats didn't overperform in all of them, but the trend is encouraging to say the least. The trend in the latest 30 special elections is that Democrats are overperforming across the country by 11%.

We are the majority, fuck cable news and bogus polls.

[Lonestarblue]

8. I have not written political polls, but I have written surveys for other areas.

How you ask a question also makes a big difference in the results. Many questions are not totally neutral. I haven’t seen the questions in this poll, but it’s pretty easy to skew results.

[underpants]

9. I've never understood how the Poles are supposed to know so much.

What about the Irish or Italians or Argentinians?

[BumRushDaShow]

13. Alternately

the "poles" get grievances aired to them so they have the benefit of absorbing a lot of bullshit...

[SouthernDem4ever]

25. Very true, and the answers are directed at the wrong questions

I have never taken a poll where the question fit my answer.

[soldierant]

123. Boy, is that accurate.

Sometimes I'll even email them and say I never answer any TF or multiple choice poll because all the answers are always wrong. I will only respond to a poll if it allows me to do so in my own words.

But I thing the stupidest question of all is, "Do you think thw country is headed in the right direction, or is it going the wrong way?"

I'm 78 and I have never seen a time, not for a second, when the country was actually headed in a single direction, right, wrong, or irrelevant. Never. Not for a second. Well, maybe a second on 9/11 when everyone who could and who had a heart was volunteering themselves and their proprty tohelp. (There were a lot of amateur boaters showing up to help people get home, for instance.) But that certainly didn't last. Anti-Islam took over fast.

[moniss]

28. It's because of the

diet high in kolachkes, paczkis, cabbage and kielbasa soup, potato soup, pierogis and galonka just to name a few. It's always a good thing to make friends when you find out somebody is Polish. You just might get an invite to Grandma's house for dinner.

[underpants]

38. 😎

[Doc Sportello]

11. Maybe Democrats "overperforming" is the new normal

I posted this yesterday on another thread but think it is important to note again that Democrats have done better than expected in the last three election cycles, and this year in off-year elections. (Did anyone predict that Democrats would win Georgia and Arizona in 2020, or tank the "red wave" in 2022?).

I think about 55% of voters have made the correct assumption that in order to save our democracy they are goong to vote Democratic.

[gab13by13]

14. I totally agree about saving democracy,

it should be President Biden's campaign slogan, Save our democracy vote Democratic. It should be a race between democracy and autocracy.

[brooklynite]

12. Does a news personality's opinion trump that of the Biden campaign staff?

I had a briefing last week with their polling people. THEY expect the race to be close.

And the "red wave" predictions last year had nothing to do with polling. The polls accurately predicted that many races would be close. Analysts took that data and presumed most of the close races would go to the Republicans because that's what traditionally happens iun in the first midterm of a new Presidential Administration.

Also, not seeing anything in your extracts that asserts "propaganda".

[gab13by13]

15. Just imagine if Democrats in NY

had won in the districts where President Biden won that would have destroyed the red wave propaganda.

The propaganda in this election will be immense and we better be ready for it, and AI will be a big factor.

[brooklynite]

19. But they didn't

Democrats lost five seats that Biden won because voters were worried about crime. What does that have to do with rigged polls?

[gab13by13]

22. Just imagine if Democrats had kept the House,

what would that have done to the Big Red Wave propaganda? It would have made people more aware of propaganda.

Some people just want to vote for winners.

OK, it's hard to prove a poll was rigged but I remember back to Obama v Romney when Gallup was supposed to be the king of polls. Gallup put bad data in its polling formula that favored Romney. Can I prove that Gallup did that deliberately? Nope I can't, but on the other hand I find it hard to believe that people who are supposed to be experts in polling made such a glaring mistake.

[Fiendish Thingy]

27. It's kind of apples and oranges, isn't it?

The polling that has some folks running around with their hair on fire is national polling, and the races in which Dems are over performing are state, and in some cases , local elections.

I’m sure your briefings about the 2024 race being close refer to the electoral college, not the national popular vote.

[brooklynite]

34. Both. In 2020 Biden's popular vote win was only 3%.

Last edited Thu Sep 21, 2023, 10:13 AM - Edit history (1)

Not likely to be larger in 2024.

[Butterflylady]

40. That was before supreme court had their say.

And before all these indictments. Heck who knows 13 months months out, and we don't know what could happen in the meantime. Right now polls don't mean anything.

[brooklynite]

53. I'll repeat my previous comment...

The BIDEN CAMPAIGN tells me the race will be close.

[Polybius]

85. It was also when Biden's approval rating was about 55%, and he was 77

You have to take those things into account too. Even though they don't bother us doesn't mean that they won't be a factor.

[Demsrule86]

102. That is not how it works...we are in good shape for 24.

[

[Polybius]

120. Not the point

You can't only talk about the things that are better and say we will win by more than 4 1/2 points next time. Gotta look at the negative factors too.

[Demsrule86]

60. No

Democrat Joe Biden defeated President Donald Trump by about 4.45 percentage points, according to Pew Research Center’s tabulation of final or near-final returns from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Biden received nearly 81.3 million votes, or 51.3% of all votes cast – a record, and more than 7 million more votes than Trump.

[scipan]

91. Thank you for this. Nt

[Demsrule86]

95. That is very kind- thanks!

[True Blue American]

71. 7 million!

[ProfessorGAC]

77. Um, No!

Last edited Thu Sep 21, 2023, 03:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Biden won the election with 306 electoral votes and 51.3% of the national popular vote, compared to Trump's 232 electoral votes and 46.9% of the popular vote

51.3 - 46.9% = 4.4%
Out of 155 million votes, that difference is 1.7 million more votes for Biden than you claim.
Not an insignificant difference.

[Captain Zero]

83. Trump was below 45% in most polls 2-4 weeks before the election

I knew then he was done.
As you see he only got it up in the 46th percentile.

That's an old indicator that has remained true.
Below 45% 2-4 weeks out; you are not going to make 50.

[gab13by13]

47. Click on the Hayes link,

Democrats are overperforming in special elections, randomly, across the country by 11%. Using those elections as an indication how Democrats are doing nation wide is not apples and oranges. Even when Democrats lose a special election they are still overperforming.

Why do we hear the opposite from the MSM?

[brooklynite]

54. Perhaps because a Presidential race isn't the same...

As a low turnout by election in New Hampshire.

[gab13by13]

55. Maybe the low turnout for extreme Magat candidates

will also apply for Trump, eh? Maybe the Americans who are living in reality are disgusted with these radical Magats, including Trump.

[brooklynite]

58. And maybe not. I'll go with the. Biden campaign's assessment

[Demsrule86]

63. Did they have a sit-down with you? I have seen internal polls you know.

[brooklynite]

75. Yes they did; I attended a briefing with Biden's campaign manager, polling staff and messaging staff

[Demsrule86]

97. I remember how you sat down with Fetterman and didn't think he would make...I see.

Well anyone can be wrong including Biden's campaign folks but I honestly disapprove of you repeating it on a website.

[brooklynite]

98. You disapprove of.....what?

If you can't be clear, I can't be properly chastised.

nb: I'm willing to bet that Fetterman's campaign did internal polling, rather take the advice of the blogosphere.

[Demsrule86]

100. Repeating what was said in a private meeting on a website.

[brooklynite]

106. I can evaluate whom I share information with and what that information is.

You can, of course, ignore what I say.

[Sky Jewels]

107. What about all the other special elections where Dems overperformed?

You need to find a way to dismiss those results, too, and tell us why we're probably doomed.

[brooklynite]

108. Where did I say "we're doomed"? I said the race will be close. Which is what the Biden campaign says

[Fiendish Thingy]

61. The MSM largely focuses on apples (national polls), while the meaningful data

Comes from oranges (state and local elections).

Chris Hayes was talking about oranges, while most of his colleagues focus on apples.

[BumRushDaShow]

33. "The polls accurately predicted that many races would be close."

And "the polls" completely missed blowouts by Democrats and Democratic-party policies - particularly anything to do with abortion restrictions - whether in red states or purple states, or even blue states with RW loons.

Referendum after referendum after referendum.

Candidates running on a pro-choice platform have been blazing through states like here in PA, where according to you, in some alternate universe, Summer Lee lost and Conor Lamb is now a Senator in PA because Fetterman "can't win a general election" -

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16302180
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16613429
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16612430

This is the very definition of being "out of touch".

But here we are with this figment of our imagination -

This woman is the Speaker of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's state House because of "missed polls" that made it an impossibility -

Pollsters got it wrong in 2018, 2020, and 2022. Here’s why political polling is no more than statistical sophistry

BY Jeffrey Sonnenfeld and Steven Tian
November 16, 2022 at 10:55 AM EST

(snip)

Most pundits and pollsters got it wrong in 2018, 2020, and 2022–not because their artificial intelligence systems failed, but because none of us can learn if we cut off true facts and hide in a haze of denial. For example, Nate Cohn from the NYT argued: “I’m surprised by the amount of griping about the polling that I’m seeing. The polls did pretty well! The ‘traditional’ polls did *really* well. Doesn’t get much better.”

Perhaps these pollsters should take a closer look at their own polls. Take the Senate side alone:

The average poll in the week before election day had Mehmet Oz beating John Fetterman by nearly 1% in Pennsylvania when in reality Fetterman beat Oz by nearly 5%

The average poll had Adam Laxalt beating Catherine Cortez Masto in Nevada by 1.5% when in reality Cortez Masto is projected to win. In fact, not a single poll in the week before election day projected a Cortez Masto victory.

The average poll had Herschel Walker beating Raphael Warnock in Georgia by 1% when in reality Warnock outperformed Walker by 1%; and not a single poll in the week before election day projected a Warnock victory

The average poll had Maggie Hassan beating Don Bolduc in New Hampshire by only 2% when in reality Hassan soundly routed Bolduc by 15%. Two mainstream polls in the week before election day, including the seminal, admired Saint Anselm poll, even predicted Bolduc victories

An updated prediction, published right before election day by the University of Virginia’s Department of Politics, noted that the Senate races in Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, and Pennsylvania remain “jump balls”. However, the nonpartisan election handicapper shifted its rating in Pennsylvania and Georgia to “leans Republican.” And it shifted its rating for four of the six state gubernatorial elections from a “toss-up” to “lean Republican.”

Gallup confidently declared “The political environment for the 2022 midterm elections should work to the benefit of the Republican Party, with all national mood indicators similar to, if not worse than, what they have been in other years when the incumbent party fared poorly in midterms.”

The Cook Political Report with Amy Walter, a nonpartisan handicapping service, moved 10 of its House race ratings in favor of Republicans and adjusted its predictions of GOP gains in the fall upward to between 20 and 35 seats and a sizable Republican majority in the Senate.

The Siena poll found that “independents, especially women, are swinging to the G.O.P. despite Democrats’ focus on abortion rights. …The biggest shift came from women who identified as independent voters. In September, they favored Democrats by 14 points. Now, independent women backed Republicans by 18 points–a striking swing given the polarization of the American electorate and how intensely Democrats have focused on that group and on the threat Republicans pose to abortion rights.”

CNN/Marist shifted to strongly favor a red wave: “The survey shifted seven percentage points toward the Republicans in a month.”

The misses were even more egregious when it came the House and Governors races. As one example of many, the average poll in the Arizona gubernatorial race in the week before election day had Kari Lake winning by 2.4%, with not a single major poll calling a Katie Hobbs victory.

Beyond any individual race, polls seriously misread the mood of the country and the salient issues on voters’ minds. Pre-election polls largely found that voters were apathetic to the issue of democracy and receptive to voting for election deniers, with pundits lambasting President Biden’s pre-election speeches on democracy accordingly.

Evidently the pollsters were wrong.

Tip O'Neill gets it right again -

We have to (and are starting to) claw our states back - whether that has to do with state legislative seats or any states that have elected state Supreme Court Justices like WI and here in PA, where we have a seat on the ballot this November to reinforce the (D) majority there.

[Demsrule86]

62. Bums! This is the best rebuttal I have seen...

rec'd

[BumRushDaShow]

87. Thanks!

I had to go run some kooky errands including finally driving like 10 miles from where I live to give up my dozen or so year old Comcast DVR cable box after swapping it out for a replacement I was sent. Once the clerks came to after fainting when I handed it to them (I gave them what was a huge VCR-sized thing), I told them I would miss it because it had a clock on the front and the new one doesn't. And one of the reps there laughed and said - "Well you can use your phone as the clock...".

And then 10 minutes later when I finally came to after fainting from that suggestion, I had to tell him that I don't use my phone "as a clock"!

Also had to get yet another new replacement for the non-functional new replacement (wouldn't configure when screwed in and turned on) for my other old box box in a guest bedroom. Will have to make another trip out there eventually to give them that old box (assuming the new one works finally).

So that has been my late morning/early afternoon.

[Demsrule86]

96. That is funny...when I turned in my last phone for an apple 13...I think it was a LG14-loved that phone it still works...

I have a couple of emails that are from prior Embarqmail...which I don't think even exists anymore, but that email still works...and every once in a while I find an old app that uses it. But I digress. The clerk stared at me and giggled. She asked me how old this phone was as she had never seen one before. How old is this thing she asked...I keep my phone until it falls apart. I also had to replace a Roku box as it was too old in the guest bedroom...Use it up and Wear it out...my Gran always said! Now I love gadgets and technology and have the latest in many things...like computers and such.

[Spazito]

70. Excellent post!

Thanks for this, it is much appreciated.

[BumRushDaShow]

88. Thanks@

I spent 3 hours early this morning posting even more about this to someone else.

The lessons of 2022 have apparently been dismissed and we're back to the same crap again.

I think the words of Mineral Man apply here - people need to make sure they GOTV and if one can volunteer with voter registration or drive someone to the polls or canvass or whatever, it has to start with "what are WE going to do about it and what can WE do to help?".

[Spazito]

93. Exactly!

It's the voters that make the difference NOT polls and getting out the vote is the key regardless of polls or 'insider' info.

[Demsrule86]

59. Chris had data to back up his assertions...I doubt the campaign folks are going to want to look over cofident

But I could see clearly that the GOP was losing every election since 2017 by big points...even if they won, their margins were cut. This trend escalated after the demise of Roe and the January 6th insurrection. That tells us more than any national poll ever could. They are worthless. Many are slanted. We discussed this when Fetterman was running both in the primary and in the General...well Fetterman won didn't he?

[elias7]

16. By reporting polls rather than news, news orgs just further the bias

Polls to me basically prove how ignorant people are manipulated by propagandists. But the media reports polls about low favorability for Biden, for example, rather than report news as to how he has been the most effective president in most of our lifetimes.

[ancianita]

17. I told you, as well. lol Don't believe the hype.

Last edited Thu Sep 21, 2023, 09:35 AM - Edit history (1)

Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg also noted on Lawrence O'Donnell that polls won't mean anything until April 2024 or later.

[druidity33]

18. The more the media says...

it's a horse race, the more likely they are to question the election results when the Democrats "over-perform" again.

[ananda]

20. Agree 1000 and a half percent!

!!!!!

[GreenWave]

21. Usually it happens this way

GOP biased polls get out way too prematurely.
Conservative owned MSM make multiple mentions of these polls.
They strive for 50/50 results to appear unbiased.

[brooklynite]

23. I watched Hayes' segment. No discussion of "propaganda" or "fake" polls

Link to tweet

[Demsrule86]

65. You missed the point...Hayes assertation was that the success of Democrats since well 2017 indicates

strength...the early polls do not. And I agree.

[brooklynite]

68. The OP specifically claims "propaganda"

[Demsrule86]

101. Some of those polls are propaganda funded by he right like Real Clear Politics...but others are just worthless...

You know, I would think, that early polls with around 1000 participants done nationally are useless. So all this sort of thing does is discourage voters. But it didn't work in 20 or 22. It won't work in 24 either. Chris after showing the polls where Democrats have overperformed for years...said there is a silent majority..and he may be right. Polls would pick it up...Roe Roe your vote. And staging a coup might be a tiny problem for the Republicans... I used sarcasm to indicate it will likely be a huge problem for Republicans.

[brooklynite]

104. The early polls are useful if you know how to interpret them.

They give you a reference point to evaluate changes over time. This race was close to even at the beginning of the year; it's close to even now.

I'll observe that the folks here AREN'T blaming "right wing media"; they're claiming that all media outlets are allegedly biasing their polls.

[SouthernDem4ever]

24. Clinton v Trump should have taught us

Polls are worthless.

[SCantiGOP]

64. Those polls were accurate

They had a margin of error of about 2 1/2%, and the final results were within that range. Even the states that decided the election like WI, PA and MI has Clinton winning about 2% but Trump won by a fraction of a percent.

[4lbs]

29. I'm not "poll" material according to their own methodologies.

Even though I am probably in the age range and political activity they are looking for in their collection,

* I don't own a landline at all.
Got rid of it almost 15 years ago, when Obama was elected.
Been going all cell phones since. Hard to be included when they only call landlines. Usually people in rural areas still have landlines. Those are mostly right-wing because most people in rural areas are such. Also, people in rural areas with landlines tend to be "older" and "more conservative" by nature. So the answers they give tend to reflect that.

* I don't answer my mobile/cell phone if it says "Spam Risk" or something like that.
If it is from an area code that is outside my state, I definitely try to stay away. Also helps against potential phishing and scamming, where they even try to record your voice for some nefarious activity that requires you to 'voice authenticate' (I.E. calls where they simply ask "Can you hear me?" ).
Pollsters are frequently from out-of-state to me, in area codes I don't recognize, and thus would be 'weeded out' in my list.

* I don't have much of a social media presence anymore.
It doesn't mean I'm inactive (although to them, I might be). I just don't feel like I want to post thousands of selfies and memes all over the place. I have better things to do with my time than have my phone appear like it is attached to my fingers all day. I haven't posted on say, FaceBook, for more than a year, and rarely post on Xitter, and don't Insta, use Pinterest, nor Tumblr. I also set it so that only my 'friends' can post on my feed. I've met nearly all of them in real life, and know they exist, and are not bots. Also, nearly all of them have similar political leanings as me, so there is rarely a disagreement. I don't need 1000 'friends', 95% of whom I've never met. I only need 100 quality people that I KNOW and have talked to personally. That is more important to me.

* I tend not to reply to texts, especially those asking for money or to donate.
Repeatedly too. Just ask once, and if I don't respond, assume I don't care to or can't afford it.


Thus, I will likely never be in the "1000 likely voters polled" category, even though I am a 'likely voter' (have voted in EVERY election since 1988, including the midterms, and years where only local/state issues and propositions have been on the ballot).

I suspect there are millions more like me, much more than the people they "poll". They should either change their methodology to make it more possible to include me, or I can just ignore them and their "results" like I have done so for years.

If they want to increase the validity of their results, they have to poll much more than say, 1000 people, living in some area that no one really cares about.
Grab 20,000 city people. You are much more likely to get valid results from that.

[PatrickforB]

36. Good post! That 'can you hear me' scam you mention is good to know about. n/t

[Joinfortmill]

31. Here's a clip from Lawrence O'Donnell...

[PatrickforB]

35. Nice post! Yep, these polls get paid for by super Pacs, as far as I know.

It's ALWAYS all about shareholder PROFITS as opposed to truth.

Our media is owned by publicly held corporations and the fiduciary responsibility of the executives of MSNBC, ABC, CBS etc is ONLY to generate shareholder PROFITS, not actual truth. Polling companies likewise. Problem is the feeling on the part of these greed-lizards is it is much better for shareholder PROFITS to create an imaginary 'horse race.' That's always good for ratings, you know.

Makes me sick.

[Mr. Sparkle]

37. We should also remember that their is a republican presidential primary going on right now

Which means that they are getting all the attention and slightly going up in the polls. The same thing happened to us during our primary but we were showing way bigger leads.

[gab13by13]

48. The Magat primary is over unless Trump tips over.

[JohnSJ]

39. I don't think most polls are propaganda. I think the problem is many people do not answer

calls from numbers they do not recognize, and I think that introduces an unknown error into the polling. For myself I don’t answer calls from numbers I do not recognize.

Also, most of the polling done at this stage is national, and that presents issues also because that isn’t how Presidents and Senators are elected

I think certain assumptions are also made with the current polls, and that is representation of certain demographic groups. Are the young and women being adequately represented in the polls with large enough samplings of those groups? The reason I have question the sampling of young and women is because the polls indicate that the majority support a woman’s right to choose, reasonable gun legislation, climate change action, etc. and the poll sampling seems to contradict that in the closeness of the individuals in general election races.

[Demsrule86]

67. I watched the polls carefully during the Fetterman election. And some were undoubtedly propaganda funded by

the GOP.

[JohnSJ]

72. No doubt

[Deminpenn]

42. Will point, again, to the PA May municipal primary

results for my local school board. A bloc of candidates who represent rational and moderate policies ousted a bloc of rw and tax-ophobic incumbents. In local elections, most candidates cross-file as both R and D. The sane bloc defeated every rw member on the Dem primary side. On the R primary, all but one of the sane candidates won and the who lost had to run as a write-in and still only lost by a handful of votes.

I live in a heavily R area. Dems have little to chance of winning for anything unless they are unopposed. To me, this vote showed that people, even in R, conservative places, are tired of the rw craziness and want elected officials to work together to solve problems.

[hueymahl]

45. Polls have always been used for propaganda - push polling being the extreme example

So I agree with you there. But I hesitate to point to a few limited examples and conclude that all the national polls are wrong. They quality and character of these individual races probably has far more to do with the results and tell us little about what a national race would look like.

[RandySF]

46. Two things.

1. Most voters are not focused on 2024 elections.
2. The press is lazy.

[AllaN01Bear]

49. ive never trusted pollitical polls

[gab13by13]

50. I believe in exit polling,

if it is off we should worry.

[Prairie_Seagull]

51. As already stated, methodologies are out of whack and because of this.

From now until methodologies become trustworthy, I don't see this changing just because 'the' or 'an' election draws near. Polls will be skewed from this day until ?. Maybe, just maybe they could be used to predict how much land-liners are seeing the light. Other than that. Intentional or not.

It's pollpaganda.

IMO

[PurgedVoter]

52. Remember when Nate Silver was accurate?

Yeah right before the big money hit, he could do no wrong. Now, he's just another brick in the wall.

[gab13by13]

56. Yup, he pulled a Lyndsey Graham.

[Demsrule86]

57. I saw that...you and I have been saying this along with a few others as doom and gloom posts about worthless

polls and how Democrats are doomed, doomed I tell you -posted multiple times per day. Bullsit! I wish I could find the chart Chris used but so far I have not found it.

[True Blue American]

73. I posted it above. The link. I can not get the video to come through.

[Bumbolbeee]

69. I agree there is a huge conspiracy

Something smells very fishy.

[KS Toronado]

74. Welcome to DU!

Which conspiracy smells fishy to you?

[Bumbolbeee]

76. The one described in the thread title

The propaganda coordinated by all these pollsters to damage the Democratic Party.

[KS Toronado]

79. I watched this Chris Hayes segment last night

I don't remember them talking conspiracy, they might have, I'm getting old and forgetful, sorry.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

82. Welcome to DU

[yankee87]

94. Welcome

Welcome to DU

[BComplex]

78. Another reason why I never miss a Chris Hayes show. He brings things into focus for

everyone to see what kind of crap we're being fed every day by the "ruling class". I'm so fucking sick and tired of the right wing slant to everything in this country; from a federal legislature that doesn't suffer by the same rules they impose on the masses, to allowing the churches to push their self-righteous bullshit onto the non-participants, to the multi-tier system of justice we somehow tolerate and elevate in this country, to the never-ending right wing propaganda slant to the media, and the "polls" they spew with all the authority in the world.

Something has to change for the better!

[lees1975]

80. I just remember how far off the polls were especially in the Pennsylvania election of

Shapiro and Fetterman and how both of the composites discreetly went back and in their reporting, claimed they'd been within the margin of error, and were correct according to their "odds." And how they missed their GOP house control projection by more than 10 seats and then published after the fact "analysis" claiming they were right on target.

I realize that single elections or special elections in individual states are harder to poll, but wow, did they miss it with Janet Protasiewicz in Wisconsin.

[gab13by13]

84. Wife and I voted in Pa.

We were even told by Democrats that to win in Pa. we needed a more moderate candidate than Fetterman.

Fetterman gets it, some people put on a pair of white boots to look tough, Fetterman is tough.

Fetterman was perfect for Pennsylvania, and for the country.

[Qutzupalotl]

81. Dobbs changed everything.

Unlikely voters are coming out of the woodwork to stop the dismantling of women's rights to bodily autonomy. Republicans don't have a plan for what comes next, except to pretend they didn't cause this, and continue their assault on rights at the state level.

So yes, polls are off, in that they can't see this formerly silent group, now activated. That bodes well for taking back the House and keeping the WH next year. But we have a ton of suffering to get through until Roe can be codified.

[everyonematters]

86. If I remember correctly everything changed after Dobbs including the polls.

The polls showed a close race after Dobbs which was reflected in the results. The Republicans actually got more votes for congress.

[Demsrule86]

103. That is completely not true.

The Republicans had a red fizzle...despite the BS polling. They had the worst midterm result in 25 years.

[everyonematters]

111. This form 538

The Polls Were Historically Accurate In 2022

Let’s give a big round of applause to the pollsters. Measuring public opinion is, in many ways, harder than ever — and yet, the polling industry just had one of its most successful election cycles in U.S. history. Despite a loud chorus of naysayers claiming that the polls were either underestimating Democratic support or biased yet again against Republicans, the polls were more accurate in 2022 than in any cycle since at least 1998, with almost no bias toward either party.

Of course, some pollsters were more accurate than others. And today, we’ve updated the FiveThirtyEight pollster ratings to account for each pollster’s performance in the 2022 cycle. Our ratings are letter grades that we assign to each pollster based on historical accuracy and transparency. (You can read exactly how we calculate pollster ratings here.) They’re one of many tools you should use when deciding how much stock to place in a poll.

[Demsrule86]

105. So you think Dobbs doesn't matter? Your are wrong IMHO...time will tell.

[Think. Again.]

109. Yup....

...right out of the infamous book....

"How To Lie With Statistics"

How to Lie with Statistics is a book written by Darrell Huff in 1954, presenting an introduction to statistics for the general reader. Not a statistician, Huff was a journalist who wrote many how-to articles as a freelancer. The book is a brief, breezy illustrated volume outlining the misuse of statistics and errors in the interpretation of statistics, and how errors create incorrect conclusions. In the 1960s and 1970s, it became a standard textbook introduction to the subject of statistics for many college students. It has become one of the best-selling statistics books in history, with over one and a half million copies sold in the English-language edition. It has also been widely translated. Themes of the book include "Correlation does not imply causation" and "Using random sampling".Wikipedia

[Roc2020]

110. Clickbate. That's what the MSM

is using them for. Ad money. Democrats are kicking the GOP arse in every special election. Polls are fake news and propaganda.

[Rhiannon12866]

113. Here you go, I posted the video in V&M last night:

‘It’s not polling, it’s real’: Dems overperform in 24 of 30 special elections so far in 2023 - All In - MSNBC

Five Thirty Eight compiled the 30 different special elections so far in 2023. In 24 out of these 30 races, Democrats over performed their baseline. “That says something robust and inspiring about where we stand at this moment,” says Chris Hayes. - Aired on 09/20/2023.

[NJCher]

114. correction

Note the actual figures in Rhiannon's post above. Posted as a caption; you don't have to watch the whole video. It's recommended, though. Good stuff. Thanks Rhiannon and 3 cheers for Chris Hayes, too.

[keithbvadu2]

116. There are many polls. Pick the one you like and swear by it. Swear at the others.

There are many polls.

Pick the one you like and swear by it.

Swear at the others.

.................... That's why candidates sometimes refer to mystery polls that no one can locate to check.

[Bumbolbeee]

126. Or average them

Sounds a wild proposition, but worth trying.

[The Wizard]

117. Polls keep many people transfixed on the TV

If they know it's a rout and sell it as a contest they're misinforming the audience.

[calimary]

118. I saw that. It was reassuring.

If anybody's gonna get worried about that stuff, it'd be me.

[Aussie105]

119. Polls mean nothing.

Both sides will say it will be close, to encourage their voters to come out and vote.

Polls are easy to slant, sometimes subconsciously and sometimes deliberately to please those paying for them. Or pollsters' political lean.

Phone polls definitely aren't worth doing. No way you will get a representative cross section of any community.

[LakeArenal]

122. Polls. It's always the same

Same folks think polls are great. Same folks think polls are trash.

Personally I’m in the trash contingent.

[Silent3]

124. I watched the same thing, and no, that's not the message

Last edited Fri Sep 22, 2023, 03:51 AM - Edit history (1)

Just because those special elections are giving Democrats like us the good news that we've currently got voter motivation on our side, polling organizations aren't going to look at those results and immediately shift their models to give Democrats a +6 or +8 bias in the results.

That doesn't, for God's sake, mean "Polls (are) Used For Propaganda". Accept the good news that things could well be better than the polls look, and ditch the tin foil hat conspiracies.

[C Moon]

125. +1