Craptastic Poll

[Kind of Blue]

"A total of 1,001 adults were interviewed by telephone nationwide by live interviewers calling both landline and cell phones. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish. Among the entire sample, 28% described themselves as Democrats, 26% described themselves as Republicans, and 46% described themselves as independents or members of another party."

For the subset of 402 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents who are registered to vote, it is +/- 6.1 percentage points.

https://t.co/9sRP3VDi7m

Link to tweet

[JI7]

1. not sure about this poll but she IS getting A LOT of attacks on the internet

from Russian trolls and their allies.

other candidates get it also but it has been especially bad with her ever since the shit from gabbard.

and im wondering how that might be affecting her with the recent polls.

[DownriverDem]

2. All that matters

is beating trump. It's not who I like or you like. It's who can beat trump.

[Kind of Blue]

4. This poll is not about who I like or who you like.

It's about faulty methodology that no one should like.

[thesquanderer]

8. What's wrong with the methodology?

It looks fine to me.

My issue is that ALL the polls that show who leads the Dem primary are entirely pointless except for determining who gets into debates. People make a big deal out of them, and while they may--or may not--have some value in predicting who will win the nomination, why does that even matter? It's all horse race stuff, with no meaningful relevance to anything.

OTOH, the polls that show how these candidates would do against Trump (and especially in swing states) are VERY important, and could have an impact on who I would vote for in the primary.

[Kind of Blue]

11. To each its own. But I do agree how the candidates do against 45

is very important.

[JI7]

6. what does that have to do with what i posted ?

[Kind of Blue]

3. Yeah, I've seen lots of attacks and lots of support, too.

I don't consider this poll valid at all with that incredibly high margin of error.

[Amimnoch]

5. I don't recall an election in my lifetime where polling is more important.

For many, and I do include myself in this group, the choice isn't being based on policy, or even who would be best.. it's about who will beat trump. There's already other replies on this thread where people are saying the same thing.

Since so many are basing their support, their time, their personal $$ supporting the candidate('s) they think will best do this, having polls that are as accurate as possible (ESPECIALLY in the swing state match-up polls vs Trump) has never been more important.

For myself, I'm placing very little weight on the primary polls (I don't much care who wins the nomination as long as they can beat Trump), and I'm placing very little weight on the nation-wide polls since those are more indicative of how the popular vote will go, and anyone who hasn't gotten it into their head on just how unimportant winning the popular vote is by now really needs their head examined. It's all about the battleground vs Trump matchup polling.

[Kind of Blue]

9. I do recall when polling was very important, especially in the '08 primary.

Then, CNN was proclaiming HRC the winner waay before the convention.

I may be in the minority that thinks we can have both policy and several who can beat 45. So I'm not worried about that in this early stage.

Really, you cannot deny polling influences people's perceptions and I have no control or quarrel with that. But a blatantly awful one, full of Republicans, does concern me.

[Amimnoch]

14. Very respectfully disagree.

If it was as important in '08 then the very example you give of Hillary having such a strong lead early on would have carried her to the win. President Obama won because so many were willing to say damned with the polls, we're picking who we want.

I do very much believe there's a lot fewer this time around willing to risk it given what needs to be removed from the Whitehouse, and many are just looking at who is most capable of removing him.. thus much more focus on what these polls say, and less willingness to ignore them to pick the candidate they'll support.

[Kind of Blue]

15. Yes, let's respectfully disagree.

[Bradical79]

17. Yeah, I think it's a mistake to play "who's most electable".

Though I think among the serious contenders, all of them (even my least favorite) can beat Trump. The election integrity is my biggest worry.

[Bradical79]

16. Polls aren't that important at this point, except for those at the bottom

Right now, it's more about narrowing the field. I also think it's best to vote for who you think would be the best POTUS. The average person is kind of a shit political strategist, and lacks even a basic understanding of statistics.

[Skya Rhen]

7. In the Fox Poll, Harris got 8% - not much difference between 8% and CNN's 5% - both single digits

[Kind of Blue]

10. I like polling, have never trusted Fox but I'll check it out later.

This one that swings widely so that So Pete/Kamala could be polling at either 5, -1, or 11%. Warren/Sanders could be 15%, 9%, or 21%? is just too unreliable for me.

[Skya Rhen]

13. Fox uses an A rated pollster and CNN uses an A- rated pollster...

[SidDithers]

12. DU rec...nt

Sid