DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:20 AM
Original message |
Debate Helps Clinton Solidify Lead* |
|
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 10:02 AM by DemocratSinceBirth
Data from the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll shows that on the two nights following the debate (Wednesday and Thursday) Clinton held a 45% to 18% lead over Barack Obama. For Clinton, that’s an improvement from Monday and Tuesday nights when her lead over Obama had been 40% to 24%. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/debate_fallout_has_no_immediate_impact_on_clinton_poll_position*My header is based on an interpetation of the results...That's what the data is there for; to make inferences from it...
|
BeyondGeography
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:23 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Rasmussen: Give it time |
|
==Caution must be used in interpreting these results for several reasons.
First, the sample sizes are very small—447 Likely Primary Voters on the first two nights and 435 on the second two nights. The margin of sampling error for each set of data is +/- 5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. So, Clinton’s gain and Obama’s decline may be nothing more than statistical noise. However, it is fairly safe to conclude that Obama did not immediately gain any ground.
Second, while there was no immediate impact, it is possible that Obama and Edwards will find a way to capitalize on the Clinton stumbles between now and the Iowa caucuses on January 3. In fact, general public awareness of the debate performance may continue to grow on its own over the coming weeks. Additionally, there may be a general election impact as Senator Clinton’s answer supported two enormously unpopular concepts (drivers licenses for illegal immigrants and the comprehensive immigration reform that failed in the Senate).
Third, while there is little or no national fallout from the debate, the impact may be different in early voting state. Clinton currently leads in both Iowa and New Hampshire, Rasmussen Reports will conduct additional polling in these states over the next two weeks.==
|
DUyellow
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
9. all of these polls are a joke. How many of those 447 votes even watched the debate? |
BeyondGeography
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
12. It's pretty dismal...here's more on that |
|
==Separate survey data shows that political pundits and junkies are likely to overestimate the immediate impact of Clinton’s debate performance. Much of the nation was simply not paying attention. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of 800 Likely Voters nationwide found that just 56% knew that the Democrats were the party with a Presidential debate this week. Thirteen percent (13%) thought it was the GOP’s turn while 31% are not sure.
Just 38% could pick immigration from a list of four issues as the topic that caused Clinton to stumble near the end of the debate. Eleven percent (11%) picked the War in Iraq, 5% health care, 4% the economy, 6% “some other topic”, and 36% admitted they didn’t know.==
|
PATRICK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
38. The real political impact |
|
of a debate is in the one thought, one liner aftermaths even for the people who actually watched the debates. For most people it is like hearing about a sports game they are mildly interested in. Who won, how did they do and what interesting things were said or happened. IF there is a heated media discussion in the days after, the people might tune into that.
If debates mattered critically then Nixon would have been overwhelmed instead of just losing a squeaker, Bush would have been finished by ANY of his debate performances. Bush's disasters were always given a pass or just went away. A feeding frenzy orchestrated against Gore or anyone else the media wants you to think of as a "loser" will have more effect than one person watching the debate themselves.
The candidates know this and get into the game. First do a good, safe debate. Then capitalize after where the real action is. The one who STILL is able to conduct a good, bold debate and have the spin to work with after is indeed a marvel. Usually a frontrunner cannot risk even trying to have it both ways.
I am more interested at how many and who are interpreting Clinton so as to determine the why. Gingrich says she is toast in his blunt, self-important sort of way because he wants her out so the GOP can get clobbered and turn to him once more? That Clinton is truly getting too far ahead as in NY and they need a three way split to take the steam out of the party. So pile-on is the media game? It takes time to even see what the picture is much less to analyze its effect.
I would guess, in the non-existent logical world, that the polite drubbing of Clinton will be neutralized by her mild, sidelong defense. Essentially she is falling back on herself and people will get to judge what that means, fairly or otherwise with the steady interference of the other campaigns and the press.
Saying she is toast because of any debate is only true if most of the people think it is- without any factual knowledge necessary to support it. We know how she would fare vote-wise on DU, win a few lose a few. By the same dramatic pronouncements, aha! Bush would be swinging from the Hague gallows by now. The ripples becoming waves take a lot more time to discover and everything lately except autocratic war gets less and less potent.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
15. I Think Around 3,000,000 Or So People Watched The Debate |
jsamuel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:25 AM
Response to Original message |
2. of course it "has no immediate impact" |
|
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 09:25 AM by jsamuel
no one said it would
it is just seeping into the water supply now... give it time
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
7. It Might Hurt Her In The General |
|
But she will pivot it by then...Great strategy...Great tactics...The Clintons are to politics what Bill Belichik is to the NFL and Gregg Popovich and Phil Jackson are to the NBA...
|
Teaser
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
21. "What Bill Belichik is to the NFL" |
|
Do you mean a cheater and absolutely classless?
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
39. I Prefer To Call Him A Champion |
|
You notice since that incident the Pats have been beating their opponents by a margin of twenty or more points...
|
Ninga
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
27. Belichik sure didn't do Cleveland any favors...did he? Point is that he was down before he got up. |
tridim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:27 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Wonder when she'll hit 99% in Rasmussen's polling? |
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:28 AM
Response to Original message |
|
She reminds me of my other hero, Muhammad Ali...He literally let himself be a punching bag for eight rounds to the most feared fighter of his generation, George Foreman,so Foreman could waste all his energy... And then when Foreman was sapped of his energy, Ali knocked him out and recaptured the championship belt that the U S government and the boxing commission stole from him...
Hillary let herself be a punching bag to her eight opponents and she did it for us...
|
IndianaJones
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
The simple fact is she let herself being a punching bag, took the blows, in service of a higher cause; winning the presidency for us...
|
geek tragedy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:29 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Story title: Debate Fallout Has No Immediate Impact on Clinton Poll Position |
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. Do You Just Read The Headlines? |
|
Look at the polling done after the debate...Her numbers are rising...
|
geek tragedy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
1) The shift is entirely within the margin of error;
2) Correlation is not evidence of causation.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
At worst the evidence suggests the debate didn't hurt her at ALL, and at best it suggests the debate actually HELPED her.
If it's any consolation Barack Obama can look at himself in the mirror after the debate ...I can't say that for the other guy...
|
geek tragedy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
|
But, positioning is important. The primary contest is a process, not a series of independent events.
Now the seed of doubt has been planted in people's minds. No doubt that some immediate sympathy for her followed--thanks in part to her pleas for it--but that will wear off just like the Edwards bump from the cancer announcement wore off.
The doubts, however, will remain.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
20. I Remember The Seeds Of Doubt About Bill Clinton In 1991 |
|
Those seeds gave us only one of three full two term Democratic presidents in the entire twentieth century...
The Clintons are to politics what Bill Belichik is to the NFL and Gregg Popovich is to the NBA...They are masters of strategy, planning, and execution and are unsurpassed at responding positively to negative events...
They are professionals among amateurs...
|
geek tragedy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
36. Bill is a lot more gifted on stage than Hillary. |
|
Not even close.
Her mind is every bit the equal of his, but he can pull of evasion a lot better than she can.
|
yellowcanine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
16. It is a bit misleading to change the headline as you did. |
|
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 09:49 AM by yellowcanine
If the polling firm didn't interpret the results that way you should not either. They know how the data was collected and didn't come to that conclusion, at least not unequivocally. You could have used the original headline and added a "but" or something like that to suggest there MAY be a trend in Hillary's favor. That would have been a more accurate reflection of what the story was.
On edit: The authors of the story were careful to note that the results are not all that reliable so caution should be used.....
Caution must be used in interpreting these results for several reasons.
First, the sample sizes are very small—447 Likely Primary Voters on the first two nights and 435 on the second two nights. The margin of sampling error for each set of data is +/- 5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. So, Clinton’s gain and Obama’s decline may be nothing more than statistical noise. However, it is fairly safe to conclude that Obama did not immediately gain any ground.
Saying "Obama did not gain any ground" is not the same as saying "Clinton solidified her position."
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
17. That Was My Subjective Intterpetation Of Objective Data |
|
The Hill increasing her lead in the wake of the debate can be attributed to one of two factors; she has (really) increased her lead or the increase in her lead is the result of statistical noise. Based on a careful review of the evidence I chose the former as is my right...
|
yellowcanine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
19. I still think it does not warrant changing the headline of a linked story. |
|
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 09:59 AM by yellowcanine
If you are going to do that then you ought to also at least present the alternative interpretation. You say, "Don't just read the headline." but all you presented as an interpretation of the story was your headline which contained your subjective interpretation of the data. That seems a little misleading, to say the least.
On edit: And I would note - you presented the raw data without reporting the margins of error. You really can't defend that.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
22. Du Has A Three Paragraph Limit |
|
I try to avoid the limit...
And I provided a link...I can not be responsible for the indolence of the readers...
The bottom line is Senator Obama and John Edwards are losing, and losing rather spetacularly...
|
yellowcanine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #22 |
24. Now that is a copout and you know it. First of all it is a 4 paragraph limit, and |
|
it applies to posting copyrighted articles - the limit is 4 paragraphs. Secondly that limit in no way prevented you from providing an accurate summary of the story, including the margin of error, in your own words. And finally, how does that limit have anything to do with substituting your own headline with quite a different meaning for the original headline of the story - my original objection to your OP? I am not trying to be a hardass here, but your explanations are getting a little silly. If you disagree with me, just say it, don't offer up these lame excuses.
From the forum rules.....
Copyrights: Do not copy-and-paste entire articles onto this discussion forum. When referencing copyrighted work, post a short excerpt (not exceeding 4 paragraphs) with a link back to the original.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #24 |
25. Life Is Too Short To Play Sematic Games |
|
I linked the article...It is there, in all its glory, for anyone who wants to investigate...
The bottom line is Senator Obama and Senator Edwards are trailing and trailing rather badly...
|
yellowcanine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #25 |
28. I don't think you understand the meaning of "semantic". But anyway, yes - that is the |
|
bottom like - Obama and Edwards continue to trail Clinton by a long shot. But that was not what you posted in the OP, was it? Nice goalpost shift, that. You won't win any debating points, that is for sure.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #28 |
29. I Understand The Word |
|
You miss the forest for the trees or is it the trees for the forest... The larger narrative is the debates didn't help Edwards and Obama and quite possibly may have hurt them; your obscurantist tactics nothwithstanding...
Touche
|
yellowcanine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #29 |
30. Parroting slogans...."semantic games", "forest for the trees", etc, does not an argument make. |
|
And one cannot "touche" one's own argument. It is normally awarded by the opponent or an independent observor. At least that has been my experience...
And I noticed that in your cliche slinging you have still somehow failed to defend your use of a misleading headline. Silence implies what? Only you know.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #30 |
31. I'm As Patient As You |
|
We can maintain this mano a mano on to infinity if you so desire.
My header was based on my analysis of the data, nothing more and nothing less...
Oh, touche!
|
yellowcanine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #31 |
32. One could say the same of Bush and his unwillingness to admit error. |
|
Of course some might call it something else. And Bush likes to heap accolades on himself also. And you are apparently more patient than I am because this is starting to repeat. That is where I get off.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #32 |
33. Persistence Is A Virtue |
|
“Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent."
-Calvin Coolidge
great quote, lousy pres...
|
yellowcanine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
35. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds - Ralph Waldo Emerson |
|
I don't know about you but if we are going to start dueling quotes I will take Emerson over Coolidge any day. Of course there is always the possibility one thinks it is a wise consistency......
Congratuations, though, you kept me on this with an interesting quote even if it was Coolidge. Says a lot about why he was such a lousy president, by the way. A tinge of anti-intellectuallism there and modern history has plenty of contrary examples, including Coolidge himself, Hitler, Joe McCarthy, Nixon, and of course, George Bush and his determined neocon backers.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
|
When nothing seems to help, I go look at a stonecutter hammering away at his rock perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it. Yet at the hundred and first blow it will split in two, and I know it was not that blow that did it, but all that had gone before.”
- Jacob Riis
|
yellowcanine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #37 |
40. Well apologies to Jacob but it is not just persistence that breaks the stone, |
|
it is also knowing where to place the blows and how hard to strike each time. I know. I have cut stone by hand. To an observor it may appear that the stone cutter is striking the stone the same way everytime but he isn't. Yes it takes persistence but not blind persistence. And contrary to Coolidge's little bromide, it takes a great deal of knowledge also - knowledge of the stone, knowledge of how to use the tools effectively.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
41. You Are A Fun Adversary, Opponent, Whatever |
|
I just think my simple post and spin contained therein has been deconstructed six ways to Sunday...
PEACE
DSB
|
yellowcanine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #41 |
illinoisprogressive
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 09:39 AM
Response to Original message |
14. rassm. stuff is done by Penn's pal Schoen. not reliable. And |
|
any fallout probably will not be known right away. it may be a few weeks.
|
William769
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 10:29 AM
Response to Original message |
23. Lets' not forget her jump in the polls in South Carolina, since the BIGOT tour. |
FredScuttle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
26. Yeah....how did hiring a "ex-gay" clown work out for Obama in SC? |
jmp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 12:16 PM
Response to Original message |
34. In other words ... "Vote for Hillary because she's ahead in the polls." |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 06th 2024, 05:30 PM
Response to Original message |