Am I the only one paranoid enough to think the voting predictions are propaganda?

[w8liftinglady]

pure and simple-initiated by The Republican Party and their minions.Public consensus seems to be just the opposite.

[Liberal Veteran]

1. Psyops.

And the American Version of Pravda (Fox News).

[fascisthunter]

67. .

[kestrel91316]

2. You're not the only one. I have believed this for years. The polls this

fall are designed to demoralize Dems and convince them to stay home.

[SammyWinstonJack]

108. Did not work on me. I voted early and straight Dem ticket.

:woohoo:

[Jackpine Radical]

3. No, you're not alone.

Unfortunately, when the media & the pollsters all get "on message," they can heavily influence the Undecideds, and can provide cover for vote flipping--making the bogus election match the bogus poll.

[Cosmocat]

14. I think it is clear that ...

the story is driving the analysis ...

Just saw Mark Halpern pretty much having a dry orgasm predicting 70 house seats helping to sweep 10 plus senate seat swing ...

They WANT this to be the case so bad it is driving the polling ...

[Vincardog]

76. This is true and has been and will be as long as they can "adjust' the exit polls to match the BBV

[malaise]

4. Yes and until they return to the exit polls

many will also believe the propaganda covers up electoral fraud.

[Sonoman]

19. I believe Rove destroyed exit polling.

There was a big deal made of the 'fsct' that the exits got it wrong for the first time in 2000.

That was wrong. The first election the exits 'blew' was Richards v Bush.

Sonoman

[malaise]

26. Very interesting n/t

[lob1]

97. The exit polls weren't wrong, the pubs stole the election.

[w8liftinglady]

22. one thing that has pissed ME off-the inference that voting fraud favors the democrats

when the exact opposite has been proven time and time again
http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/2010/09/8-disturbing-examples-voter-suppression-in-america/
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/1954.html

[SheilaT]

36. Exit polling is no longer as valid

as it used to be now that so many people vote early. And all of Oregon votes by mail.

[polichick]

5. I too think it's propaganda meant to influence voters, either to vote with...

...the "winning" team or to stay home.

[Mr Generic Other]

35. i think you're right about that, polichick.

many want to be on the winning side so the corporate media tells us who the winners are to influence that sort of voter.

[monmouth]

6. I think they're all full of it. I pray for egg on faces Wednesday a.m...n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Yes and no

Realize it is also polling methodology.

For the universe of voters they'tre pollingbthey're correct.

They're missing a whole slew of voters, on purpose IMHO.

[Dawson Leery]

10. The CNN/Time poll did not include blacks and latinos

The CNN/Time poll under-represented both cell phone users and those under 50.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. And that is exactly what I mean

By methodology and universes. They're missing whole swaths, excuse, well they don't vote...it is the midterms..

But for the people polled they're correct...albeit it is a small universe that excludes whole other universes. Think vann chart.

[SoCalDem]

57. and when Murdoch captured the WSJ, any polls with their name on it are bogus

All the major media outlets are Giganto-Corps, so they have a definite agenda.

Gallup & Rasmussen have always skewed old/white/right

Take a look at the health care polling..

They all have the capability to word a poll like this:

think the president went far enough on health care?
think the president went too far on health care?
think the president didn't go far enough on health care?

Instead they asked:

approve?
disapprove?

Obviously the disapprove would contain replies from Right AND Left

[NorthCarolina]

104. Polls are only as credible as those conducting the poll. eom

[spanone]

8. when you know how flawed the polling is, it makes one paranoid

[Jackpine Radical]

20. Nonsense.

It only makes you reality-connected.

[phasma ex machina]

79. +1 You can fool some of the polls some of the time, but you can't fool all of the polls all of the

time.

BTW I hate polls.

On second thought, perhaps it's only the results of polls that raises my ire.

Love them or hate them, polls tend to provide a reality check.

[mia]

9. We're not paranoid.

They're really out to get us.

[bemildred]

11. Yes, blatant propaganda, lots of it. nt

[TheDebbieDee]

12. I believe that voting predictions are propaganda that works!

If it didn't work they's quit doing it............

[Odin2005]

15. Polls can be worded or weighted to give the result you want.

[RaleighNCDUer]

89. Not to mention 'random calling' isn't so random.

You're going to get a different demographic calling on weekdays than on evenings or weekends. You also get a different demographic calling land-lines only.

And of course, if you combine weighted wording with non-random calling, you can get really interesting results, I expect.

[TheCowsCameHome]

16. Hype, pure unadulterated hype.

[sarge43]

17. Not paranoid at all. That's exactly what is going on.

The media always needs to make a horse race out of an election. More importantly it's an attempt to discourage, to repress Dem turn out. "We gonna lose, so what's the point?"

[political_Dem]

18. No. Half the battle is media manipulation.

The RW has always used the media to shift the tide toward their favor--even when the public despises them. :(

After all, it is Karl Rove's specialty.

[Lifelong Protester]

21. You are not the only one

I believe that Russ Feingold said that polls are meant to drive the story, not a true reflection of what people really think.

That, and I recall in 2008 the presidential election was a 'horse race' on CNN until the votes showed otherwise. It sells better for them. Has nothing to do with reality.

[tblue37]

23. Of course they are. The narrative is meant to validate the Republican wins when the

electronic vote hacking steals all the close races for the Republicans.

[baldguy]

24. The corporate MSM doesn't want to cover issues; they want to cover contests.

Political campaigns are the biggest, liveliest reality shows around - and the networks don't even have to pay for them. They create loyalties for the two major tribes (forget about the others), drool watching to see which member survives and which one doesn't, and laughs when individuals get voted off the island. Just like any other game.

But, should they draw attention to real issues that effect the lives of real people? Never! If they did then their would be no contest.

[Bitwit1234]

25. They are NOT propaganda

they are poopaganda.

[Life Long Dem]

27. DNC Chair: No Sign of GOP Wave in Early Voting

Kaine Says Turnout of Registered Democrats Indicates Better-Than-Predicted Performance in Midterms

(CBS) The chairman of the Democratic National Committee was optimistic that turnout of registered Democratic in early voting across the nation belies a predicted wave of Republican victories on Election Day.

Appearing on CBS' "Early Show" this morning, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, said, "Folks are saying there's going to be a massive wave for Republicans, but the early voting analysis across the nation is showing that Democrats are doing very well in early voting."

Predictions that an "enthusiasm gap" would mean higher turnout of registered Republicans versus Democrats, said Kaine, aren’t borne out. "It's not showing up in the early voting stats that are coming along.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/10/29/earlyshow/main7003021.shtml

[Kalyke]

74. I believe that the enthusiasm gap narrative was truthful...

SIX MONTHS AGO!

But, once sluggish Dems and nonchalant Indies got a gander at the kettle full of spittle the Republicans were putting forth, then the enthusiasm to keep these idiots out of office toppled back in the direction of the left.

Granted, we don't know how those early voting voters voted (the ballots aren't opened or counted, yet, they're simply showing more registered Dems voted), but the fact that the Dem turnout seems to be so high is either a function of the Teabaggery on the right, a backlash against a corporate-owned media who is screaming that the "Dems lost!" before a vote is counted or both.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

28. No

:bounce: but remember, we're not really paranoid if they actually are after us....... :)
besides, for the most part the media is now in the hands of the conservatives. Watergate, as my primary example, would never happen today. Although it makes me wonder; Woodward being involved with the Watergate story and how he let Iraq go right by until it was too late..........

[randr]

29. The paranoid inside of me thinks the polls are made up as

cover for stolen elections.
When expectations are not met people begin to question the results.
I do not find it coincidental that the exit polling crashed the same night Bush stole Florida.

[GreenPartyVoter]

30. I think that they are definitely trying to be, yeah.

[pacalo]

31. No. n/t

[elleng]

32. Not paranoid, CORRECT. We are surrounded by propaganda,

and it will only continue and increase, esp since now we're headed into 2012, and rover is in charge.

We must all BEWARE, and more important, we and 'official' Dems MUST address this, at every turn, from now on.

[stray cat]

33. There are lots of paranoid people - tea par tiers think Obama wants to lock them up for re-education

[tavalon]

34. Nope you aren't. I posted a similar thread last night

Diebold lives in my nightmares.

[BzaDem]

37. Partisan Democrat pollsters (who were correct about 2008 and 2009) say the exact same thing. n/t

[ellenfl]

38. nope, been thinking that for months now. after all, who is telling

us that we will not win? the corporate/conservative (as opposed to liberal, dontcha know) msm, of course! 'grain of salt' has been my mantra.

ellen fl

[Scuba]

39. No. And it's obvious. n/t

[oswaldactedalone]

40. I think the pollsters try to be scientifically accurate

and for years they were very close. The rise of the cell phone though has messed up their science a little bit, although I'm hearing that they are beginning to correct for some of this. The other missing piece could be GOTV efforts becoming more sophisticated. Still, the cell phone bias can't be more than 2-3% and the GOTV stuff could be worth two points. Bottom line, we're going to lose big, the question is how big.

The pollsters can't be that far off.

What the Dems are going to have to do is: 1. Find a way to message better, 2. Try to make inroads at having a liberal mouthpiece in the media, 3. Be determined to register voters and connect with voters year-round, and 4. Educate our voters so that they feel knowledgable about the mechanics of casting their vote.

If we can't control the propaganda, we have to control the activity in the trenches where the voters are.

[CommonSensePLZ]

59. Sounds reasonable nt.

[shimmergal]

65. I think caller-ID

has messed up the "science" even more than cell phones have. Now people don't have to answer calls from unfamiliar numbers or deceptive names.

[Truth2Tell]

88. The pollsters can't be that far off?

Yes they can, and frequently are. For example, there's an OP in GD right now wondering about the "tied" Senate race in WA. One of the recent polls driving this "tied" meme is the Rasmussen Poll from the day before yesterday. But, as Nate Silver points out, Rasmussen polls for Federal races in WA vs actual results have skewed an average of 5 points in favor of Republicans since 2000. That's pretty huge. One wonders why anyone in the media would continue to uncritically report polling from pollsters who predictably generate inaccurate results.

[oswaldactedalone]

41. dupe

[juajen]

42. Yep, it's propaganda. NT

[donheld]

43. I'm right there with you.

[TexasObserver]

44. No. The corporations which own major media have no moral compunctions.

They are the borg.

[mahina]

45. I've been worrying about that myself.

[lunasun]

46. you are not alone! nt

[CommonSensePLZ]

47. Considering that the GOPs lead has widdled down to a toss-up yet they keep

Going on about how hopeless it is for the dems, I'm gonna say YES.

I know the media is a pile of shit, but I don't get why they do it. Why'd they support Obama a couple of years ago but the GOP now?

[FrenchieCat]

48. YOu ask.....I'll answer.

Obama, the Janitor, was needed to clean up the mess and get the blame, and too many were voting for him for them to be able to lie with ease.......

It is a better story to have him win, and when they realize he ain't playing their game, to handcuff him with a Republican congress just 20 months later.

They are starting on him for 2012. Watch the talk of primarying him in 2012 start in about ...1, 2, 3, NOW!

[political_Dem]

51. +100000

[deacon]

49. Propaganda to lower the vote, yes. MSM steering the elections. n/t

[Daphne08]

50. No, you're not. n/t

[Lilith Unfair]

52. The only poll that counts is the one on Election Day

I don't know who said that, but, whoever s/he was, BINGO!

[info being]

56. Assuming fair elections, yes.

[caliform]

53. I think we ought to learn about polls

What if schools and community groups taught the voting public about poll methodology> I know it sounds like a yawner to some people but what if we all learned what questions to ask about polls, and how poll questions can unfairly bias answers. If it was common knowledge, then every pollster would have to explain to us, show us, post their data etc. For example, what size of sample is statistically sufficient? Offhand I don't know but I'd like to.
I've thought that about budget issues too. Instead of being told that 'there's no money this year', I think it would be good if, slowly and over time, those we elect to govern us create videos intended to bring us up to speed on budget issues so we could particpate more. I recall reading a long time ago that when our country was just a few years old, every person you encountered, regardless of their status or education level, had an idea about the issues and could offer a reasoned opinion. I am now officially paranoid and I don't feel like I know what polls mean and why there's never any money in the budget for things I want and plenty of money in the budget for things I don't want. I realize this kind of education could take time but I'm willing to learn and I don't like feeling helplessly out of the loop.

[FreeJoe]

54. It's clear that you aren't the only one, but....

I can't join you. In 2006 and 2008 the polls correctly predicted the Democratic surge. Why didn't they lie then? Why are the pollsters hired by Democratic candidates telling us the same thing that the MSM pollsters are telling us?

It's time to face a few simple facts. The voters are angry and are taking it out on the party in power. They don't love or even really support the Republican platform. They just want to punish us. Honestly, the same thing happened in 2008. A big part of our success was riding a wave of anti-Republicanism rather than pro-Democrat feelings.

It leaves me wondering what the hell the voters want. Perhaps they don't really know. Perhaps the relentlessly negative campaigning that is the norm these days doesn't prepare the country for mandates but only sours everyone of politicians.

[madokie]

55. I agree and we're fixing to find out for sure here shortly

maybe that will put to rest the hatred for our very capable President, Naw not gonna happen, wrong color

[Hannah Bell]

58. no. but what isn't, these days?

[deaniac21]

60. This public consensus has a sample size of ?

[jpgray]

61. Not if you view them as propaganda only when they are unfavorable for your cause

It seems almost everyone does that.

[Betty Karlson]

62. Vtoing predictions are based on landline households.

Cell phone only households have not been thrown in, which is why all polls favour GOP by about 2.7 % (cell phone brigade is leaning Dem)

[nannah]

63. ch ching you just passed your neuropsych eval!!!!! n/t

[nannah]

64. ch ching you just passed your neuropsych eval!!!!! n/t

[AspenRose]

66. I agree with you.

I wish Michael Moore would take this on in a documentary.

[Chemical Bill]

68. No.

Polls are shown to favor repukes. Vote tallies favor repukes when compared to exit polls. It really isn't paranoia.

[Skidmore]

69. Formalized voter suppression mechanism.

[pruple]

70. They've been telling us the results of this election since Nov. 2009.

[goforit]

71. WTF....Where have you been in the last twenty years???

Propaganda....hell ya!!!

The NEW WORLD ORDER confirms that the right people get in.

[Tippy]

72. K&R for truth

[we can do it]

73. I Agree, too

[cascadiance]

75. Yeah, and I think its made to make it appear like there's no election fraud...

... when perhaps there is. If the expectations were the other way, and they twisted some elections, then we'd be up in arms. Perhaps Al Greene was a test to see how far they could go.

[yurbud]

77. it will be until they start polling cell phone users who are younger and less conservative

[truedelphi]

86. + 1 for every cell phone user out there. n/t

[Desertrose]

78. You are definitely not the only one.n/t

[ladjf]

80. What we may have here is a case of self-full-filling propaganda. nt

[moondust]

81. Maybe.

One possible scenario is that the corporate media use phony polls to create a narrative over a period of months and that leads the gullible public to the desired outcome. Much of the gullible public falls for it and climbs on board with "the inevitable winners." The polls themselves then only have to be "in the ballpark" at the very end in order to preserve some of the pollster's credibility.

:shrug:

[gulliver]

82. It is propaganda, but it comes from media sycophancy.

That makes it even worse than if it were the Republicans doing it deliberately. The media scans the American public constantly, begging to be liked. It uses the first few polls to find out how the public feels. Then it creates a narrative, because that is the only thing most people understand. From then on, the vain, diffident, ill-informed public tries to conform to the narrative, and the media bows and scrapes right up through election day.

Polling would be fine if there were no interpretation of the polls and if the media did its job as fact checker. Instead, it lazily and cheaply chews its cud most of the time. Eventually, journalists are going to realize that sound information and analysis have value, and everything else can be mass produced by monkeys. I think the pink slip tidal wave has already given some of them a clue, but it looks like a lot more are needed.

[whathehell]

83. No and Hell No..

I've been thinking (and saying) if for weeks.

I honestly believe we are going to lose this country if we don't do something about the media.

[redirish28]

84. No you are not. The way these polls and data our put out and spinned

this country it truly is becoming propaganda for both sides.

[DirkGently]

85. MSNBC's "Hurricane" headed for Dems headline wasn't even backed up by its own story.

Other than Fox, I stop short of accusing the "MSM" of conspiracy, but I agree with Rachel that the press has latched onto the "incumbents will be crushed" narrative and is slow to let go even in the face of contrary facts. It's lazy, cliched reporting, with one source after another building on convenient "storyline" rather than actually analyzing what's going on.

"Close and unpredictable, with some anti-incumbent momentum" is closer to the way things are shaping up.

[Raksha]

87. I think they are propaganda, but not only Republican propaganda.

Some of it could also be coming from the Democratic Party in an attempt to motivate disillusioned Obama voters, who might otherwise not bother to vote. They might be trying to make the races look a lot closer than they really are.

[JJ]

90. Old fashioned marketing

to get people "on the bandwagon" because no one wants to be on the losing side.

[RadicalTexan]

91. I've always thought that.

Well, since I was in my early 20s, anyway.

[pasto76]

92. especially this year, YES

[Hekate]

93. You're not paranoid when people really are out to get you, or in this case, us.

[kenfrequed]

94. its cover

It is cover to depress turn out and make the election close enough to be steal-able. Failing that, even if they would normally lose by a large margin it might let them try to steal it anyways and declare it a tea-party grass roots victory.

This means we have to get out the vote even more. We have to overwhelm and swamp the conservatives. We have to crank up our turn out to the point where even the corporate media and the tea party intimidators and the damned Diebolt machines cannot hand congress over to the repugniks.

[JDPriestly]

95. Here in Los Angeles, very few people are voting Republican,

and those Republicans I know are sort of looking scared and whispering among themselves.

Sure looks good for Democrats here in L.A.

[katty]

98. yup it does

[krabigirl]

100. I live in oc, and while many are voting repuke or for nightingale (!!), they are for prop 19.

However i meet many people voting for dems.

[katty]

107. yes, after the Auh-nold, etal CA appears to be going Dem

and i think that the clean-tech sector has done a great job of getting the message out, if you want more clean/green tech jobs created in CA don't expect the GOP to do a damn thing about that as they are still carrying oil for their black gold billionaire bankrollers.

[BlueJac]

96. Time will tell......

I hope you are right

[krabigirl]

99. No, you aren't. I think so as well.

I take it up a notch lol..i kinda think they are manipulated so they can steal elections, and then refer to the polls in case people question the results.

[roody]

101. not paranoid--it is so.

[abelenkpe]

102. Certainly think that about prop 19

but the press is convinced it's going down. Seems out of character to me, but whatever.

[XanaDUer]

103. No

I think they want to discourage folks who might vote or will vote Dem from doing so, since, "it won't matter."

[xloadiex]

105. I think the polls

show republicans winning so when they cheat their way in, nobody will really question it.

[customerserviceguy]

106. You're not the only one to think that

but I can't say that I agree with you. What you call "public consensus" is the opinion of the folks around you, at least those that will voice that opinion in your presence. I've lived in big cities and small towns, and I know that there's a vast diversity of political opinion out there, it's a mistake to believe that your lifestyle and socioeconomic cohort's worldview is shared by everybody in the country, right or left. We win sometimes, we lose sometimes, depending on how the mushy middle goes.

One of the ways I've protected myself is lowered expectations. I frankly expect the Rethugs to take over between 90 and 100 House seats, and I do expect them to get a majority in the Senate, I figure this is a wave election, and there will be at least one 'safe' Democratic seat that will flip, probably in NY (Gillebrand), MD, or OR. I also expect the Repukes to run the table on any 'close' votes. It's just not our year.

But I also take some comfort in the fact that while it may not have happened in the political memory of too many people alive today, our nation's history is marked with huge back-and-forth swings between the parties, usually accompanied by very trying times, such as the recessions of the late 19th Century, WWI, and the end of WWII. Truly, we are in some extremely stressful times, and we may see a number of swings between the parties until the country can shake off the problems that it is now faced with.

With that in mind, I look forward to the displacement of DINO's and Blue Dogs, and their replacement with tea partiers that will display their true stupidity to the American public in the next two years. Yes, we know they're insane right now, but the rest of the country needs to catch up with us on that. Sunlight is the disinfectant that will allow them to show their true selves, and when the President is at the top of the ticket, we will have progressive candidates to run when America is finally ready to put the grown-ups back in charge.

[toledoman1962]

109. Makes me kind of scared

I have heard very few polls that indicate we can win......it gets really demoralizing after a while