It's funny how polls are "completely meaningless"...

[TwilightZone]

until they show what you want them to show. Then, they're completely accurate.

Pretty convenient, that.

[MADem]

1. Only one poll counts.

The one on election day.

[TwilightZone]

9. Sometimes, not even that one counts.

2000, for example.

[MADem]

36. 2004, too. But at least we know the truth about those. NT

[Dr. Strange]

2. Is this about the BCS?

God, I hate the BCS!

[bunnies]

3. I must be psychic.

I knew exactly what this post was going to say before I even read it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. Welcome to DU

;)

In addition, any article which contains less than flattering information about your favorite candidate is a 'hit piece.'

[TwilightZone]

12. On a related note, any source becomes legitimate if it fits the agenda.

Usually justified with the "even a broken clock..." defense.

[theredpen]

14. It's exactly the same in Freeperland

Must be some law of the universe.

[AtomicKitten]

5. Kinda like astrological forecasts, eh?

I'm a big fan of the Ouija board myself.

[wyldwolf]

6. sorry. Any poll taken online is meaningless.

For example, I often vote in the KOS straw poll 3-4 times.

[TwilightZone]

8. Don't be sorry.

I completely agree. If online polls were indicative of anything, Ron Paul would be the presumptive favorite on the Republican side.

[dionysus]

16. lol, figured you'd pull a cheater move like that.... bwaaaa

[wyldwolf]

17. yeah, along with thousands of others. I wish I could marsall a bunch and throw it to Gravel

[Alexander]

21. Nice to see you are honest about your dishonesty.

[wyldwolf]

24. glad you approve.

[Alexander]

19. Sounds like something Freepers would do.

Let me guess, you think two wrongs make a right.

[wyldwolf]

25. ...or "DU this poll" DUers.

:)

[inthebrain]

7. The polls that had Dean leading in Iowa in 04

sure were accurate.

[wyldwolf]

10. they were - at the time they were taken.

I don't understand why people have a hard time understanding polls are snap shots of the electorate's feeling at the time the poll was taken. Polls are not meant to be predictive.

[inthebrain]

11. Yes they are

The object of a poll is to predict the outcome. That's why they try to grab a random sample of respondents. The problem is that they are all done over the phone and do not include callers that don't respond to the polling. That throws off the random sampeling.

[wyldwolf]

15. no they are not - show me one poll two months out that said "Dean will win Iowa."

[inthebrain]

23. here

Although polls show Dean in first place among Iowa voters, Rep.Dick Gephardt of Missouri was a close second, with Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina not far behind.

Polls also indicated a large number of voters remained undecided and could sway the voting in Iowa's caucuses January 19. (CNN.com's interactive Election Calendar)

Gephardt, Kerry and Edwards took each other on in campaign stops and interviews Monday, with much of their criticism targeting Dean.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/12/elec04.prez.democrats.iowa/index.html

Dean and Gephardt were the frontrunners heading into Iowa.

[wyldwolf]

26. yeah... but it doesn't say "Dean will win Iowa." It tells who the voter preference was on 1/13/04

[inthebrain]

27. Doesn't have Kerry leading in it

As a matter of fact, he's in third behind Gephardt and Dean.

[wyldwolf]

28. because on the day the poll was taken, Kerry was not the voter's first preference

[inthebrain]

29. No, the pollsters completely fucked this thing up

and they often do it.

[wyldwolf]

30. nope, they did their job in measuring the voter's intent in that time period

As they always do.

[TwilightZone]

33. Exit polls showed that the majority of Iowans didn't choose a candidate until the last few days.

That being the case, the polls could have been accurate for the polling period, and many voters made a change at the last minute.

[Renew Deal]

34. Here are the polls from 2004

On January 10 Dean was the leader. On January 28, Kerry was the leader bigtime.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04dem.htm

That doesn't mean the polls fucked up. Also, look for polls for Iowa the night before the election. They showed Kerry winning.

[Renew Deal]

32. That's incorrect

The poll is a snapshot of public opinion at the time it was taken. It is not predictive in any way.

[Renew Deal]

13. That's always the case.

Even in the GE. It's actually kind of funny.

[IntravenousDemilo]

18. Except for the big one, polls ARE meaningless except as a device for cajoling public opinion.

It's a call to action. If you want your issue in the public consciousness, even if it's something most people don't think about on a daily basis, organize a poll and then publicize the hell out of the results. Do enough of them using "artful" language, and you start to make people agree with your position, then after that will come the inevitable petition to get your issue on the ballot.

[Joe Chi Minh]

20. Not at all. Bush and his Neocons are so unpopular, the best they can hope

for is damage limitation. Consequently, when my favoured politicians appear to be favoured by the polls, I'm actually annoyed, because it will almost certainly be to understate their popularity.

On the other hand, when Clark, Hillary, Giuliani et all appear to be "top of the pops", imo, it is highly likely that the polls were skewed by the way in which the question was framed, and/or the very unrepresentative target catchment.

The worst type though are the Republican polls prior to an election, which almost invariably act as a component of their "noise machine", to establish a spurious plausibility they can hurl at those who question a fraudulent result.

Back to the Twilight Zone, now, Tex, there's a good chap.

[quinnox]

22. It is amusing

And for instance when Hillary had polls showing her beatiing all the republicans we don't hear a peep from the same people who then when a poll shows her losing to a republican trumpet it like its the last word!

[Renew Deal]

31. And they're going to make it hurt.

Google says there are 177 stories about this already. http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&q=zogby+%2B+hillary

This story will spread on a day where Hillary said she can beat anyone. The polls will make her look like a lier.

[damntexdem]

35. True, that is a good thing about them.

Unfortunately, there just aren't enough of those completely accurate ones. ;-)

[TwilightZone]

38. Off-topic - I like your signature line.

It's quite appropriate!

[Perry Logan]

37. Well, but they ARE.