Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I found out why Kucinich is so far down in the polls.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:06 PM
Original message
I found out why Kucinich is so far down in the polls.
My New Hampshire phone rings (caller ID 000-000-0000 WTF?)and I pick it up out of curiosity. "This is (talking like a magpie so I haven't got a clue what the name of the company is)Research. Would you like to be part of a poll for the Democratic presidential primary candidate?" I agree and the woman rapidly reads the list of candidates. "Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Dodd, Biden and Richardson." I say, "Kucinich." The woman on the phone says "Who?" I say, "Kucinich. Dennis Kucinich." I hear coaching in the background - apparently the call is being monitored. "I'm sorry, but Dennis Kucinich is not on our list. Is there anyone on the list I gave you who you would vote for?"

So there you have it. Kucinich is down in the polls because he isn't included in the polls . . . and you can forget about Gravel, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. it is pretty blatant isn't it?
remember the ABC photo cropping him out? This sucks. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radiclib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
27. This is why polling should be BANNED
except for exit polling. ANY poll can be manipulated for the desired result.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. haven't they eliminated exit polling?
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radiclib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. Good point.
Doh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #29
80. No they've just politicalized it like the elections, DoJ, and everything else.
:mad:

We should trust them. The same folks rigging everything else have taken over the polls to push candidates of their choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dickbearton Donating Member (577 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #29
96. Sure, after the Criminal Bush stole the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #27
51. Since all methodologies can be manipulated for a desired result,
are you for banning science altogether?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #51
54. I'm for banning the people that exploit it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #54
56. Yes. There should be criminal penalties for using "science"
to mislead the public. Unfortunately our police powers are focused on taggers, pot smokers, homeless people, and the occasional celebrity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cui bono Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #51
65. Science is peer reviewed to be taken seriously and have experiments proven valid.
Edited on Sat Sep-22-07 04:56 PM by cui bono
I don't think peer review would help with polls though.


Clinton campaign pollers - "That poll looks good to us."

Obama campaign pollers - "Yep, pretty much what we expected."

Edwards campaign pollers - "Our poll shows pretty much the same, but we have more than that."

Biden campaign pollers - "Wish we were higher but I think that's right."

Dodd campaign pollers - "Damn, we're that low on your poll too?"

Richardson campaign pollers - "Okey-dokey."

Kucinich campaign pollers - "Hey, wait a minute! How did you conduct that poll again?"

Gravel campaign pollers - "Why weren't we invited?"

Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Biden, Dodd and Richardson campaign pollers - "OMG... whining again!"


:rofl:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #65
68. A lot of science isn't peer reviewed--
for instance, the kind of in-house evaluation research I've done is almost never peer reviewed. That doesn't mean I have to be sleazy or obfuscatory. In fact, I'm not. If anything, I try to bias my results against whatever would make my funders look good. If these politicians were serious about learning the electorate, rather than scoring points in a meaningless war, they would hire more rigorous pollsters.

The general public should also understand that all telephone surveys are biased against the poor and the young (people without land lines). If the poor and the young started voting in significant numbers, they would have to change the methodology to preserve their reputation!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colorado Progressive Donating Member (980 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. but thats not scientific research at all, not even close nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #72
109. Thanks, I guess I didn't need all that training
in social science methodologies. Silly me. I could've just walked in off the street and made up whatever I wanted to.

Of course, there's so much unscientific crap in the peer-reviewed journals lately, what the hell does science mean anymore anyway?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #109
160. So..
Is excluding one inconvenient candidate a scientific poll? What scientific data is being sought by way of this poll? With your training in social science methadologies maybe you could explain what the purpose of excluding Kucinich might be. Help me, a simple unducated schlep understand what is going on here.




Particularly when that candidate has a history of polling better than Richardson, Biden, and Dodd. Actually Kucinich had been gaining in the polls a bit prior to what is obviously a poll designed to weed out his supporters. I wonder if this is the reasoning. Richradson, Biden, and Dodd all seemed to be running more for VP as they rarely seem to want to confront the front runners in a meaningful fashion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #160
163. Not defending this poll
Just wondering why the poster at the top of this subthread thinks all polls should be banned. Why does everything on DU break down into for/against?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #163
166. Well
Pre election polls are not considered terribly accurate and can be easily pushed and pulled about.


Exit polling is considered almost universally to be accurate and is an international measure of election fraud (except where math and scientific analysis were suspended temporarily in America in November of 2004).

I can see his point, I am not sure I agree with it completely but you have to admit polling this far out can suppress participation, especially if your candidate is far down in said polls. Polls that are taken well in advance of the primaries and based for the majority of Americans purely on Name recognition. If you are not politically active Clinton is going to be an easy name to remember.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Malidictus Maximus Donating Member (326 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #68
158. There *ARE* accurate and scientific polls.
I've worked on a few.
However, the REAL polls are about one thing: where to effectively spend money. And the results are NOT released to the public.
Most campaigns do serious polling to determine which demographics can be won, on what issues; when it comes to how to target money the polling (or market research) is dead serious: where is there a point in spending money and where is it either futile or unnecessary. Same methodology as market research- for example, if you have $250K to spend in part of a state where should you spend it? Working class hispanics? 'Soccer Moms'? Retirees? amongst some of those groups you might be running so far ahead there's little sense in spending money on advertising, amongst other groups you will never get more than fifteen percent, but in one of them your message would be effective if you got it out. This is where Dick Morris and Bill Clinton were highly effective professionals, world class experts on gathering, qualifying, quantifying and using polling data.
In other words, if it isn't about where to target the resources (and thus highly secret) then it's probably just hype or mind games.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dickbearton Donating Member (577 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #65
98. Ha, cui bono don't be a chucklehead...
The Criminal Bush doesn't need a poll, he counts the votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #51
77. Are you suggesting
That political and incomplete polling designed to generate a particular result is a means of gathering scientific data?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #77
108. Polling is a long-used method in social science
The post seemed to suggest that this method be banned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #108
161. Oh right
'Cause that answers the entirety of my question. You just deleted from yoru vision everything except: "are you suggesting That ... polling ... is a means of gathering scientific data?"

Why bother answering the whole question, you can just pick and choose the convenient parts. Kind of like picking and choosing a list of candidates to provide you with a convenient set of data.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #27
58. I agree
this is open sabotage
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ISUGRADIA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #27
71. There's that pesky thing called the First Amendment...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #27
89. Yeah. Polling should be banned.
Great idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zonmoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #27
99. polling should in large part be banned but I agree with you on exit polling
Edited on Sat Sep-22-07 08:40 PM by zonmoy
but for a different reason. exit polling is the best tool for detecting election fraud. if the votes don't show the same results as the exit poll then there should be suspicion of a rigged election.

I think polling could be allowed if all polls were regulated in a way so that their results and methodology had to be reviewed for accuracy and lack of rigging or other deceptions or dirty tricks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GMFORD Donating Member (202 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #27
123. Kucinich should pay for a poll.
Please tell me which of these candidates you will be voting for in the Democratic primary?
1) Dennis Kucinich
2) Other
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datavg Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #27
124. You're Gonna...
...ban polling?

Yeah, right.

Did you know Survey Research folks are some of the most respected people in Political Science? The guy who was department head where I went to college worked on a lot of private projects and every cycle, the newspapers came groveling to his doorstep wanting to know what he thought about this-or-that.

This is the same guy who said Democrats only win when gays stay in the closet and shut their mouths. He said it in front of a 500-level seminar around 1992.

And he's a registered Democrat! I can provide his name if anyone here wants to know.

I saw it. I was there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-24-07 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #27
181. polling should be "banned"?
It should be unlawful to ask people questions?

okay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoodleBoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #1
126. Hey, what would you do if a candidate had been consistently polling within the margin of error?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananarepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #1
131. How do y'all think Bush gets 29%? He cheats!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DianaForRussFeingold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #1
132. K&R Yes It Is blatant!... 'ABC News Censors Dennis Kucinich' YouTube
:hi: ... ABC literally took Kucinich out of the picture and disappeared him.... :grr:
On the "Politics Page" of ABC's website, the photo of all the candidates was missing Dennis Kucinich. He had been deliberately cropped out of the picture.... The original, from an AP photographer, had all the candidates in it....

-- "When candidate Dennis Kucinich took the lead by a very large margin, ABC took down the poll, and then replaced it with another poll On Aug. 19, a debate for the Democratic contenders for 2008 was hosted in Iowa by ABC news. At the same time, ABC put up a prominent poll on their website, asking the question, "Who is winning the debate?" When candidate Dennis Kucinich took the lead by a very large margin, ABC took down the poll, and then replaced it with another poll:" --- After Dennis took the lead, again winning handily, ABC dropped the second survey from prominence on its website. Users posting comments in ABC's Politics page reported having their comments deleted, and demanded explanation of ABC's actions.... ABC news has still neither posted an explanation nor officially reported the results of its survey."
(more) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2DGfXA8DlE :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #132
143. cut right out of the picture
I had heard that.
thanks for posting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
2. Dennis would be a problem for other candidates if he were rich like Ross Perot.
He could simply buy air time in bulk like Perot did in 1992, build up massive name recognition rivaling Clinton or Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. It's time to end the cycle of buying the presidency
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #9
20. I think it may be too late this time around. It's usually just Clinton, Edwards and
Obama who receive the focus -- the three with the fattest war chests. I'm surprised that this poll even included Dodd, Biden and Richardson. Kucinich and Gravel don't have the money, ergo the exposure, to even be considered, apparently.

I'm with you about ending the buying of the presidency, but at this point, where we are now, if I had the funds I'd be stuffing my candidate's coffers to the gills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. It's more than a year until the election, not too late at all.
If not now, WHEN? DK will get my vote, and all the bloviation by rigged polls, MSM and DLC won't change that.

I'm not at all the poll included Dodd, Biden and Richardson; they have close ties to DLC. Kucinich is the antithesis of everything DLC stands for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #24
31. So is Gravel, and he was ignored, too -- you may be right about the DNC thing. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. I said DLC, not DNC
Edited on Sat Sep-22-07 01:54 PM by notsodumbhillbilly
Quite a difference between the two:


Let's just look at the cold, hard facts about the DLC and its record. The DLC has pushed, among other things, the war in Iraq and "free" trade policies, using bags of corporate money to buy enough Democratic votes to help Republicans make those policies a reality. They have chastised anyone who has opposed those policies as either unpatriotic or anti-business -- even as a majority of Americans now oppose the war in Iraq, oppose the DLC's business-written trade deals, and are sick of watching America's economy sold out to the highest corporate bidder. Additionally, in brazenly Orwellian fashion, the DLC has also called its extremist agenda "centrist," even though polls show the American public opposes most of their agenda, and supports much of the progressive agenda. http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0727-32.htm

The progressive movement has not just threatened this message monopoly -- it is undoing it. Through MoveOn, the rise of popular documentaries, blogs, think tanks, etc. It's not just that we talk about real values and innovative strategies. It's because we're talking, period, that the centrists feel threatened.

Hence the DLC's vicious attempts to discredit the movement. And that's what they want. They don't seek to win an argument over policy. They seek to destroy the credibility of their opponents and restore their message monopoly. http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=721

This is why the DLC is dangerous. For all their claims of supposedly wanting to help Democrats, they employ people like Marshall Wittman who specifically try to undermine the Democratic Party, even if it means he has to publicly defecate out the most rank and easily-debunkable lies. They reguarly give credence to the right wing's agenda and its worst, most unsupportable lies. They are the real force that tries to make sure this country is a one party state and that Democrats never really challenge the Republicans in a serious way. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/why-the-dlc-...

"The Democratic Leadership Council's agenda is indistinguishable from the Republican Neoconservative agenda," http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Kucinich_DLC_agenda_undis...

DLC Watch, the wicked shall not escape justice http://dlcwatch.blogspot.com

Without a doubt, the DLC is the most fundamentalist organization within the caucus, the most ideologically rigid, and the most destructive to the progressive cause.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/5/24/1712/23448

These DLC types are amazing, they really are. Their pathology is unique; they all secretly worship the guilt-by-association tactics of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove, but unlike those two, not one of them has enough balls to take being thought of as the bad guy by the general public.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11275627/the...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #34
43. Ha! And I was THINKING DLC as I obviously typed DNC, sorry for the
confusion. I'm in agreement with you on the DLC, but I'll follow your links because I like reading articles that support my beliefs. Thanks for doing that -- sincerely!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flagrante Donating Member (104 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #2
107. It's prabably just as well DK isn't out front
Any time a progressive gets too popular they take him out, I'd rather he live to fight the good fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burrowowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
3. Pretty amazing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
4. Wow. That's pretty blatant
and damn infuriating too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
5. can I send to DK?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
28. Please do. I wish I could have made out the name of the company. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AZBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #28
104. Do you happen to have caller id?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #104
164. Yes. Nothing appeared that could be traced. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
6. That is a damned shame!
It's what the DLC-ization of this Party has done to it. If you are anywhere to the left of Attila the Hun, you can forget about raising money and being "electable".

I wish you had gotten the name of the company that called you.

TC

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. I think the caller was trained to deliberately garble the name of the company.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Obviously
It has the putrid stink of DLC all over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. It's just outrageous!
And I agree with you about the DLC. It has the distinct whiff of their tactics all over it.

TC


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoodleBoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #6
127. Hey, what would you do if a candidate had been consistently polling within the Margin of Error?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gonnuts Donating Member (525 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #6
152. Election Farce
Calling C-SPAN two so-called political experts were talking about the 08' elections and I asked why about 80% of the callers to C-SPAN either mention Kucinich or Paul as their only choice yet neither of these two nor the national polls every have them any where in the top numbers or even mentioned for that matter. Their answer was that it seemed to be a mystery.

It may be a "mystery" to them but it's not to any savvy political junkies. The system is rigged. Our election process is a farce, a dog and pony show to give us the illusion we have a say in who runs our country. After the 2000 disaster you'd think a massive effort would have been done to give us fair, verifiable, uniform system. Not only has the process not been fixed they haven't even done the obvious like moving election day to Saturday, public funding and eliminating the antiquated Electoral College. E-voting is still in place and the prosecutors rove&co put in are still there to promote their election fraud tactics of caging and banning lists.

Folks, we the people don't have anything to do with the government process anymore. It's been bought and sold by mega-international corporations that are the polar opposite of democracy. We don't need another election in this country - we need another REVOLUTION!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
7. Pollsters are the engineers of the public mind, such that it is. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
8. More blatant complicity to blindside the public.
F@#k! :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
12. Hmm, what's different from 2004
Let me think, hmmmm, why didn't this happen then, what could be the difference... :freak:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flabbergasted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
13. Fuckers. That pisses me off. That should be illegal.
Edited on Sat Sep-22-07 01:25 PM by Flabbergasted
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NotGivingUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
15. They know that Kucinich stands a real chance...otherwise they wouldn't bother.
It got to the point that I was just angry all the time, so I haven't been paying as much attention. It's not healthy to be angry all the time and not be able to do anything about it. But now this has really got my blood boiling again. Everybody...show them we can think for ourselves. We don't need their goddam polls. Vote for who is speaking out for the people. You see, they are worried. Their resorting to tactics...they know that Kucinich is standing a good chance. I also think they're trying to thwart efforts by having Edwards lean more to the left to steal votes from Kucinich...just a thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:22 PM
Original message
I vote in my best interest, not the way rigged polls, MSM and DLC want me to vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
16. Another way to keep him silenced - if more people heard his message of truth
and alternative plans for the future, and the whole electoral process wasn't run by greedy, corrupt corporations, he'd be the frontrunner.

It's up to the grassroots to get his message out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kansas Wyatt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
17. The selection has already been made for us.
The 'Powers That Be' will never allow someone who wants to represent 'We The People' to ever be an option. Therefore, we are presented with options who do not threaten their power. Our government has been turned into a racket that has been bought and paid for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. It doesn't have to be that way if people will only stand up and say "enough!"
and ignore attempts such as these to discourage people from voting for Kucinich.

See post #9.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. And the way they accomplish that is with money. Plain and Simple. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FREEWILL56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 03:58 AM
Response to Reply #21
138. They can pay me to vote another way,
but DK will still get my vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
_dynamicdems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
19. That's disgusting.
Kucinich deserves equal treatment. And besides that, it really bothers me that the pollsters are actually impacting their own results by choosing the candidates to poll on. Indirectly, but very certainly, they are influencing the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
22. The fix is in
And I'm mad as hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #22
33. We're all mad as hell, but we need to keep going otherwise they'll win. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ima_sinnic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
23. 1 thing we can learn from this: before responding, insist they identify
themselves clearly. If I get a call like this, I will say, before they even read me the choices, "wait, what did you say is the name of the organization?" while scribbling it down on a notepad. Let's at least try to get a name for these fuckers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. Thanks. I've got to remember that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #23
37. Exactly. Ask them to repeat it, and then spell it for you.
Sometimes, I even ask for the name of their supervisor. THEN, if I decide to, I answer their questions.

Learn to be a hard-ass with these people. It's your right to know who you're talking to.

TC


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
25. This is why I've been saying to ignore the polls.
They're bs. They're made up. They're fake. Just like the news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #25
60. I believe it's long been understood, and not considered at all remarkable by the politicos,
that polling is a conventional weapon in the party political armoury; and any truth they convey would be entirely accidental.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
30. It occurred to me that the order that she read the names to me also influences
the poll. It was Clinton, Obama, Edwards, etc. - not alphabetical order, but in order of somebody's preference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1monster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
35. When I get a call like that, where the name of the polling company is garbled, the first thing I do
is to ask them to repeat the name of the company until I understand who is calling.

If they give me really bad (push/pull) or incomplete questions (like the one you got), I tell them where to get off.

Years ago, I got a poll call asking a few questions, then asking if I would vote for the Democratic candidate for the State Legislature if I knew that he had raised my taxes.

Now, the Democratic candidate had at that time not served in any position where he could raise taxes and I knew that.

I not only told off the poll taker, the next morning I called into a local radio/phone show and started a fire storm by relaying the phone call.

It seemed that many, many people in the voting district had received the same phone call.

The Republican candidate disassociated himself from the poll swore he knew nothing about it, claiming to be the victim of the poll and tried to cast the blame on the Democratic candidate doing a reverse psychology dirty trick... :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NV Whino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
36. There have been some online poll like that too.
They wanted feedback after I took the poll. Boy, did I give them feedback.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
38. YOU WON'T BELIEVE THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My phone just rang again - an "unavailable" on the caller ID. Another pollster! (Welcome to New Hampshire primary season.) This one's name is Doris and I made a point of getting the company name: NTS Research. She wouldn't tell me anything about the company or who ordered the poll. The choices were (in the order she read them): Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Dodd or Biden. Once again I asked about Kucinich and why he wasn't on the list and "Doris" didn't know. This is really outrageous. Does anyone have a direct line to the Kucinich campaign??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #38
70. That's bizarre
I wonder who is paying for this poll anyway - I'd be curious to know...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #70
88. That's easy: The first name mentioned.
Simple. :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #88
91. lol, perhaps
...I think a little more research may be warranted :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #38
82. All the more curious
Because in some of the last polls that included Kucinich he was beating Dodd, Richardson, and Biden. Of course even then he didn't have more than 4% but if there was no hope then all four of them would already have dropped out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #38
95. check this out!
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2519/is_8_24/ai_...


Firm Profile: NTS is the MAJOR NATIONWIDE PROVIDER of political and grassroots phoning to campaigns, associations, progressive public policy groups, and organized labor. Founded in 1979, NTS has completed more than 150 million calls in 50 states.

In Touch Systems Roswell, NM

Phone: 800-347-2280

FAX: 505-623-0095

URL: gopcalls.com

Email: calls@gopcalls.com

Party Affiliation: Republican

Years in Business: 16

Services Offered: Persuasion Calls, GOTV Experience Firm Profile: Deliver your message, in your candidates own voice, directly to thousands, or even millions of voting households in a rapid, efficient, and low-cost manner.

The Clinton Group, Inc. Washington, D.C.

Phone: 352-371-5888, ext. 108

Fax: 352-371-4049

URL: www.theclintongroup.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #95
100. Very interesting
They're out early, trying to control the Dem primaries...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #95
106. GOPCALLS.COM????!! So it is a repuke company...
They are the ones that are afraid of Dennis Kucinich!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 03:50 AM
Response to Reply #106
137. That's not what's going. Much more sinister. From the web page.
"The Clinton Group (TCG) is a campaign communications and direct contact services firm that specializes in recruitment and activation to promote a political agenda or mobilize people into action.

TCGs strength is employing our targeted teleservices, direct mail, and interactive contact programs to persuade people to act. After identifying segments of the population who are fair-minded about our clients issues, we use repeated, complementary communications in the language and values of each selected demographic group to mobilize citizens. Central to our method is the use of information technology to create a dialogue with people and discover how they feel about the issues, and the use of that feedback to make the next contact more persuasive. This Repeated, Persuasive Contact continues to be the most effective way to launch and win campaigns."

-------------------

You see what's up? They are polling Democrats, finding out why people are supporting them, and then tailoring their message to appeal to Democrats. They left Kucinich and Gravel off because they figure they have so few supporters it doesn't matter. They include people like Dodd even though he has no supporters because his message is closer to the mainstream. What they are doing is finding Democrats, running their buzz words past them, finding out what words they respond to, then crafting the Republican message to use those words to appeal to Democratic supporters. They hope to swing a few percentage points, probably the independents mostly, that way--enough to win.

This has nothing to do with polling to see who's winning, and they won't release these numbers to the press. This is a research project to gain marketing advice to use against the Democrats.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
piesRsquare Donating Member (960 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 04:28 AM
Response to Reply #137
141. Well, okay then!
This has nothing to do with polling to see who's winning, and they won't release these numbers to the press. This is a research project to gain marketing advice to use against the Democrats.

So let's do it back!

First rule of guerilla warfare: Capture your enemy's weapons and use them against him (her/them/it/whatever).

Let's have some fun!

Next time one of you's gets a call from these guys, record the phone call or, if you can't do that, take detailed notes as so you can precisely reconstruct the questions asked. Post 'em here on DU (or send them to me in a PM) and we can start raiding forums and message boards. How about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #141
159. Excellent idea. Of course that tactic needs to be exposed..perhaps via Olbermann,so that those
Edited on Sun Sep-23-07 12:09 PM by BrklynLiberal
receiving these calls can know that they are being used as patsies!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #137
168. Hmm no the logic of it fails
I think the GOP has a lot to gain by knocking off the candidates who would drive them the farthest off message. They may be collecting data here as well, but excluding Kucinich and his message is the best thing they could do for their cause. The more moderate the Democrat they run against the easier it is to put said candidate on defence with regards to their voting record.

Moreover having a national symbolic candidate that is weak or wavering or even pro war will aid the republicans chances congressionally across the board as it will drive out those that fail to see a difference between the two parties and help maintain more seats rather than losing them.

The republicans (outside of Ron Paul) will never say the words needed to steal the election with language. (though they may supress and do evrything that has become business as usual to them) Most of them cannot say "We need to end the war now and get out while we still are able to."

By shifting the language to a timetable republicans will claim authority over who has the tougher stronger timetable and who will hold Iraq to the fire longer and make damn sure they don't follow us over here. The Script will change only subtly. The moderate Democrat choosen won't say "Lets get out starting tommorow" they will counter with: "Well my plan has us getting out in x time but only if we can be sure we are secure."

By poxing both political houses against the majority of the American people who are majorly anti-war, the antiwar vote stays home. If the Antiwar people stay home, the Republicans win. Period. End of sentence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosemary2205 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #95
119. This part of the tread really needs it's own thread.
And it needs to be forwarded to to every single freaking progressive blog on the planet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #95
150. GOP calls and the Clinton Group? That is wierd!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #150
153. "The Clinton Group" has nothing to do with the Clintons, it's an old firm.
Founded in 1972 http://www.theclintongroup.net/about/history /

Walter Clinton: http://www.theclintongroup.net/about/management-team /

Just a coincidence, it seems. I met a man in 1992 named Clinton Bush. Out of 300 million people, odd coincidences happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #95
162. I agree that this needs its own thread.
Will you start one?

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #162
167. sure!
will do!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
39. A few months ago, I received a call surveying my opinion of my newly elected
Edited on Sat Sep-22-07 02:00 PM by OmmmSweetOmmm
progressive Democratic Congressman, John Hall (he's on Karl Rove's hit list). The questions asked were very pointedly saying that he was a Commie Pinko etc etc etc. I asked the young woman why was she was working for people who were making other people fearful of this fine man. I then told her that by making these calls, she was working against her own best interests, considering she was working for minimum wage or slightly above. She then whispered to me that she had just secured a new job that day and she couldn't wait to leave! I wished her the best of luck!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
40. sounds a bit like election fraud to me.
It seems to come in many different fashions.
this is outrageous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgetrimmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
41. FASCISM!!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MisterHowdy Donating Member (295 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
42. its all just a popularity contest.
Kucinich is like a "geeky-kid" in high school,
running for school president against all the popular kids, the football quaterbacks and the cheerleaders.
He stands no chance.

Unfortunately, the geeky-kid is the only one that wants to do good things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. I agree with you to a point. It's human nature to align more closely with someone
they like, rather than someone they don't or are even neutral about. Connecting with someone we like makes us feel good.

In this case, I considered all the candidates on what their message was and who I felt would do the best job -- that's how I came to my decision.

I found something admiral in each of them, including Hillary whom I thought I wouldn't warm to at all. I looked past their presentation style, their nervousness, their stumbling, and focused on what they wanted to do for the country as President. Kucinich -- geeky as he may be, was a strong contender in my book, as was Gravel (and if people say Kucinich is unelectable!)...

We don't have the luxury of voting for the most popular (and according to the polls, Clinton, Obama and Edwards -- none of which is MY pick), so I have faith that people are choosing the person they feel best represents their values and issues, not the Prom king or queen.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
44. Thank you for that information. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
46. That's one poll, and it could very well have been...
a pushpoll or private party or candidate poll if you had gone further with it.

The legitimate polls actually have DK with numbers, which had to come from somewhere. Presumably, those polls include him.

'Tis worthy of a bit of investigation just to make sure, though, before spreading yet more rumors.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Rumors???? I'm just relating what happened. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #47
52. Yeah, but this doesn't mean ALL polls, and...
you're using this to explain DK's low poll numbers. Can't do that unless this is a legitimate poll, and we don't even know who they are. If ther major polls are doing this, it would mean something, but we don't know that they are.

See how many people immediately jumped on the bandwagon? Nobody is suspicious of a poll only listing some Democrats and trying to hide its name. Why not?

FWIW, when I lived in NJ, I got called for all sorts of bullshit push polls. I don't doubt the poll business is working overtime up there, and wouldn't even be a bit surprised if this wasn't some Republican paying for the poll who called you trying to size up the opposition.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #52
62. It didn't seem like a push poll to me and I've gotten those in the past.
The second poll (see post #38) the person gave the pollster's name and it appears to be legit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #62
87. I can't find any record of an "NTS Research"...
except for a Canadian biotech comapany and a few small operations that seem to be defunct. That they called you twice is even more indicative of a basement operation.

Think what you must, but I still think it's a private candidate poll and has nothing to do with the major published polls.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #87
170. Here is their official website
Edited on Sun Sep-23-07 03:22 PM by spooked
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #170
174. Thanks. They represent Democratic organizations, so...
this supports my idea that it's an internal poll not for "public" consumption. Whoever sponsored this specific poll, possibly NH Democrats since they are listed as clients, dropped Kucinich and Gravel from the list. Why clutter an internal poll with questions about non-threats?

So, back to my original point-- don't blame the pollsters for Dennis being so far down in the polls.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #46
90. Consider this ...
... even in the poll described in the OM, Kucinich will receive (and be credited with) some of the responses. It's 'normal' for pollsters to tally responses that are 'off-menu,' particularly when they account for over 1% of the responses. Nonetheless, the bias is clear.

It's very important that the polling questions be cited VERBATIM when assessing ANY poll ... and the sampling techniques and 'mormalization' process be described in detail. Without that information, anything can be corrupted.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
48. fuck fuck fuck!
this is just infuriating me! See what corporate cash buys!!!! :argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
49. Wow! Thanks Vinca!
Sounds like a CONtrived effort to keep the real straight talking Dennis Kucinich outta the race and don't even think about Mike Gravel.

Hope they know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
monmouth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
50. I'm sure they will call me too (they always do) and whether I will vote
for DK in the future, I don't know but I will definitely insist that DK be included in the poll. I love messing with their heads...lol. Thank for the heads up on this...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
53. I had a similar experience here in San Diego a couple
months ago, and I posted it and it sank like a rock
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sellitman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
55. The only one worth voting for isn't on the poll.
Fucking a-holes!

Well.....DK gets my vote in the Primary....thats for darn sure.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
57. I remember that happening in 2004. It's disgraceful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
59. I realize that logic and Moonbeam McCrazypants whine-ins are incompatible....
Edited on Sat Sep-22-07 03:32 PM by BlooInBloo
... but if he's not included in the poll, wouldn't you expect his results to be ZERO?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. No. Even his name is like garlic to a vampire. The last thing they would want to do
Edited on Sat Sep-22-07 03:39 PM by KCabotDullesMarxIII
is to remind the public of his name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #61
64. According to the US Corp Media: only three Dem Candidates
Clinton, Obama & Edwards. The fix is in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #59
75. speaking of logic, your post is devoid of it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #75
79. Oooh - the rubber-glue comeback! Classic!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #79
176. touch
damn you're good. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #59
121. "Moonbeam McCrazypants"?
Who's that? The new McDonald's character that gives kids their Ritalin McNuggets?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #121
175. that's the kind of name right-wing assholes use for candidates who scare them..
that's what they used to call Jerry Brown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superkia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
63. The media has ignored him and the sheeple have followed.
Our country's future may be decided by a bunch of sheeple that wont open their eyes to the truth. Good thing is they will be complaining about politics even after their candidate wins but they will blame it on someone else. No one wants to look at the facts.


Heres a good piece on the media and the polls winner. Tell me how that helps the people, looks like it helps the corporations to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YvsrT8tz6U
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Debi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
66. I'm only getting Clinton/Edwards/Obama in my poll calls
They actually include Biden/Dodd/Richardson in yours?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #66
81. Yes - both calls. That's why I couldn't figure out why Kucinich
wasn't included. It's not like Bill Richardson is steamrolling over the other candidates in our state. I'd bet Dennis probably has more support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Debi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #81
85. It's obvious he does - just by looking at this board. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
67. Everything is "manipulated"
and we're all lied to. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Annces Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
69. Coke or Pepsi
What about offering juice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
73. Polls play to those that always want to go with the larger crowd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ISUGRADIA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
74. If it's a poll being done by a candidate there's no obligation to
include Kucinich. He's grouped in other for their convenience as he's shown low support and has spent little in NH. That's what I'm guessing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marlakay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
76. yeah just like he didn't get invited to the aarp debate
when I heard that I was pissed. I also was pissed to find out they are in with the health corporations. I haven't renewed our membership with them for years now. On my own I didn't think their stuff was worth it and now this, I won't have anything to do with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
78. What kind of survey is that?
ANY survey for a presidential candidate should at least have a choice for "OTHER", even if Kucinich isn't on the list.

The same goes for any choice-based survey where the list of choices isn't absolutely limited in some way.

Whoever designed this survey is an idiot. And doubly so, because Kucinich is not exactly a complete unknown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davekriss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #78
94. They weren't idiots...
...it was intentional. Polling is a very rigged science.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeff30997 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
83. To quote Mark Twain:
"There are three kinds of lies: lies,damned lies and statistics."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
84. Fucking idiots - they're manipulating it all already!
I am surprised, but not too much now that I think about it...

Disgusted - very disgusted...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
japple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
86. The thing about these polls is.....
the people who make the calls are usually temporary workers with no benefits--they're just trying to make a paycheck. They usually don't understand the political issues, and in lots of cases can't even pronounce the candidates' names (or some of the words they're reading). I usually just politely tell them that I'm not interested in participating in their polls. If you shout at them or slam down the phone, it makes it harder for them to keep hanging on until payday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucognizant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #86
93. Are you ASSuming........
That temp workers with no benefits are TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND politics? There are a whole LOT of Seniors who HAVE to work, because they are fudging the COL figures. COULD you live on $5.00 per hour?
I have observed in my neighborhood, the stupid ones, in their middle years , are doing fairly well financially!, in part because they are not held back by moral considerations. They're stupid because they have been jipped out of a good public school education! ( or are inbred) Yeh I live in Joe Bagantland North!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
japple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #93
165. I've worked for Kelly Services and Manpower many times
over the past 40 years, and, no, I couldn't live off of the $3.25 per hour I was making then, neither am I denigrating those who work temp jobs or ASSuming that those workers are too stupid to understand politics. I am simply basing my opinion on those people who have called my phone number and asked me to participate in their survey. On occasion, I have participated, especially if I recognized the name of the organization that was conducting the survey. After you participate in one of them, there are lots of other calls.

I don't appreciate your making negative ASSumptions about my actions or motivations. That sack of rocks you're carrying around must get pretty heavy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #86
113. you pretty much summed up the place my daughter worked
course she was politically informed cause she reads du or asks me what`s happening. the political phone calling she did was for someone in kentucky and we live in northern illinois. they have to engage the party for a certain amount of time and if they do`t they are fired. my daughter worked all kinds of calls from political to trying to get people to buy products and services. there were women and men that made decent money because they were on commission,my daughter said they were really "hard core" and no one spoke to them while they were working..
it`s not a job for those who can`t take a huge amount of shit...my daughter lasted three months
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyclezealot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
92. The biggest factor is Chris Matthews
MSNBC and lobbyists money favoring their cronies. Can't get TV time in America you have a tough road to hoe. And not getting lobbyists money- that is a big reason i favor Dennis Kucinich. Some think lobbyists money equals free speech, I say it is equivilant to a bribe. You will not see any cozy pictures of Dennis Kucinich with Rupet Murdock, as we see with some other Democratic presidential candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
97. Yep. This Democratic Party is being run like a country club.
First there was Kucinich and Gravel not being invited to the Iowa steak fry because they didn't "qualify" and now they aren't included in the polls because they aren't rich enough in donations?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #97
102. It was a GOP pollster
someone is up to dirty tricks, no surprise..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #102
103. Oh, it was?
Why would the Dems pay any attention to them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkaba Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #97
111. Illusional Polls
Most of us have suspected these mainstream polls are rigged but wondered how it was done. Now we are starting to see one of the ways it's done. I mean, Kucinich is winning many of the online polls. Among ordinary people, who are not tricked by the mainstream media, he is a big favorite.
In conclusion, it is not necessary to go hiking in the desert without water to see a mirage--all you have to do is watch TV news and their associated polls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #97
117. pretty much
and it sucks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 08:50 PM
Response to Original message
101. "Which is your favorite: Hillary Clinton, genital warts, the flu, or herpes?"
"Our respondents overwhelming favored Hillary Clinton above all other choices!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frog92969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 03:41 AM
Response to Reply #101
136. The Flu
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
105. What the f would we do if our candidate reflected our values?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheUniverse Donating Member (954 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
110. I'm voting for Dennis Kucinich.
And any pollsters who don't like it can fuck off. We already ran an "electable" Democrat, and it didn't work. I say this time we vote for someone who supports real progressive values. Any polling company who won't even have Dennis as a choice, doesn't deserve to be considered legitimate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
112. it could have been the democrats or the republicans paying the call center
my daughter worked for a call center did this on 2003. she`s given a script, monitored not to deviate from it, and told not engage the caller in conversation. who paid the company to call? who really knows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vilis Veritas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
114. It is apparent that 'We The People' no longer pick the candidate.
We must change that simple fact if we are going to save this country.

No Fear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
115. You should e-mail him this post - go to his channel on youtube

And, link him this post. He will pay attention
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
116. Not only is he not on the poll but a Democrat poller says, "Who?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maximusveritas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
118. Can't believe this got that many recommendations
Is this really news to some people?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #118
122. Well, Mr/Ms Smartypants--I' ll just have you know--
--that water is wet, and babies, puppies and kittens are cute! So there!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danger Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-22-07 11:07 PM
Response to Original message
120. fucking bastards
at least give him a chance. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoodleBoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
125. hahahahahaha! no, it can't possibly be that...
NOT THAT MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY SUPPORT HIM, it's all a big conspiracy to keep out the real democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #125
171. Did you say "conspiracy"?
Edited on Sun Sep-23-07 04:23 PM by GoneOffShore
Where's my damn :tinfoilhat:!!!

This is hugh!!!!1111 I'm series!!!

Next people will be saying that Ron Paul isn't a viable candidate. Or Pat Paulsen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
128. Wild. I keep wondering why he isn't mentioned much except for those
who make an effort to mention him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
129. I'm voting for Kucinich even if I have to write him in. Clinton is turning out
to be more of the same money people running things with two faces. The money party...one party...two faces...Repub and Dem.
Kucinich is different and so far ahead of the other candidates on every issue and plan. He would make a real difference.
He's the best hope I've found...whoever wins the democratic nomination will be the next president and I pray it is him. Kucinich/Edwards '08...the truth ticket...the real change.
I've been posting him everywhere, every chance I get
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
130. Ummm... it's not quite that simple
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Desertrose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 02:46 AM
Response to Original message
133. Thats one way to eliminate the competition.
Not surprised tho.

It sucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lebkuchen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 02:46 AM
Response to Original message
134. A donation to his campaign should make up the difference
I hope his site allows for contributions from military addresses. MoveOn.org's doesn't, yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 02:55 AM
Response to Original message
135. forget about ron paul too
although, that may be the silver lining


sometimes I think the game is cooked so completely that all we do now is participate in some charade, confused an unsure of what exactly is real - led into intense scrutiny of manufactured distraction -
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 04:04 AM
Response to Original message
139. This isn't a poll, it's a scam. Read post #38, and the posts below it.
This is a Republican scam. They poll people to find out who they are supporting, and then find out what words and phrases the Democrats respond to, they tailor the Republican advertising to use those words and phrases, to steal votes from the Democrats. They left off Kucinich (this should make his supporters happy) because they figure Kucinich is so far left they wouldn't be able to steal his voters, basically.

This isn't a poll that shows who is winning, and it won't be released to the press. This is marketing research. This is the part of politics that a lot of people don't realize happens. I keep shouting about how much the Republicans manipulate our opinions of our own candidates--Clinton, especially--and no one believes me. Here's the proof. That's exactly what they are doing this poll for--to find out what makes Democrats tick, and use it against us.

Obviously, the majority of Democrats won't fall for it. But they are also trying to steal our message. By using the words that we respond to, they make it harder for our candidates to use those words, so our candidates are weakened. And Independents who might lean towards Clinton, Edwards, Obama, or the others might be swayed to the Republicans.

This isn't an example of why Kucinich trails in the polls. It's not that type of poll. This is an example of how Republicans fight dirty, how they wind up controlling the message, how they swiftboat our candidates. This is an example of what we are up against, all of us, no matter which Democratic candidate we support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #139
147. Hmmm. That's interesting. I don't know exactly why, but I somehow
got the impression from the second poll taker that this was coming from the left. After she asked who AMONG THOSE LISTED I could support I said something like, "maybe Obama or Edwards . . . Obama, I guess." She then asked who my second choice would be and I said, "I suppose it would be Edwards." She sounded very pleased and said something like, "Oh, that's good." The whole thing seems pretty stupid if my first choice is Kucinich. (I didn't include that tidbit before because I didn't want to antagonize the Obama and Edwards supporters here because if their candidate is our nominee he'll get my vote in the general election and because I have no way to prove the call came from any of the campaigns.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #147
154. void
Edited on Sun Sep-23-07 10:42 AM by jobycom
bad info
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #147
155. The link says "Republican." Ignore the post above this, I misread.
The link in post 95 says it's a Republican affiliated polling firm.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxkeiser Donating Member (404 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 04:09 AM
Response to Original message
140. polling data manipulation is less of a problem than 'Prediction Market' data manipulation
Edited on Sun Sep-23-07 04:10 AM by maxkeiser
Clearly the polling methods are being manipulated to fit an agenda; so too so-called 'prediction markets' that track who is 'leading' in these 'markets.' Prediction markets are even easier to manipulate than polling data and yet there is a growing belief that some how 'markets' are more accurate than polling because of a naive belief that these prediction markets are some how incorruptible... Having designed, built, and launched the most successful of these virtual markets; hsx, I can tell you that manipulation is a huge issue - and it's getting worst as more and more pundits take the easy way and just refer to the 'markets' as arbiters of 'truth' when in fact these markets are used to try and legitimate lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemReadingDU Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #140
142. very interesting
Edited on Sun Sep-23-07 08:09 AM by DemReadingDU
I've been thinking for some time that there is manipulation going on with these polls. Just haven't heard it in terms of prediction markets. But the concept makes sense.

Reminds me of the stock market, economy and the dollar. Someone is definitely playing with us there. Appreciate your videos getting out the truth.
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=MaxKeiserTV

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
parcell Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
144. Your choice:
kucinich is the ONLY candidate with the potential support to change America's course, so you can get on board the Ark and then if you're good for your word he wins or you can continue to waste your time

http://action.dennis4president.com/groups/view/id_203 /

most people want to take America back but do not want to join a political campaign so if you are serious about winning this go to this site that is independent of the Kucinich campaign or any political party or candidate and share it with everyone

http://un-scared.org

and next time somebody calls get their name for @#sake
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #144
145. I've got a pad and pen next to the phone, prepared for another day
of New Hampshire political phone calls. If I get more Kucinich-less polling calls, I'll let you all know and I will take names.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RFKJrNews Donating Member (760 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #144
146. I worked for the Gallup Organization and can verify...
...that this is the way that Gallup conducted political polling (ther results of which you would often see on CNN and in USA Today): by only giving the names of the accepted frontrunners to choose from. I suppose because they think those are the only names the average American will recognize. They shoot for the lowest common denominator.

The person we were surveying was not allowed to give another candidate's name, because there was no way for pollers to record it. There were no write-in spaces on the form (or rather, the computer program we used) for third party or independent candidates, not even a category for "other."

The only alternative option they gave you was "undecided."

This is only one example of how public opinion polls are manipulated, even by "trusted" names like the Gallup Organization.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #146
148. That is what I suspected. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
149. If Kucinich is so "unelectable"
what the hell are they so afraid of? Well, at least I now have a counter to, "He's only polling at 4%!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dweller Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 09:34 AM
Response to Original message
151. post #'s 95 and 137
contain the most pertinent information on this thread.

:kick: & R.
dp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
156. Gravel wasn't option, either? That means they included only viable candidates.
The numbers of Kucinich and Gravel are too small to be considered viable candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #156
157. The point is, Kucinich and Gravel won't have numbers at all
IF THEY AREN'T IN THE POLL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-24-07 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #157
179. Well, that's a Catch 22, isn't it? In any case, they don't have many contributors or much $$$.
It is reasonable to exclude those that are not viable candidates. I would prefer they all be included, but there are so many as it is, I can see where it just streamlines things not to have to repeat all those names, when a couple of them just don't have much support, anyway. The prior numbers show the lack of support. The lack of money raised shows the lack of support.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
169. HERE IS THEIR WEBSITE
Edited on Sun Sep-23-07 03:20 PM by spooked
http://www.ntsdc.com /

And here is a list of their clients. Weird, that they represent Democrats...

http://www.ntsdc.com/majorclients.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #169
172. Good find. I had the impression the 2nd call was from the left.
Very strange that I've had no calls at all today. The phone usually rings and rings over the weekend and I usually look at the caller ID and ignore them. Today I want them to call and apparently I've been blacklisted. LOL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #172
173. still, it does seem like a blatant attempt to eliminate Kucinich...
from the field.

I wonder who hired them...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-24-07 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #173
182. This poll has nothing to do with Zogby or any of the major polling companies
Everyone is freaking out here but the poll was likely paid for by a Democratic Candidate for data. DK is not on the poll because he is not a threat to that candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-24-07 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #169
180. They were likely hired by a Democratic Candidate for campaign data
They are a National Telecommunications Service. They don't put the poll together they carry it out for someone. DK is likely not on the poll because Hillary or whoever did the poll is not concerned with him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-23-07 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
177. I suppose the fact that so few people support him has nothing to do with it
He was polling in the low single digits last time. Remember what happened in the primaries? He got fewer delegates than Al Sharpton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-24-07 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #177
178. I know lots and lots and lots of people who support him.
The number on DU alone is significant. How do you poll in anything other than single digits if your name is excluded from the list of candidates when a poll is taken? I heard the results of a poll yesterday that put Dodd below Kucinich, yet Dodd was on the pollster's list. For some reason they don't want Kucinich to have a chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bentcorner Donating Member (385 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-24-07 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
183. I stopped trusting polls when I took a college class pollster John Zogby was teaching
It was 1992 and he needed people to work at his polling center. He offered to raise grades one whole level for anyone that put in 8 hours (unpaid) at his polling center. The class was European History.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-24-07 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
184. oh that is so sad.
Dennis the voice of reason and is willing to fight for the American people, and our disgusting media does not give him any play. This disgusting media dictating to us who to vote for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 25th 2014, 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC