-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
The issue is that it's possible Pete was left off other surveys, but only this one person complained. It's impossible to know.
I don't know. Tukarr's theory sounded plausible to me, but against that, clearly they didn't do it, and you would assume they'd like to release the poll if they thought they could.
They're trying to dash our high hopes. The corporate media is out gunning for Pete.
You just asking questions? Lets get that conspiracy talk out of here unless you joking.
it's almost as if they needed to comment on why they aren't posting a thing they were scheduled to post even though they do not yet have all the facts about the situation
That seems like the kind of situation in which you'd really want your statement to be coordinated with the other PR guy!
CNN wouldn't have access to the call data.
Pete's team should be able to give the voter's phone number to the pollster, and DMR should be able to pull up the call recording.
It's Saturday night so they're likely just not able to revise and verify the data.
We'll probably see the poll before caucus opens, but by then it'll be near pointless for content driven media.
This is dumb. MOE has to do with sample sizes, not actual "errors" that occur during the polling process. If there's an issue with how you collected polling data, you can't just fiddle with the MOE a bit and call it good.
I really hope whoever wins Iowa does so decisively, I'm not looking forward to there being a contested result due to Iowa's new disclosure rules for this caucus.
That makes sense, and suggests that DMR did do at least a spot check before deciding to pull it, which is why they are more certain with their statement.
That's what they get for not writing "it's pronounced Boot-I-judge" in the instructions!
I hope the caller doesn't get fired. And that they get bigger screens.
There's no good option here.
Delay the poll? People would cry conspiracy.
Say what happened but also go back into the field? People would cry conspiracy.
More likely they don't really know how many interviews this affected, so they and CNN made the decision not to release the poll in the interest of fairness. It also doesn't seem like it was only Pete who was potentially affected. I would have still released the poll, but I can understand why they would not want to.
Yeah exactly.
Is NYT really doing the "mean tweets" thing. On the internet....rly. And weaponizing it at Sanders as a uniquely bad issue with his supporters?
It is definitely close to first polling time.
What would make more sense is more articles about awful people just stop being terrible online.
It is definitely close to first polling time.
What would make more sense is more articles about awful people just stop being terrible online.
It wouldn't surprise me that more hostility comes from the Sanders camp given his more ... passionate online base and the perceived (justified or not) unfairness the mainstream media or DNC treats his candidacy.
I'm not sure what tweets you're responding to though, post them?
They made an article about Sanders twitter people and how its a super bad issue.
There are some people they found tweeting death threats which they talked about the article, but that's super misleading considering how toxic any online discussion forum can actually get no matter the base.
And outside of those, i guess being most fair to the corporate media apparatus, it takes a lot of the punditry class by surprise that online followings are modern day legitimate bases of support who will go out and vociferously defend their preferred candidate and argue against what they see are bad takes.
The problem is when actual criticism becomes "these people are bullying me" because a lot of people happen to respond at once via ratio to something they respond strongly to
Go read one of the Twitter account fo candidate not named Bernie Sanders, a lot of the comment are from supposed Sanders supporters, they drown the candidates supporters comments. It looks terrible
Damn the Selzer poll isn't being released. Selzer is the most accurate Iowa caucus poll going back about 20 years. There was a great interview with the person who runs it on Preets podcast a few weeks back.
Also yeah re this poll, CNN and Des Moines register don't have access to the info, the poll isn't done by them it's sponsored by them. Polls are run by polling agencies, not the newspaper or tv names associated with them.
Here's the link tonpreets interview with J Ann Selzer, it's a great interview and you learn a lot about how polling works.
cafe.com
Also yeah re this poll, CNN and Des Moines register don't have access to the info, the poll isn't done by them it's sponsored by them. Polls are run by polling agencies, not the newspaper or tv names associated with them.
Here's the link tonpreets interview with J Ann Selzer, it's a great interview and you learn a lot about how polling works.
Stay Tuned Transcript: Born to Poll (with J. Ann Selzer) - CAFE
Preet Bharara: From Café, welcome to Stay Tuned. I’m Preet Bharara. Ann Selzer: There’s not …
cafe.com
I wish my brother was like this, he doesn't want socialized medicine for everyone but he loves his navy benefits.
Imma pass on the guy who called Barack Obama a "republican in blackface" and who attacked other black Americans supporting Obama as being on the Democratic "plantation."
Hard pass.
I mean, i'd expect that Sanders supporters would respond to rivals posts in relation to Sanders. And if there are more supporters of any candidate responding to comments that they feel are objectionable by other candidates, of course they are going to be there. Sanders has a ton of online support thus more representation on twitter.
Its not surprising, that's why making an article about it is very weird. "Active online supporters of a politician are active online, let me highlight a handful of assholes to make some kind of blanket concern statement about Sanders or his supporters which could technically apply to any other support base of any other candidate".
This is why people are so distrustful of narratives by the media, because this is not a piece that is actually in good faith by the person in question making it, truly concerned about general discourse on twitter.
Last edited:
CNN had to cancel an hour long special on this and the DMR lost its single biggest draw of the primary season.
Hate to say it but that caller is fired af.
Also... while I'm a Sanders supporter, I always take pause at the enormous victim complex some of his other supporters have. There are so many legitimate critiques to be made about the media, how it operates, how money is tied into the process... but they always focus on the wrong things and make their arguments in the most abrasive ways possible. This shit has NOTHING to do with Sanders... like at all.
Wow so Bloomberg is a poll option in this thread whereas Andrew Yang just missed the cut? I'm disappointed that the multi-billionaire has made himself relevant in this election without participating in any debates (a necessary skill when going up against Trump). I was hoping the democrat's only minority candidate would be allowed to stay relevant at least through the early primaries but looks like Bloomberg's multi million dollar advertising campaigns have been effective. Very disappointing to me.
User Banned (3 weeks): Inflammatory accusations across multiple posts in contravention of the staff post, trolling across multiple posts, recently returned from a ban for trolling
in news unrelated to my previous several posts since Returning from a Ban:
Extremely normal small-d democratic behavior where certain posters threaten to deliberately send the country even further into hell if the roughly three quarters of the Democratic primary electorate that does not currently support Sanders (chiefly the roughly three-tenths that supports The Previous VP and is substantially blacker than everyone else's first-choice voters) does not get out of the way of the remaining quarter
Extremely normal small-d democratic behavior where certain posters threaten to deliberately send the country even further into hell if the roughly three quarters of the Democratic primary electorate that does not currently support Sanders (chiefly the roughly three-tenths that supports The Previous VP and is substantially blacker than everyone else's first-choice voters) does not get out of the way of the remaining quarter
I'd compare it to Acerbo but that was somehow less gross
Last edited:
It's not worth the risk to support any candidate other than Sanders then.
- Status