Survey of AFT members on 2016 election.

[Gman]

All members by 67-19% support Hillary.

http://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/memo_presidentialsurvey2015.pdf

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Too bad.

Well, there are other unions for Bernie to win over.

[wyldwolf]

2. accusations they made these numbers up in 3... 2...

[rock]

13. Or maybe the sound of crickets?

Maybe?

[wyldwolf]

35. look at the exchange below, starting with post #28

Essentially, his argument is just because the PDF says Hart Research, and they are Sanders' pollsters, it doesn't mean they did the poll or are Sanders' pollsters.

[rock]

130. I stand corrected

Excellent foresight! I thought they would be too embarrassed to make a peep. Apparently, humility is not an attribute of Bernie followers. Here's to you!

[zappaman]

19. Already happened.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=438766

[stevenleser]

3. So much for the conspiracy theories. The manufactured outrage was hilarious.

Gives one a preview of what the wailing and gnashing of teeth in that crowd is going to be like when Hillary clinches the nomination.

[Hoppy]

4. Wrong.

The weeping, wailing will begin if she becomes president.

If you liked Holder, Geithner and Arnie, wait 'till you see what you get if she wins..... Obama on steroids.

[JaneyVee]

6. "Obama on steroids". Sounds great to me.

[wyldwolf]

7. yeah, I wouldn't complain.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. President Obama has been a transformational and consequential president.

He ended the Great Recession, reduced our exposure in Iraq and Afghanistan, augured rapprochement with Iran, passed comprehensive health care, removed some of the more onerous provisions of welfare reform, and appointed justices who made marriage equality possible.

I look forward to Hillary Clinton defending his legislative achievements against the Republicans and building on them.

[zappaman]

21. "Obama on steroids" would be awesome!

Great post!

[stevenleser]

38. Obama on steroids would be exactly what I want. Thanks, you made my day!

[calimary]

111. Actually, that would NOT be such a terribly bad thing.

President Obama has done some MASSIVE good. MASSIVE. Of course, he's not perfect, either. But on balance, I think he'll come out FAR more on the plus side than on the minus side. With the crap he's had to face in the past six-and-a-half years, the obstruction, the hostility, the outright hate, the duplicitousness, the Sore Losermanship, I'm frankly amazed that he's gotten ANYTHING positive accomplished. History will be VERY kind to this President.

I would also guess that if Bernie Sanders makes it all the way to the White House, there very likely will be another round of weeping and wailing to be seen and heard. Because with a Congress like what we've got now (and there's no way Dems can take the House back until maybe 2020, the way it's been gerrymandered), he will not be able to get much of his agenda passed. It will be another fucking struggle with the assholes on the so-called "right." He'll be immediately targeted by mitch mcconnell and friends who figure THIS time, it'll work. THIS time they'll fer sure be able to hold him to a one-term Presidency. And they'll go after every burp and fart of his with everything they've got.

And as with President Obama, I would suspect that we would soon be hearing strains of "goddamn used car salesman" with a President Sanders, too. How he broke all his promises and he's a turncoat or a useless incompetent because he coulda fought harder (or some such thing), or that there was no magic solution put into place as he envisioned it in his campaign speeches and he sold us a bill o' goods (or some such thing). NOBODY will be happy with him, especially his ardent supporters who have such strong faith in him. Then-Candidate Obama didn't bat a thousand once he got the big job, either. And it seems as though, in many ways, he STILL can't get a fuckin' break from some people on our side. If Bernie becomes President, that will be his lot in life, as well. Guaranteed.

It's always good to hope for a miracle. But miracles are rare. EXCEEDINGLY rare. The one we just saw unfold in Charleston only happened because nine innocent, loving, inclusive, and saintly people got fucking massacred In Their Church In The Middle Of Freakin' BIBLE Study by a young white supremacist-trainee. Look what it took for us to evolve even as much as taking the damn hate rag down. Look what it took. Miracle, maybe. But it was paid for by blood and tears in amounts almost unimaginable. Miracles don't come easy and they don't come by the dozen - especially in the size and magnitude that America most desperately needs.

[SCantiGOP]

114. Obama on steroids? Really?

Can't think of anything better.

[Hoppy]

153. Yeah, Wall Street in the White House would be great.

Goldman Sachs can have their own office.

[Recursion]

166. Obama on steroids? Sign me up (nt)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. Peter Hart

Peter D. Hart is regarded as one of the top analysts of public opinion in the United States. He is a leading shaper of national trends and political messages. He founded Hart Research in 1971, and since 1989 has been the pollster for NBC News and The Wall Street Journal. His political clients have included leaders in the forefront of American politics over the past half century, from Hubert Humphrey and Jay Rockefeller, to Edward Kennedy and Bill Clinton. He has represented more than 55 US senators and 40 governors. His work with Hart Research has focused on public policy and cultural issues and has included work for clients such as the Smithsonian Institution, Habitat for Humanity, UNICEF, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In the international realm, he has conducted studies in South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa. He has conducted strategy planning projects for clients such as Coca-Cola, AT&T, and Tiffany & Co.

[wyldwolf]

9. The irony is he also works for Bernie Sanders

http://hartresearch.com/clients/

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. Because he's the dean of Democratic pollsters./NT

[bigtree]

10. but some posters on a blog said they weren't polled

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. +1

eom

[virtualobserver]

20. they were not polled

they have over a million members.....

1150 were polled.

That is why they did it early, before Bernie's support grew.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. You expected Bernie Sanders' pollster to call over a million people.

And the poll was completed on 6/30/15.

[madfloridian]

47. The AFT itself said they called a million people.

See my post below.

[jwirr]

95. No we expect the truth from the teachers union.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

96. Pollsters use random samples. They don't call everybody.

Statistics 101.

[jwirr]

105. Even when they are speaking for the members? What exactly good is it to be a voting member

if you are not asked about anything? Especially something so important as who you want your union to support for president?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

109. They did two surveys

Since February, we've engaged members and leaders in the most extensive outreach we've ever done leading up to a primary endorsement. We conducted a phone survey calling more than 1 million members, commissioned a second major scientific poll from a nationally respected polling firm, and solicited your input online and in person. We wanted to know what issues mattered to you, which candidate you thought shared our values and who you believed could win.
- See more at: http://www.aft.org/election2016#sthash.nQFPAeSd.dpuf

[HooptieWagon]

157. Since February.

Who were the declared candidates in February?
4 years ago, the endorsement came out in October, after several debates had already been held. Why do you think it was rushed this time?

[bigtree]

26. that's the way polls work

...let's change reality, though, just to support crackpot accusations of corruption in support of your candidate.

[virtualobserver]

39. They didn't endorse Hillary until October of 2007

They did it months earlier this time because Bernie is rising in the polls

She has a longstanding friendship with Randi Weingarten.

What a "crackpot" accusation.

[bigtree]

53. they did it because they already know the candidates

...and earlier support (and member surveys) reinforced this decision for them.

Weingarten is one vote on a 36 member executive council. The conspiracy theories are crackpot. The unproven corruption accusations are smears.

But, you go with that...

[virtualobserver]

58. it is just reality....they locked this down months earlier....

than they did in 2007......it is just standard politics.

[bigtree]

61. shocking

...when everyone else participating in and weighing in on this process is doing so out of pure concern.

[virtualobserver]

66. not shocking, just par for the course...

which is why I like Bernie.

[Gman]

76. Do you think Sanders will make up 48 points

Between now and October? 48 points defines "overwhelming support". And no, Sanders would do well to pick up no more than 10 points.

[virtualobserver]

82. he just has to get within striking distance

His wins in Iowa and NH will be game changers

for now he just needs to keep rising.

[Gman]

83. No, he can't and won't make up 48 points in AFT

And actually AFT can do whatever it pleases when endorsing.

[virtualobserver]

87. I know you are but what am I?

we can just assert our viewpoint back and forth but I'm afraid we just disagree.

I couldn't agree more on AFT's freedom to do what they want. I just don't like the way they did it

[Gman]

91. Don't mean to be rude

And sorry if you feel I did. I can get gruff and not realize it.

Here's the thing. They did it the best way possible, polling the members. Many, if not most unions don't poll. Their E-board just endorses and in general the members are OK with that. The need for unity in a union is overwhelming. And that's why recalcitrant members are strongly encouraged to follow the union endorsement.

And bottom line, AFT and any other union win whoever gets the nomination.

[virtualobserver]

103. I didn't perceive your post as rude.

I was just trying to imply that we weren't going to convince each other. I should have used a better phrase.

I understand the process......I just felt that it was a tactical move to endorse now rather than later, to help Hillary in the primary to help fend off Bernie.

[Gman]

110. It may well have been

That's part of the political game. Endorsing is like placing a wager. You get the biggest payoff in terms of influence with the candidate if he/she wins when you endorse early. You can say you were there early when others weren't. Shows commitment. And gets you influence.

[stevenleser]

40. If you have to attack a poll to support your candidate, your candidate is in a bad place. nt

[virtualobserver]

46. It is the timing, in 2007 they did not endorse until October

They justified the endorsement based on a poll of 1150 people and Bernie is rising in the polls.

Hillary has a longstanding friendship with Randi Weingarten.

They did not want to risk Bernie rising further in the polls.

It is just that simple.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

55. FIXED

If you have to attack a poll, performed by your candidate's own pollster ,to support your candidate, your candidate is in a bad place

[stevenleser]

57. Even better. nt

[virtualobserver]

72. The backroom manipulation, not so good

The poll is fine, better than most of the polls.

It is the early endorsement lock down for the candidate of the status quo that shows that it is about Hillary, rather than about the members.

[fed-up]

165. If you have to take a poll earlier than the norm, YOUR candidate is in a bad place

Most people are attacking the TIMING of the poll, taken only two months after Bernie announced his candidacy. Heck, corporate controlled media is not giving him much air time, despite his record crowds. I talked with my mail person on Saturday and that was the first she had since of Bernie on the news.

So it is not surprising that a poll completed at the end of June was in favor of the more familiar candidate.

I guess they were really afraid of what the results would have been had they waited til Feb of 2016 for their poll!

I have heard of Bernie as my brother has worked with him over the years on veterans issues.

[Jefferson23]

56. Do you happen to have a link to that? It is interesting it came early but I'm not

sure what significance it will have for Bernie. Randi supports Common Core and
although they all vie for these endorsements, it worries me he wanted hers.

They can have Randi, who the teachers vote for is my greater worry.

[virtualobserver]

115. I hope that he gets the votes, too

They must exist, but I've never met a teacher who likes Common Core,
I am sure that Bernie is thinking of the teachers rather than specific AFT positions.



http://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/memo_presidentialsurvey2015.pdf

[Jefferson23]

121. I have many concerns aboout Common Core and the private charter schools with

tax dollars, the testing for big money. I honestly don't know who is going to dismantle that
but I doubt it will be Clinton and Randi.

Thank you for the link, the questions I saw raised was the surprise the endorsement came early
and that they were unaware of the outreach. Seemed like fair questions to me.

[jwirr]

93. Exactly. This was a small sample. The teachers who were not polled a the ones who do not like

this endorsement at this time. The teacher who did not get polled are not going to accept this. They will go their own way.

[fed-up]

14. press release in 2012 was done on Feb 7th, w/months of surveys

I smell a rat!

http://www.aft.org/press-release/american-federation-teachers-endorses-president-obama-re-election

Press Release
American Federation of Teachers Endorses President Obama For Re-election
For Release:
Tuesday, February 7, 2012

"The endorsement was voted on by the AFT's Executive Council following months of surveys, meetings, online forums and conversations with thousands of AFT members who made it clear that they support the re-election of Obama. - See more at: http://www.aft.org/press-release/american-federation-teachers-endorses-president-obama-re-election#sthash.7Ptiag1C.dpuf"

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. The survey was completed on 6/30/15

The survey was completed on 6/30/15


http://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/memo_presidentialsurvey2015.pdf


Surely you wouldn't question the veracity of Senator Sanders' own pollster:


http://hartresearch.com/clients/

[wyldwolf]

16. you 'smell a rat' because Bernie Sanders lost the endorsement.

[BooScout]

41. Precisely! n/t

[LordGlenconner]

17. Probably best for Bernie supporters to just let this go

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. That would seem to be the sane course./nt

[zappaman]

22. Good luck with that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. "Better to be strong and wrong..."

[LordGlenconner]

45. This is a preview of the primaries

If it doesn't go Bernie's way we'll hear talk of Diebold, the fix is in etc. I could envision a scenario which Hillary wins, NH for example, and many of the most strident Bernie supporters here would question the results, call for investigations etc.

No doubt in my mind that's what is coming if things don't go their way.

Of course that also adds to the "theater" of the experience here so I can't complain.

[Comrade Grumpy]

25. Yeah. This is the smaller of the teachers' unions, the more conservative one.

And in the bag for Hillary.

I'll be curious to see what the NEA, which has four times the membership of the AFT, does.

[bigtree]

27. ooh! new strawman

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. "I'll be curious to see what the NEA, which has four times the membership of the AFT."

'll be curious to see what the NEA, which has four times the membership of the AFT, does.

American Federation of Teachers

1,597,140 members (2014)


National Education Association


2,963,121 members (2014)


What's 3,500,000 or so members among friends?

[HooptieWagon]

28. Where are the detailed poll results?

Who conducted the poll? What was the methodology? How were the questions framed? What are the results, by locals? Strange that the Executive Council is keeping that information secret. Surely it's merely a coincidence that AFT President Weingartner is a board member of Hillarys Super PAC.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

30. Who conducted the poll?

Bernie Sanders' own pollster:





http://hartresearch.com/clients/

[HooptieWagon]

32. That's a list of clients.

It doesn't say they conducted the specific poll. Try again.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. You must have missed this part

http://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/memo_presidentialsurvey2015.pdf

[wyldwolf]

37. Well...

just because the PDF says Hart Research, and they are Sanders' pollsters, it doesn't mean they did the poll or are Sanders' pollsters.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. Now, posters are upset that they used a random sample instead of calling all 1,600,000 members...

Now, posters are upset that they used a random sample instead of calling all 1,600,000 members as that is remotely possible.

[wyldwolf]

50. And circulating a petition at change.org for AFT to withdraw the endorsement

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128023785

https://www.change.org/p/american-federation-of-teachers-withdraw-your-endorsement-of-hillary-clinton-for-the-democratic-presidential-nomination?recruiter=337451827&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink

[DemocratSinceBirth]

51. This should make for great theater./nt

[Gman]

81. Statistically, over 1,000,000 members support Hillary

Like a petition with a few thousand sigs will make AFT say, "Duh, what were we thinking!"

And no union succumbs to outside pressure on these things.

[ancianita]

104. That's exactly the problem -- 'random' isn't always representative of rank and file.

A sampling challenge is valid. AFT locals are all over the country, but my impression is that the 'random' sampling didn't cover 50 states' union reps.

As a local AFT union rep here in Chicago says, "If there is any reason to prefer an independent candidate, the process by which this endorsement was made is reason enough."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

128. Random=everybody in the universe that is measured has the same chance of being polled.

Each individual is chosen randomly and entirely by chance, such that each individual has the same probability of being chosen at any stage during the sampling process, and each subset of k individuals has the same probability of being chosen for the sample as any other subset of k individuals.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

123. The MOE is 4.1%

So we can say at a 95% confidence interval that the results can vary from HRC 63% BS 23% to HRC 71% BS 15%

[Gman]

78. If you had clicked on the link in the OP

You'd know b

[Number23]

141. I think you just won GD:P for the day

That's gonna leave a mark.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

143. Please hang around, pardner, there might be a couple more./nt

[bigtree]

31. it's all a conspiracy against Bernie!

[LWolf]

33. In response to this endorsement:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/AFTMembersFeelTheBern/

[madfloridian]

36. They say they phone-polled a million people. That's a huge undertaking.

So many who are seeing the Hart poll are asking about data from the phone-polling of the one million. The Hart poll included 1150 people. Most feel they should have data on the other nearly a million.

http://www.aft.org/election2016

Since February, we've engaged members and leaders in the most extensive outreach we've ever done leading up to a primary endorsement. We conducted a phone survey calling more than 1 million members, commissioned a second major poll, and solicited your input online and in person. We wanted to know what issues mattered to you, which candidate you thought shared our values and who you believed could win.
- See more at: http://www.aft.org/election2016#sthash.se35qxxg.dpuf

This is not about votes. Teachers usually do their own thinking and voting aside from the union.

It's really about the way things have been handled.

It won't be resolved, it's done. Teachers will vote as they please as they usually do.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. THE NEA has nearly 1,600,000 members...

Bernie Sanders' own pollster, Hart Research Associates, performed a scientific poll to measure the choices of the American Federation Of Teachers.

It's a random sample, performed under universally accepted controls, and it findings represent the sentiments of the entire universe of NEA members. What part of that don't you understand?

Did you really expect them to call 1, 600,000 members?

[madfloridian]

43. I did not expect any group to call a million members at all.

I am not questioning the Hart poll.

[aspirant]

59. How can it be Bernie's pollster if Hart works for other people

Let's verify the poll. Have the ATF obtain the list and contact #'s of the 1150 members and call and verify. This would put this issue to bed, it's very simple.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

60. What part of a random sample don't you understand?

Here's a lifeline:





#lol@me

[aspirant]

134. Let me help you

Look up the difference between Descriptive and Inferential Statistics

Notice that Inferential stats are uncertainty, estimates, guesses for the population in whole

These 1150 are Union members and verification is essential for membership trust.

...and while you're at it give me the government agency that oversees pollsters and verifies their results so they're not self-policing themselves

[DemocratSinceBirth]

140. DNA is based on inferential statistics

DNA is based on inferential statistics. Juries have no problem locking up folks for life or ending them based on DNA evidence so a reasonable person can assume they have the requisite validity to predict how a specific universe of association members would vote.


There is no governmental agency that controls pollsters. However Hart Research Associates belongs to the National Council Of Public Polls which sets the industry standards:



http://www.ncpp.org/

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.
-John Adams

I eagerly look forward to our present tete a tete ending the way our previous one did.

[aspirant]

146. Dna is verifiable with 1 person

it does not exclude 320 million until each are tested, this is silliness

Tell me their exact standards and how they verify results

[DemocratSinceBirth]

147. Please do not make demands and insult me when I have been nothing but civil to you...

this is silliness .... Tell me their exact standards and how they verify results

[


Please do not insult me and make demands like I am chattel when I have been nothing but civil to you...I would hate for our tete a tete to end like our last one:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6895432

Thank you in advance.

Now that we got that out of the way:

Inferential statistics help predict or infer information regarding some aspect of a large population by sampling a subset of the population.Inferential statistics are used when it is essentially impossible to collect data on every member of a particular population. Political election polls and population allele frequency DNA databases are examples where inferential statistics are used.

http://tinyurl.com/oc8klko

[aspirant]

149. Truth is not an insult or demanding

You forgot to let us know of the Public Polling Council standards of verification

Please don't forget about the AAPOR and how both police the pollsters.

Please explain how a single murder's DNA (Descriptive statistics) will convict thousands of others of murder (Inferential statistics)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

151. DNA is based on inferential statistic not descriptive statistics (REDUX)

And you demanded I tell you something. You demand a dog or a horse to do tricks:

Tell me their exact standards and how they verify results

When you want a human being to do something you usually preface your request with a Please unless he's a slave, a prisoner, or a child...I am a human being and a child of God and I humbly request you treat me as such lest our tete a tete comes to the same ignominious end as our last one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6895432



DNA is not descriptive statistics. There are 50,000 or so genetic samples in the national data base from which researchers makes inferences that now reach into the billions, ergo:

Inferential statistics help predict or infer information regarding some aspect of a large population by sampling a subset of the population.Inferential statistics are used when it is essentially impossible to collect data on every member of a particular population. Political election polls and population allele frequency DNA databases are examples where inferential statistics are used.

http://tinyurl.com/oc8klko

[aspirant]

158. Now it's truth time

"what part of random sample don't you understand" (your post #60) where is the please and kindness?

"locking up folks for life based on DNA evidence" (post #140) A link showing potential murderers being convicted with Inferential Statistics

"National Council of Public Polls which sets the industries Standards" (post #140) what are the industries standards, that you refer to, and how does AAPOR fit in?

Inferential statistics are inferences, estimates, uncertainties and guesses and don't belong in a court of law.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

164. "Truth crushed to earth will rise again."-Martin Luther King, Jr,

"what part of random sample don't you understand" (your post #60) where is the please and kindness?

If you don't understand the difference between a question and a demand there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.

Inferential statistics are inferences, estimates, uncertainties and guesses and don't belong in a court of law.

The standards of proof in a court of law are more likely than not, clear and convincing evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt. It's not a metaphysical certainty which is virtually unattainable in human affairs. Inferences are not guesses, ergo:

Inference
In the law of evidence, a truth or proposition drawn from another that is supposed or admitted to be true. A process of reasoning by which a fact or proposition sought to be established is deduced as a logical consequence from other facts, or a state of facts, already proved or admitted. A logical and reasonable conclusion of a fact not presented by direct evidence but which, by process of logic and reason, a trier of fact may conclude exists from the established facts. Inferences are deductions or conclusions that with reason and common sense lead the jury to draw from facts which have been established by the evidence in the case.
West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.

There are approximately 50,000 samples in the national data base but attorneys are using those samples to infer there is in some instances a 4000000000 to 1 probability that a person's body fluid could have come from someone else.


Inferential statistics help predict or infer information regarding some aspect of a large population by sampling a subset of the population.Inferential statistics are used when it is essentially impossible to collect data on every member of a particular population. Political election polls and population allele frequency DNA databases are examples where inferential statistics are used.

http://tinyurl.com/oc8klko






Again,


May we please keep our tete a tete civil because I would truly regret our tete a tete coming to the same inglorious end as our prior one with you treating me to a most unkind attack:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6895432


Thank you in advance.

[wyldwolf]

63. ^ here's another example of how some people don't understand the scientific polling process

... or how a polling firm can have more than one client.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. Would you suggest that Senator Sanders fire Peter Hart and have another pollster conduct a new poll?

eom

[wyldwolf]

70. Why would I suggest that?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

71. I can't think of a reason why but if Senator Sanders doubts the veracity of his own pollster...

I can't think of a reason why but if Senator Sanders doubts the veracity of his own pollster he should...

I like the novel argument that he's not Bernie's pollster because he has other clients. That's like saying my doctor is not my doctor because he has other patients.

[aspirant]

161. How many other pollsters has Bernie contracted with?

How many other doctors do you contract with?

[aspirant]

133. Does he have a poll pending with Hart

that he is able to fire him?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

142. I don't know. Here is Peter Hart's contact information:

Peter D.Hart
Founder
Hart Research Associates
1724 Connecticut Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20009
[phone]

[aspirant]

150. How do you suggest he "fire Hart"

if their is no pending polling contract.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

152. I don't want anybody to fire anybody and deprive a person of his livelihood or even a portion of it.

That would betray a lack of empathy.

[aspirant]

163. Your Quotes

"that Senator Sanders fire Peter Hart" (post #65)
On firing Hart; "doubts the veracity of his own pollster he should" (post #71)

Where is your empathy there?

[aspirant]

160. "have another pollster conduct a new poll"

So did Bernie pay for the first poll and has now contracted with Hart for a second poll?

[fed-up]

48. wow-so they did outreach beginning in Feb before Bernie declared he was running at the end of April

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/29/politics/bernie-sanders-announces-presidential-run/

[virtualobserver]

49. Do you like Hillary or this guy you haven't heard of? n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. Ahh, "name recognition", got it, thank you./nt

[virtualobserver]

75. When you are running against Ms. Name Recognition....

it does matter a teency weency bit.

[madfloridian]

62. I missed the February part. Very interesting. Polling since February.

Since February, we've engaged members and leaders in the most extensive outreach we've ever done leading up to a primary endorsement. We conducted a phone survey calling more than 1 million members, commissioned a second major scientific poll from a nationally-respected polling firm, and solicited your input online and in person. We wanted to know what issues mattered to you, which candidate you thought shared our values and who you believed could win. - See more at: http://www.aft.org/election2016#sthash.se35qxxg.xqRemiIl.dpuf

http://www.aft.org/election2016

Who do you like best..Hillary or ?

[Scootaloo]

52. Good. Nice to finally have at least an inkling of an answer to the concerns brought up.

In Camp Windsock though, is "over a thousand" the same thign as "A million"? 'Cause AFT claims a million were polled.

[bigtree]

64. it's more evidence of support than critics have produced

...in their claims the membership is opposed to this endorsement based on a handful of blog posts.

[Scootaloo]

68. You're evading.

It's a question of whether the leadership actually conducted this in the fashion they claim they did, not whether the membership supports the result.

The union leadership claims they phone-polled a million people. The survey i nthe OP has a sample size that is... substantially smaller. What's the story on that?

[bigtree]

69. I'll take this poll over the baseless accusations of Sanders supporters here any day

...you're deflecting because you have zero to back up the nonsense flying around here.

24 hrs. of this nonsense over one endorsement. What a spectacle.

[SoapBox]

73. Uh...

Sorry that I simply can't take the constant posts by HRC supporters, how we that support Bernie need to basically drop his support and blindly March (roped off) behind Clinton.

Never.

Blocked.

[bigtree]

79. I'm not a 'Hillary supporter'

...but I have enough integrity to oppose this craven political nonsense from Sanders supporters here.

I didn't even realize we HAD a 'soap box.' Pity that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

74. The guy polled for Hubert Humphrey and Ted Kennedy...

You would think any sane Democrat would stipulate he's legit.

[Scootaloo]

77. It's not an accusation to ask questions about polling procedure

AFT is a union with over one million and six hundred thousand members. The poll you are looking at contains the results garnered from asking 1,150 of them. 1,150 is a mere 0.07% of the union's membership. The union heads meanwhile claim that they phone-polled a million of their members.

I don't think there's some sort of "conspiracy" going on here - though the union president also being on Hillary's Super PAC would certainly excuse me if I were. I simply wonder whether a union reaching a decision based on less than a tenth of a percent of tis membership is democratically valid.

[bigtree]

80. this is just another self-serving, sour grapes defense of Sanders

...not even a hint of a sincere concern for the union or its members. This is an extension of the DU anti-Hillary campaign, not unlike most of the Sanders supporters' campaigning here.

This isn't a serious accusation, Scootaloo and, without any real evidence to back up whatever you're insinuating at the time, you've used up your last straw on this endorsement.

[Scootaloo]

98. The real evidence is right there, Bigtree

The AFT has a membership of over 1,600,000. The poll in the OP cites the results from polling 1,150 of them.

1,150 is 0.07% of 1,600,000. That's math, not editorialization. And of that number, 67% (770) support Clinton... So, a total of 0.04% of total union membership.

However, the AFT's own press release claims over a million members were polled. 1,000,000 is quite a different number than 1,150. Again, basic math.

So. To have it your way, both the AFT - which is the source for all the numbers I have cited - and basic laws of mathematics are engaged in some great big Hillary-hating conspiracy for Bernie. While endorsing Hillary.

I have no idea who the majority of the union supports. ...because only 0.07% of them had the opportunity to make it known.

[bigtree]

107. it's one more poll than you have

...I can't believe this dirt-dumb nonsense is still being pursued here.

If I believed for one moment this line of questioning was part of the actual Sanders campaign...it's just embarrassingly brain-dead.

You're right, you have no idea who the majority of the union supports. I do.

[Scootaloo]

108. Correction: You know what 0.07% of the union supports. Same as I do.

[bigtree]

112. that's some really dirt-dumb analysis of the polling

...I'll just leave it to you to learn what the poll's methodology actually represents.

here's where your entire nonsense falls apart:

The AFT has conducted a long, deliberative process to assess which candidate would best champion the issues of importance to our members, their families and communities. (1) Members have been engaged online, (2) through the "You Decide" website, (3) through several telephone town halls, (4) and through multiple surveys—reaching more than 1 million members.

(5) **Additionally**, over the past few weeks, the AFT has conducted a scientific poll of our membership on the candidates and key issues. The top issues members raised were jobs and the economy and public education. Seventy-nine percent of our members who vote in Democratic primaries said we should endorse a candidate. And by more than a 3-to-1 margin, these members said the AFT should endorse Clinton.

http://www.aft.org/press-release/american-federation-teachers-endorses-hillary-clinton-president#sthash.spDZtkcd.dpuf

[DemocratSinceBirth]

116. I am loathe to get in this discussion...

I am loathe to get in this discussion but would you please ask your interlocutor if he accepts or denies the efficacy of random sampling small universes of voters to make inferences about larger universes of voters.



Thank you in advance.

[bigtree]

120. no. I've asked that the poster do his own learning on methadology

...involved in polling.

I'm not convinced my efforts won't be met with yet another obtuse and diverting response. I see they're out of straws, so I'm going to take a few steps out of this and go back to my own candidate support.

(see the obtuse nonsense below my post)

[Scootaloo]

118. Smarter than your belief that math is an anti-Clinton conspiracy

AFT based its decision on the opinions of 1,150 members of its 1,600,000-strong organization. or at least, this is the only data it has made available - maybe you have more I can't seen, and I'd love to.

AFT made a decision for one million and six hundred thousand people, based on what seven hundred and twenty of them said.

Had it gone the other way and they supported Sanders, i'm certain I'd be seeing you and the rest of Camp Windsock howling in the streets. And the damned thing is? With these sorts of numbers i'd be there with you, just as I am now. I don't much care who or what is endorsed, endorsements will come and go and some will even change. But i think the union leadership may have pulled one over its members here.

[bigtree]

122. ah, obtuse

fruitless discussion.

You're wasting my time. pathetic.

[Scootaloo]

124. Anymore insults you want to throw out there, Bigtree?

[bigtree]

129. I thought this pathetic political effort of yours to defend Sanders was a source of pride

...I didn't realize the truth would hurt you.

[Scootaloo]

131. I'm not hurt. It was an honest question. Do you have any more insults you want to squeeze out?

I figure you're going to need the practice.

[bigtree]

135. the way I see this effort of yours on this thread?

...no, I can't think of any other way to describe it. I've seen this repeated a dozen or more times. It's rabid anti- Hillaryism, pure and simple. Nothing, not even truth and reality, assuage the political cravenness in defense of Sanders here. You don't want answers, you want something to support your own trumped-up nonsense about this endorsement. You'll have to satisfy yourself with your own imagination. The truth apparently hurts you too much.

[Scootaloo]

148. "Rabid anti-hillaryism"? "Cravenness?"

Keep 'em coming.

[Jefferson23]

102. I don't get the glee being exalted here, claiming a conspiracy theory has been hatched

due to questions. But maybe you are aware of info I am having difficulty finding.

Where is the AFT claims to have phone polled a million members? That seems a
daunting task..and all I could find was this from their website which seemed to
me to be illuding to that the means they used made the information available
to members, but not necessarily that they did reach them?

**Members have been engaged online, through the "You Decide" website, through several telephone town halls, and through multiple surveys—reaching more than 1 million members. - See more at: http://www.aft.org/press-release/american-federation-teachers-endorses-hillary-clinton-president#sthash.spDZtkcd.dpuf

The questions I have seen raised by members began with, they knew nothing about it, thus
it seemed more than fair to wonder about the process.

[historylovr]

155. Here is where the AFT says it called over 1 million members.

http://www.aft.org/election2016

Fifth paragraph, it says they called over 1 million members, since February. But there's also the much, much lower number cited in the poll they commissioned. So that does raise questions, yes, especially with members saying they were unaware.

[Jefferson23]

159. Thank you. I had not seen that so I wondered if they were suggesting the info was

available and not necessarily confirming the outreach to a million members.

We conducted a phone survey calling more than 1 million members, commissioned a second major scientific poll from a nationally-respected polling firm, and solicited your input online and in person. We wanted to know what issues mattered to you, which candidate you thought shared our values and who you believed could win. -( end )

That is a lot of phone calls.

[historylovr]

162. It certainly is.

And you're welcome!

[riversedge]

67. "1,150 AFT members who are registered to vote"

No, the survey only says 1, 150

New @AFTunion survey of members--69% support Hillary @HillaryClinton vs 19% for @SenSanders http://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/memo_presidentialsurvey2015.pdf … #wipolitics #UniteBlue

[daybranch]

84. timing and name recognition

working for Hillary. They have plenty of time to change their minds. I know teachers in NEA who favor Bernie. so too early to tell.

[Gman]

86. The only thing that will make AFT change their endorsement

Is a Sanders winning the nomination

[BlueJazz]

85. Is it possible that Hillary received more endorsements because more teachers are women?

[Gman]

88. Give them more credit than that

These are educated people we're talking about.

[BlueJazz]

92. I figured that but with my background, the question had to be asked. I certainly have..

...no problem voting for Hillary if she's picked.

[wyldwolf]

90. If that were true, would you suggest their votes count as 3/4 of a vote?

[BlueJazz]

97. Of course not. If the polled were Fire-Fighters and the results were the opposite,...

...I'd be asking the same question (replacing women with men).

[wyldwolf]

100. sure.

[BlueJazz]

106. ! I don't think you believe me but my intentions are Honorable, I'll vote for either of the 3.

(so far)

[OhZone]

89. Predictwise has her chances going up again today I think.

86% probability of winning the nomination.

http://www.predictwise.com/politics/2016DemNomination

[Gman]

94. Sanders is well aware he has virtually no chance.

And he said as much last year when he said if he got in it, it would be to push his issues out front to be debated and thereby push the Democratuc nominee toward these positions.

I'd say he's doing a fine job.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

99. I follow it too and for sports as well...

[William769]

101. Kick & Recommended.

[sadoldgirl]

113. All this is rather intriguing

If the AFT really claims to have called 1,000000 members
since February it raises the question:

When did HRC declare her candidacy?
As far as I remember nobody had declared by then.

I don't mind the whole brouhaha, but find it rather
funny for the AFT to claim that.

[Gman]

117. Read the info at the link

Nobody polls 1 million people.

[sadoldgirl]

127. Well, I was referring to the link

in post 109, which comes obviously from the
union itself. A bit of an admission of too early
counting their chickens.

I actually don't care. If a conservative union wants
to support a centrist dem, that is their choice.
Teachers will vote separately anyway.

[Robbins]

125. this shows why unions are dying

they support anti-union dems.Those who support corporations and trade deals are killing working people and unions.Corporate Dems no matter what they say in election years are anti-union

[Hoyt]

144. Would like to see Unions accomplish anything without corporations. The mom amd pop

outfit isn't likely to recognize unions, much less pay anything close to a large corporation.

[Gman]

145. Things that happened with the NLRB under Obama

Are enough to show how absolutely wrong that statement is.

[madfloridian]

126. This is not about votes, not about sour grapes. It goes much deeper.

This is not about which side gets to gloat or cheer. Nothing like that. It involves more than one union and deep-pocketed foundations who donate to them freely.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251440203

[sadoldgirl]

132. Yes, but you see if you read

the post from the AFT site, that they started calling in February,
when NOBODY had declared yet. I found that to be the most
interesting part.

[Jefferson23]

136. Yea, but if members ask questions and such, they're perpetuating a conspiracy sour grapes thingie.

[madfloridian]

137. That was stunning. What could they have possibly asked in February?

Amazing.

[sadoldgirl]

138. Let me speculate,that the

head of the union knew already that HRC was
going to run, after all both of them are friends.

It is surprising though that they wrote that on
their site, because it should raise questions, right?

[Number23]

139. K&R I don't have a dog in this fight either way but facts are good

And there was a lot of really butthurt and blatant dishonesty over this.

[HooptieWagon]

154. Hmmm

http://reverbpress.com/politics/aft-endorsement-clinton-shows-lack-democratic-process/

[Gman]

156. Nothing to see here

Just speculation and generalizations.