Looking for Hope in All the Wrong Places

[MineralMan]

DU's Democratic Primaries forum is always hungry for news and information. DUers with favorite candidates in the presidential primary race are no different, so people post stories that are good news for one or another candidate every day here.

Still, the information in those stories is often fleeting and short-lived. Take poll results as an example. There are multiple polls out there. Each has its own methodology and level of trustworthiness. It's interesting information, but is already old when poll results are posted. We're seeing snapshots from previous days.

So, they go up and down with careless abandon. Some are even way off the mark, when compared with other polls. But, they are what we have right now, in terms of supporting our candidates on DU.

Soon, people will start going to their states' caucuses and primary elections in numbers that dwarf the number of people surveyed in those polls. Real people, casting real votes. Soon, we'll begin to see how the people in individual states feel about the primary candidates. That will be refreshing, but also a flawed way to predict the eventual nominee.

There is only one set of numbers that counts: the number of delegates pledged to each primary candidate. Each state has a fixed number of delegates who will attend the Democratic nominating convention next summer. Some states, like Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada have relatively few delegates to send. Others, like California, Texas, and New York have large delegations to select.

Once those larger states hold their primaries, we'll begin to see how the race is progressing in a real way - a way that doesn't change once the election or caucus is over. Then, and only then, we'll be able to look at the trends and see who is most likely to become our Democratic nominee for President.

We're all impatient. We all want to KNOW if our favored candidate has a chance. However, we will all just have to wait a bit longer to begin to see how the primaries are likely to work out. Meanwhile, we can carry on posting information that favors our favorites and ignoring information that doesn't.

Politics is interesting, but not very predictable until the actual votes start getting counted.

Patience gets rewarded eventually, but the results aren't always what we had hoped. And so it goes...

[Liberal Jesus Freak]

1. Yes!

It’s why I’m still undecided. Kentucky’s primary isn’t until next May. Right now I’m focused on ridding the state of Bevin and McConnell 😕

[redqueen]

2. Yep. Polls are interesting but not much else.

If you've been talking to voters you know how soft much of the current support is. Most are barely paying attention.

Will be a very interesting holiday season, that's for sure

[HeartlandProgressive]

3. Physician heal thyself?

You do not seem to follow your own advice, you post about polls all the time:

Star Member MineralMan (124,492 posts)
1. That can't be right. The Economist has a poll
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287321839#post1

Wed Oct 23, 2019, 01:20 PM
Star Member MineralMan (124,492 posts)
10. I haven't noticed any primary polls for Texas recently.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287321839#post10

Star Member MineralMan (124,493 posts)
4. Grasping at straws once again, I see.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287320499#post4

Star Member MineralMan (124,493 posts)
12. Inconvenient, isn't it?
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287320499#post12

Star Member MineralMan (124,493 posts)
16. And yet, he is still the leader in the polls and has been
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287320499#post16

Wed Oct 23, 2019, 10:23 AM
Star Member MineralMan (124,493 posts)
15. Well, that can't be right. We've been told that Warren is surging into the lead.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287321552#post15

I could continue, but there are just too many posts about polls to include here.

So, thank you for the nice sentiments about how people should not pay attention to the polls.

[bluewater]

4. Bazinga!

That's going to leave a mark.

[MineralMan]

5. Oh, dear...

I have posted about polls many times. That does not mean that I take them seriously or even follow them closely. They are a frequent topic of conversation in this forum though, so I'm not surprised that you found posts of mine discussing them.

This is a discussion are with a subject of the Democratic Primaries. I post here.

Thank you for your polite concern.

[HeartlandProgressive]

6. "I have posted about polls many times. That does not mean that I take them seriously"

If you say so...

Strange though... you seemed quite serious in this post:

Star Member MineralMan (124,498 posts)
16. And yet, he is still the leader in the polls and has been

from the very beginning. Your outlier poll notwithstanding.

We can all see the polls, you know. We can all evaluate them just fine.

Are you only serious about polls that reflect well on your preferred candidate, perhaps?

[MineralMan]

7. I don't post data from polls on DU, normally. I may have posted one

at some point, but I don't normally post them. I post in threads discussing polls, though, fairly often. I post negatively about people's reliance on them even more often.

What is your interest in my posts? They're not hidden, and you're welcome to search for and read all of them. I don't take any individual poll seriously, however. As I have said, they represent a snapshot of opinions at the time they are taken, and have no meaning beyond that.

The aggregate averages of polls are more informative, but even those are subject to bias, based on which polls are selected to be part of the aggregate. Some poll aggregators rate individual polls for reliability or give them letter grades like schoolchildren. Are those accurate? Who can say. There's no way to test polls until an election is held and actual votes are counted..

That's why polls are not a good way to predict election outcomes.

I hope I have satisfied your curiosity.