DU'ers obsess way too much about online polls.

[Bread and Circus]

Seriously, it's a fucking waste of time. First off, the polls don't mean anything. Second, it's not going to affect the way people really think and vote. Third, if the media doesn't like the results "they expect", they just change the outcome or restart the poll. But here, we all act like it's a matter of life and death. Frankly, let the polls get freeped - in the end, this is the least of our worries. If you want the media to "get it" that Bush sucks, write something intelligent and email them. It may not make a difference but I think it's better time spent than clicking the "Kerry Box" and erasing cookies.

[Still_Loves_John]

1. I agree

Online polls are the most pointless thing ever. They always end up tilting heavily to whatever side decides to win them; they're just a joke. I still don't understand why the news networks still have online polls on anything besides "whose your favorite anchor?"

[Iris]

5. because they're fun?

I can't help but get a giggle when the local right-wing freak's poll goes 75% for Edwards even if the next day it's up to 97% Cheney! There was still that brief window of time. . .

Not only that, but I think if nothing else, the coverage helps keep the media from turning a winner into a loser the way they did Al Gore in 2000.

[Chicago Democrat]

2. its fun, and I dont erase cookies

Plus it does help... Those polls are publishes and reach a very large audience.

[movonne]

3. I'm obsessing about this whole election...It is so important that is all

I can think about.

[TrustingDog]

4. I don't quite agree...

if the Mess Media has the race 'close'' by their lies, it easier for Bush to do another Florida maneuver than if the polls came in with Kerry overwhelmingly in the lead. This isn't about polling so much as about laying out the intended outcome...

[Bread and Circus]

11. I'm talking about the fallible online polls that are unscientific and

routinely subject to skew by anyone interested in taking the time.

[Protagoras]

6. The polls are meaningless insofar as showing information

But I see CNN and MSNBC report them, often in ways that cloud their lack of validity. These online surveys aren't about gauging public opinion, the are about shaping it. And if we don't participate we are letting the Freeps do it.

Nonetheless I'm a firm believer in the one person one vote method and I can't support rigging them more than the media and FR is already doing.

I'll vote once, and then spend the rest of my time worrying about registering voters in my neighborhood and writting LTTE.

[gratuitous]

7. Perhaps, but . . .

That doesn't answer why CNN found it necessary to scrap one of their online polls today because the Kerry numbers were coming out at a level they found unacceptable. Granting that your reasoning is true (waste of time, meaningless, doesn't affect people's opinions), then why does CNN go to the trouble of re-starting their polls.

There's a reason large companies spend gazillions of dollars every year on advertising: It works. In the same way, online polls are trumpeted by folks hoping to gull the credulous among the citizenry. We're just taking that arrow out of their quiver, that's all. If you don't care to vote in online polls, by all means go do something else: Work a phone bank, hang doorknockers, stuff envelopes, walk a neighborhood canvass. And leave it to other folks to address the online polls.

[Bread and Circus]

12. That's my whole point, DU'ing polls is a waste because CNN

just changes it.

[gratuitous]

15. Well then, let's keep making them change it

It makes them look partisan and as if they're putting out polls with a preconceived notion of how they're supposed to turn out. We'll put the onus on them to explain why they're disregarding their own polls. I have no problem with dragging a little reality across their path.

[HEIL PRESIDENT GOD]

8. Well, Fox did re-call the last election

And they must have SOME decent social scientists and computer scientists working for them--no pile of money that big doesn't.

So, if they know that somewhere between 50 and 70% of their viewership is for Kerry, they are going to have a considerably higher "pucker factor" as they attempt another such move.

[ThoughtCriminal]

9. On the other hand

They can no longer pull them up as support for *, which was quite common durring the Golden Age of Freeping . These polls are showing a lot of anger and dedication and I think that scares them more than a little.

But yes, trying to vote multiple times is a waste of time and dishonest. I vote in polls that are on news sites I visit anyway. I really don't care to track down every small town newspaper and backwoods UHF TV station poll.

[Reciprocity]

10. Go tell that to the Freepers.

All you are doing with this post is undermining all the hard work that Skinner and others are doing.

[Bread and Circus]

13. Well, I'm sorry. I still think all this "online poll" stuff is a waste

of energy and brain power.

[kerryin2004]

16. How much energy and brain power does it take??

I avoid the local ones, but for me to go through that list and click on Kerry on the major ones really does not exhaust me much..Now I do agree the email's and letters are more effective because they will just toss their polls up to not being scientific, Sure, but it only took me about 5 minutes to click on the major poll links and vote.. If anything I am sending a message that alought of us that watch you are interested and aware!

[Awsi Dooger]

14. Generally I agree, but not all online polls are a waste

The newspaper and TV station polls are completely overemphasized, IMO. But something like a CNN or MSNBC poll that is quoted on the network can influence opinion, particularly over the weekend after a Friday night debate. There was no water cooler day for Bush's rude behavior toward the moderator to be discussed, etc.

[F.Gordon]

17. Who do YOU think will win "Survivor"?

I couldn't agree more. After 2000 I understand why Skinner promoted this, and I think it was a good idea. But as it turns out the monkey man did our work for us.

Face it....bush* could have pulled his pants down last night and took a dump on the floor and Tweety would have said "how dedicated he was...he had to go real bad...and he showed his leadership to the country. He stayed in the debate...didn't give in to his pressing bowel movement". And Faux News would have still shown bush* to be the winner.

I have no idea who these "undecided" people are but if they are still undecided at this point I seriously doubt that ANY poll is going to change their mind....

[depakid]

18. Unfortunately, they're not a waste of time

because the media will cite them as "proof." If we blast them and ceate results that they don't like, then at the very least, we've kept them off the airwaves.

IMHO, most e-mails are a waste of time, because it's pretty much a given that they don't care a rat's ass about them. For all the e-mails people have sent CNN, has that had any effect on their blatant whoring for Bush? Nope. But hitting their polls, as a note from some media manager to Skinner last week shows, limits their ability to use bogus proof to shore up Republicans.

Back this spring, I lamented that polls (especially the cheap media polls) were going to be used to try to influence public perception- as opposed to making an honest effort to reflect it- and that has in fact come to pass. The only way we can fight this is to try to influence the results in whatever way we can, and the internet polls are one of the few ways we can do that.

Forget science- this bunch cares nothing about science. Their so called "scientific" polls are as often as not just a blatant affront to science as any internet poll.