News and Politics | November 25, 2007 | 3 comments

Announcing HuffPost's Polling Project: Putting Polling Under a Microscope

source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/announcing-huffposts-pol_b_73395.html

Image
Chique
The impact of polls and polling on our political process continues to be one of the unexplored stories of the 2008 race.

Take the remarkable gap -- chasm, really -- between the widening lead national polls continue to anoint Hillary Clinton with and the current dead heat in Iowa and New Hampshire.

It's enough to leave one wondering: are polls measuring the 2008 election or are they driving it?
  1. groups:
    News and Politics,   Politics
  2. tags:
    News and Politics,  Politics,  Hillary Clinton,  Polls,  4 more
  3.     
    |

3 comments // Announcing HuffPost's Polling Project: Putting Polling Under a Microscope

  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • Polls are an assault on reason regardless of who is in the lead. They can be commissioned by groups that have an in with those polling since they pay money to have them conducted, or the questions can be phrased to elicit the answers and results wanted. It happens in politics with campaigns, with groups looking to draft someone, or groups looking to do almost anything. And when they report results they always report percentages but never tell the people the number polled. But then of course, to tell someone 60% of people want such and such makes a better impression than saying only 160 people. Therefore, I see polls as nothing but manipulation and place no credence in them period. Especially Internet polls where many allow voting more than once and it is abused.

    • 4 years ago
  • Marilynn_Murray
    • 0
      Marilynn_Murray  

    • They are all screwed. The pollsters can skew them to turn out any way they want. Even the Online polls aren't honest. All they take is a few jerks determined to make them turn out for their guy. I watched DFA poll turn from John Edwards being way ahead with Kucinich and Obama second and third. I'm fairly certain the first results remain the real results. Hillary was just a blip on the bottom. Then the dedicated spammers went to work. Kucinich won by a huge unreal margin. I honestly don't believe that is an accurate count. Plus, I personally don't know anyone that wants Hillary except the media.

    • 4 years ago
  • Padders100
more from News and Politics:
from the community

top videos