POST DEBATE POLL SHOCKER=> Hillary Takes 4th Place in ABC News Poll Behind Jill Stein, Gary Johnson

[ABikerSailor]

How in the hell can they run an actual poll (not one where people click and vote as many times as they want) within less than 4 hours of the first debate?

Sorry............but computer polls aren't real polls, they are basically American Idol click and vote as many times as you want.

 

[toomuchtime_]

How in the hell can they run an actual poll (not one where people click and vote as many times as they want) within less than 4 hours of the first debate?

Sorry............but computer polls aren't real polls, they are basically American Idol click and vote as many times as you want.

They are not scientific polls, yet Nate Silver says they do predict the post debate bounce pretty well.

 

[ABikerSailor]

How in the hell can they run an actual poll (not one where people click and vote as many times as they want) within less than 4 hours of the first debate?

Sorry............but computer polls aren't real polls, they are basically American Idol click and vote as many times as you want.

They are not scientific polls, yet Nate Silver says they do predict the post debate bounce pretty well.

You know..............it takes a couple of days for the debates to sink into the psyche of the American people. See me on Friday, and we'll see what the polls say then.

 

[toomuchtime_]

How in the hell can they run an actual poll (not one where people click and vote as many times as they want) within less than 4 hours of the first debate?

Sorry............but computer polls aren't real polls, they are basically American Idol click and vote as many times as you want.

They are not scientific polls, yet Nate Silver says they do predict the post debate bounce pretty well.

You know..............it takes a couple of days for the debates to sink into the psyche of the American people. See me on Friday, and we'll see what the polls say then.

I agree these are not scientific polls, but that does not mean they are without value. I think people who vote on these online polls right after a debate are expressing a level of enthusiasm for or against the candidates, and I believe the level of enthusiasm has some predictive value.

 

[ABikerSailor]

How in the hell can they run an actual poll (not one where people click and vote as many times as they want) within less than 4 hours of the first debate?

Sorry............but computer polls aren't real polls, they are basically American Idol click and vote as many times as you want.

They are not scientific polls, yet Nate Silver says they do predict the post debate bounce pretty well.

You know..............it takes a couple of days for the debates to sink into the psyche of the American people. See me on Friday, and we'll see what the polls say then.

I agree these are not scientific polls, but that does not mean they are without value. I think people who vote on these online polls right after a debate are expressing a level of enthusiasm for or against the candidates, and I believe the level of enthusiasm has some predictive value.

Enthusiasm just says what level his current supporters are, not whether or not he can get more voters from other places.

Like I said....................see me on Friday, and we'll see what the actual polls say then.

 

[BluesLegend]

You know....................I'm gonna wait a couple of days to settle down and let people absorb what they saw on the debates, and THEN I'll check on the polls.

No need, Hillary is a lying hack.

 

[kiwiman127]

All three articles are from right wing sites. Sorry...............but after the right tried to convince me that Mittens was ahead in the polls and would win handily over Obama in 2012, I figured out that polls can be skewed and bought.

The only pollster that I trust right now is Nate Silver.

Nate is basically saying the same thing and Democrats are treating him like they typically treat Rasmussen.

Speaking of Nate Silver,,,,,,
Clinton Won The Debate, Which Means She’s Likely To Gain In The Polls
Clinton Won The Debate, Which Means She’s Likely To Gain In The Polls

 

[toomuchtime_]

All three articles are from right wing sites. Sorry...............but after the right tried to convince me that Mittens was ahead in the polls and would win handily over Obama in 2012, I figured out that polls can be skewed and bought.

The only pollster that I trust right now is Nate Silver.

Nate is basically saying the same thing and Democrats are treating him like they typically treat Rasmussen.

Speaking of Nate Silver,,,,,,
Clinton Won The Debate, Which Means She’s Likely To Gain In The Polls
Clinton Won The Debate, Which Means She’s Likely To Gain In The Polls

I read it, but of course he only looked at one poll, CNN, and he acknowledged that Democrats were disproportionately represented in it.

 

[kiwiman127]

All three articles are from right wing sites. Sorry...............but after the right tried to convince me that Mittens was ahead in the polls and would win handily over Obama in 2012, I figured out that polls can be skewed and bought.

The only pollster that I trust right now is Nate Silver.

Nate is basically saying the same thing and Democrats are treating him like they typically treat Rasmussen.

Speaking of Nate Silver,,,,,,
Clinton Won The Debate, Which Means She’s Likely To Gain In The Polls
Clinton Won The Debate, Which Means She’s Likely To Gain In The Polls

I read it, but of course he only looked at one poll, CNN, and he acknowledged that Democrats were disproportionately represented in it.

Yes, Silver did note the poll was top heavy with Dems.
Here's what he said:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Post-debate surveys like CNN’s aren’t always popular with poll mavens, in part because the universe of debate-watchers may not match the electorate overall. The voters in CNN’s poll were Democratic-leaning by a net of 15 percentage points, for instance, a considerably wider advantage than Democrats are likely to enjoy on Election Day.
But the CNN survey also historically correlates fairly well with movement in the post-election polls. Below, you’ll find a comparison between the perceived winner of the CNN/Gallup poll in debates since 1984, and how much the horse-race polls changed afterward. In 2012, for instance, Romney gained a net of 4.4 percentage points on Obama, although he eventually lost most of those gains. Bill Clinton, meanwhile, saw the polls swing by 4.1 points in his favor after the town hall debate of 1992.
he data is certainly noisy, but an emphatic win on the order of what Clinton or Romney achieved — and perhaps what Hillary Clinton achieved on Monday night — might be expected to produce a swing of 2 to 4 percentage points in horse-race polls. Even a 2-point gain would do wonders for Clinton, who would go from a fairly uncomfortable position in the Electoral College to a fairly comfortable one, and who would emerge with a 3-to-4-point lead in the popular vote.
Of course, there’s not necessarily any guarantee she’d hold on to those gains — Romney didn’t in 2012. But let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves, and consider various aggravating and mitigating factors for Clinton in terms of her potential for an immediate post-debate bounce.
On the mitigating side, as I mentioned, CNN’s poll had a Democratic-leaning sample. (On the other hand, if Democrats were more interested in watching the debate, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing for Clinton since she’s had trouble engaging her base.) Also, a separate post-debate poll from Public Policy Polling found Clinton winning by a narrower margin, 52-40. And historically, it’s the challenging party’s candidate, and not the incumbent’s, who gains after the first debate.
But there are several other reasons to think Clinton could get a bounce, and perhaps a relatively meaningful one. In addition to the polls, a variety of post-debate indicators implied a Clinton win, including focus groups, betting markets, and the post-debate coverage on television networks. The TV coverage matters because the pundits’ reaction doesn’t always match that of voters in instant polls, and it’s sometimes the TV spin that wins out. Voters narrowly scored the first presidential debate of 2000 as a win for Al Gore, for instance, but after intense media focus on Gore’s demeanor, it was George W. Bush who eventually gained ground in polls.
This time, pundits and pollsters seem to agree on the Clinton win. It’s certainly possible that by the time you’re reading this — I’m writing at 3 a.m. — some storyline that cuts against Clinton (and which didn’t seem like a big deal on Monday night) will have emerged. But the correlation between the instant-reaction polls and the eventual effect on horse-race polls has actually grown stronger in recent election cycles, perhaps because the conventional wisdom formulates itself more quickly.
The effect of major campaign events has also tended to be magnified in 2016 because of the much larger number of undecided and third-party voters than we had in recent previous elections. Clinton got a large bounce of about 8 percentage points following her convention, for instance. There’s also an argument that Clinton is poised to rebound because the race was out of equilibrium — she’s led by about 5 points on average over the course of the campaign, as compared with just 1 or 2 points now — although it’s not clear how predictive that tendency is.
What if Clinton doesn’t improve in the polls — or they even move toward Trump? Then that ought to be scary for Democrats, obviously. While Trump’s lack of preparation could also potentially cause him problems in the second and third debates, he showed off some of his worst qualities on Monday night, appearing to be the weaker leader than Clinton and less presidential than her, according to the CNN poll. If undecided and marginal voters were willing to shrug off Trump’s performance, then perhaps they really are in the mood for the sort of change that Trump represents, his faults be damned.
But in general, Clinton has gained after the set pieces of the campaign, which reward her knack for planning and preparation, including her first primary debate against Bernie Sanders, her (anticlimactically) clinching the Democratic nomination on June 6 and 7, and the Democratic convention. Clinton doesn’t seem to have as much of an edge on her opponents in the daily free-for-all of the campaign. So if Trump and his advisors don’t like the post-debate storylines, they may try to create a distraction or two — something they’re uniquely skilled at doing.
As a warning, you should give the debate five to seven days to be fully reflected in FiveThirtyEight’s forecasts. It will take a couple of days before reliable, post-debate polls are released, and then another couple of days before the model recognizes them to be part of a trend instead of potential outliers. Also, check the dates carefully on polls released over the next few days to make sure they were conducted after the debate. Although pollstersreleased dozens and dozens of polls over the weekend in anticipation of the debate, there are probably a few pre-debate stragglers that will slip through.
Clinton Won The Debate, Which Means She’s Likely To Gain In The Polls

Please note, Silver didn't take all those online polls seriously and didn't even mention those polls, because they are a joke and highly inaccurate.
The only people who put credibility in online polls are the people who vote in them and do so multiple times. Now, not to put those folks down, I myself have voted multiple times on online polls at RealGM.com. Not intentionally or not habitually, it's all just for the fun of it. And I don't take those polls seriously, they are meaningless.

 

[owebo]

He's upset hitlery lost the debate...and now he is panicking....

 

[kiwiman127]

He's upset hitlery lost the debate...and now he is panicking....

Right, Silver is at the top of his field and you,are demonstrably clueless. Being as political hack miniaturizes objectivity, you are incapable of recognizing reality.

 

[owebo]

He's upset hitlery lost the debate...and now he is panicking....

Right, Silver is at the top of his field and you,are demonstrably clueless. Being as political hack miniaturizes objectivity, you are incapable of recognizing reality.

Luntz....