Main stream media pushes misleading polls to show Hillary won second debate

So I have noticed that the main stream media and many on ATS are posting articles and links to polls that show that HIlllary won the debate last night quite convincingly. These polls are supposedly much better than the online polls that showed Trump winning, because bots can vote in them, and people can vote as many times as they want. I agree that these online polls are no good.

However, I was a little surprised to see that the scientific polls showed Trump lose that bad, because I thought he won quiet easily.

So I decided to look into these polls. Here are some of the articles touting how the scientific polls show HIllary is the winner.

www.politicususa.com...

fivethirtyeight.com...

www.msnbc.com...

And there are many more. When you read these stories, they all reference two scientific polls. The first is a CNN poll, and the second is a you.gov poll.

So breifly on how scientific polls work. The pollsters contact a number of voters and ask them who they think won. This is better than the online polls, because people can't spam votes.

However, if you only call on group of people, the results would be skewed.

So lets start with the cnn poll.

Donald Trump exceeded expectations, but Hillary Clinton won the second presidential debate, according to a CNN / ORC poll of debate watchers. The results showed a clear victory for Clinton, with 57% saying Clinton won, as opposed to 34% for Trump.
I
t's a strong showing for Clinton, but not as good as her performance at the first presidential debate, when 62% of debate watchers said she won.

The results Sunday also track closely with watchers' pre-debate preference. Fifty-eight percent of debate watchers said they were supporting Clinton before the debate.

edition.cnn.com...

So wait a minute, 58% of the people they polled supported Hillary before the debate, and only 57% of the people thought she won. This is hardly proof of a Hillary victory. I bet if you polled 58% of people that favored Trump, it would have appeared as if he has won the debate.

I would like to look in more of the demographics of this poll, but unfortunately, this is all they provide. So I think that any reasonable person would think that this was a skewed sample that doesn't reflect a Hillary win.

So lets go to the yougov poll. This poll is better, because they have a whole pdf of the demographics.

Here is the PDF with the demographics of the poll.
d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net...

812 people interviewed, 337 of which were democrats. That means around 42% of the people polled were Democrat. Compare this to only 31% of republican people, with the leftover 27% being independent.

So again, a heavy skew towards democrats. Despite having 41% of respondents be democrat, she only won 47% to 42%.

But here is where it gets really crazy. yougov says this about independents.

Clinton narrowly won undecideds 44% to 41%

today.yougov.com...



Ok looks bad for Trump. But wait a minute, when we go to yougov own PDF on demographics for this poll, it shows this number is misleading!!

Go to question 3 on this cite that shows the demographics. d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net...

Who do you think won. Notice when it is broken down by demographics. Democrats, 82% though Hillary won, 6% thought Trump won, and 12% thought it was a tie. Republicans, 9% thought Hillary won, 81% thought Trump won, and 10% thought is was a tie.

Now the big number, independents. Remember, yougov spun it as if undecideds thought Hillary won. But whats really important is how did independents think. 36% for Hillary, 51% Trump, 13% tie.

You get that. Trump crushed her with independents. Yougov is being intentionally misleading own their own poll!

Republicans and independents overwhelmingly thought Trump won, but because they sampled so many democrats, it looks like Hillary won.

It gets even better though. You know how Trump has no chance to win according the the main stream, media. The same media outlets that are touting this poll. Well lets see what the poll says about who these people are voting for.

Page 20, who do you intend to vote for?

Democrats 91% for Hillary, 5 % for Trump.

Republicans, 8% Hillary, 81% Trump

Independents, 29% Hillary, 53% Trump.

Again, Trump is way ahead with Independents and Republicans. So the very poll the main stream is advocating as proof of HIllarys dominance shows the exact opposite!

This is how disgusting the mainstream media is. They are so desperate to make it seem as if Trump doesn't have a chance that they mislead people about the results of the very polls they say are legitimate.

Not saying I trust polls, but I can understand why people would think Hillary won. Not everybody gets Trumps rambling word salad with no specific answers about anything.

I agree that we should wait for more reliable polls before jumping to conclusions.

most accurate poll to date

goo.gl...

originally posted by: Phage
I agree that we should wait for more reliable polls before jumping to conclusions.

I am with you. But that is not what the main stream media does. They are going on and on about how Trump lost, and how these polls show it.

If they are willing to mislead with these polls, how can we trust their reporting on any polls?

And we know to many people they listen to what the mainstream spin is. So when people hear right after the debate how HIllary cleaned up Trump, many of them get influenced by that and believe it is true.

Once more, the main stream media is just a propaganda tool for the establishment.

Heck I just saw Juan Williams on the Five on Fox cite these polls as proof that Hillary won, and everyone just sort of agree. And this is Fox News!!!! If even they are spouting this garbage in favor of Hillary, it is a really sad state of affairs.

a reply to: Grambler

Wonderful research, OP...you did exactly what the polls' sponsors hope nobody actually takes the time and effort to do.

I've completely stopped believing in the polls ever sine the DNC fiasco.

A poll has said this?

Okay, that's a fair conclusion.

I really can't wait for the candidates to start discussing policies, and not threatening to send the other to jail, that is totally ridiculous.

a reply to: Grambler



Both sides of the MSM distort polls heavily. What would be interesting to see is the average of an equal amount of left and right news organizations. That would probably give us the closest true numbers.

But Trump won, imo. For the sole reason that his campaign was hanging on a thread and he bounced back high from that debate.

a reply to: Grambler

If they are willing to mislead with these polls, how can we trust their reporting on any polls?

You think they distort the results of independent polls? Well, ok, but you can always do what you just did to verify.

It will be interesting to see, in a few days, what reliable polls show. See if Trump gained support.

Anyone who watched the debate knows that he failed.

originally posted by: Iamnotadoctor
Anyone who watched the debate knows that he failed.

Geez, I watched, and I don't know that.

originally posted by: Grambler
So I have noticed that the main stream media and many on ATS are posting articles and links to polls that show that HIlllary won the debate last night quite convincingly. These polls are supposedly much better than the online polls that showed Trump winning, because bots can vote in them, and people can vote as many times as they want. I agree that these online polls are no good.

However, I was a little surprised to see that the scientific polls showed Trump lose that bad, because O thought he won quiet easily.

I don't get that bit,
"However, I was a little surprised to see that the scientific polls showed Trump lose that bad, because O thought he won quiet easily. "
ZERO is pretty bad innit?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Iamnotadoctor
Anyone who watched the debate knows that he failed.

Geez, I watched, and I don't know that.

Ditto.

a reply to: smurfy

Fixed the typo, thanks.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Iamnotadoctor
Anyone who watched the debate knows that he failed.

Geez, I watched, and I don't know that.

Ok.
*Anyone with moderate intelligence who watched the debate knows that he failed.
Maybe you don't know that.

a reply to: Grambler

Polls are Like A Holes , Everybody has one . People Rarely Tell Anyone their True Personal Feelings about Anything Unless they Genuinely Trust the Person they are Revealing that Information to . Last Time I checked , Mind Reading is a Very Rare Phenomenon in this World , and I doubt the ones with that Gifted Ability Waste their Talent on Politics .

originally posted by: ghostrager
a reply to: Grambler

Both sides of the MSM distort polls heavily. What would be interesting to see is the average of an equal amount of left and right news organizations. That would probably give us the closest true numbers.

But Trump won, imo. For the sole reason that his campaign was hanging on a thread and he bounced back high from that debate.

Too bad polls don't matter.

www.realclearpolitics.com...

You see this electorate map that does?

Clinton needs 10 electorates to win. Trump needs 105.

Basic math-
Trump has only been 1 point ahead of Clinton the entire race in Florida. Pennsylvania he's behind by 8 points. 6 points in MN, 3 points in NC, and if he loses ANY of these states it's a Clinton sweep.

If Clinton won 8 more electorates there won't even be 270 for Donald to Collect.

originally posted by: Iamnotadoctor


Ok.
*Anyone with moderate intelligence who watched the debate knows that he failed.
Maybe you don't know that.

Hmm, I was going to give a serious response, but I will opt for the joke instead.

So you admit that you have just moderate intelligence. Well me and all of my superior high intelligence friends thought Trump won.

originally posted by: underwerks
Not saying I trust polls, but I can understand why people would think Hillary won. Not everybody gets Trumps rambling word salad with no specific answers about anything.

What do you mean? He was asked a question about his purported fisting of unsuspecting women, and he gave a perfectly straightforward and unrelated answer about ISIS.

I don't see the problem.