Sanders get 2nd place in Drudge Poll

[Beazy]

Except all major online polls are voluntary, resulting in more skewing that you normally would see. They are posted publicly for people to vote on and can become distorted based on external efforts. Magazines polling their subscriber base would clearly have its own bias, further amplified by the audience having a full list beforehand.

The most accurate polls are more random in nature. For example, polls conducted by Pew Research do not post publicly and then ask an audience to vote. Sure, they are technically skewed because not everyone has a landline. I'm not suggesting they are flawless. But polls by reputable companies are meant to have as little external influence as possible and cover a wide spectrum, not limited to one particular subscriber.

To argue all polls are equally accurate is just nonsense. Honestly it's surprising anyone can believe that.

- - - Updated - - -



1) The drudge report would have its own bias even if people who normally don't view drudge report voted.

2) The outcome of a drudge report-only poll can be expected to match the screenshot I posted where Sanders was only around 8%.

3) It is virtually impossible for Sanders to come from 8% to 29% when the 8% figure was several hundred thousand votes in. So, on top of the Drudge Report initial bias, there was then obvious external influence putting Sanders far above what can be expected for the website.

The main point I'm trying to get across here is that nobody should reach the conclusion "Wow, 29% of regular Drudge Report viewers voted for Sanders!" On top of that, any non-random poll such as this one cannot be expected to match real-world results in any way. That's all.

Its not even remotely impossible, its a fact that drudgereport gets millions of unique hits a day. This poll, does not even represent half of drudges daily user base. Much less the traffic over the past week, that the poll was up.

[Ahovv]

Its not even remotely impossible, its a fact that drudgereport gets millions of unique hits a day. This poll, does not even represent half of drudges daily user base. Much less the traffic over the past week, that the poll was up.

edit: I'm going to try and explain this better, but I have extreme doubts of your comprehension for statistics.

[Tijuana]

Some of you guys are seemingly unaware of the difference in scientific polls and unscientific polls. The fact that people under 30 don't have land lines is irrelevant. They are polling types of people and trying to estimate how many of each of the types will show up and vote which way on election day. The model that they use can completely make or break the poll, regardless of the answers given to the pollsters.

Fox News was famously wrong that black voters would not turn out in historic numbers to vote a second time for Obama, and since they were nearly the only one who thought that, their polls were favorable for Romney to win. This election cycle has a couple wild cards as well. One, what happens to these historic high numbers of black voters regarding turn out, and two, Trump is likely to be far more popular with voters behind the curtain than he is publicly.

[Torgent]

I'd wager someone posted it on 4chan or some other hive of scum and villainy and the Sanders cultists descend on Drudge like the locust plague.

You seem mad. Does Bernie scare you?

[Beazy]

The two statistics you mentioned play virtually no impact on the maths behind statistics on a large scale such as this poll.

Show me. Because I passed statistics with ease. I would love to see this explanation/proof and how its impossible.

/popcorn

[Ahovv]

Show me. Because I passed statistics with ease. I would love to see this explanation/proof and how its impossible.

/popcorn

I really have no interest in taking the time to further explain this when...

1) You're resorting to strawmans. I never claimed it was impossible.

2) You've already proven your lack of statistical understanding by implying the overall viewership plays a substantial role.

The only relevant comparison is the end result versus the snapshot, if you assume the end result to be accurate.

[Beazy]

I really have no interest in taking the time to further explain this when...

1) You're resorting to strawmans. I never claimed it was impossible.

2) You've already proven your lack of statistical understanding by implying the overall viewership plays a substantial role.

The only relevant comparison is the end result versus the snapshot, if you assume the end result to be accurate.

While the poll was live, what day was the snap shot taken?

Could have sworn you said "It is virtually impossible for San.............". I must have quoted someone else.

I think your issue is that you believe me and others are drawing meaningful conclusions from a drudgereport poll. Like ive said in earlier posts, this is pointing out how odd it is for a democrat to "trump" other republican candidates on their home turf. And without evidence of brigading from any website forum/community, the fraud argument isn't a good one. Im not sure what statistical analysis you think you can derive from that other than "WTF is going on with drudgereport viewers" ~ which is the entire point of this thread.