Ridiculous Gravis post debate Democratic primary poll

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This can't be serious, right?

[RI]

Webb-mentum in full force

[weixiaobao]

Gravis does have outliers from time to time.  But it usually is fine.  However, don't trust polls that only barely past half a day after the debate.  We saw their plunder with the GOP debate where they had Fiorina 22% Trump 22%.

So many articles cited that post GOP debate poll as signal for Trump entering his doom stage.  I will watch out to see if other polls will replicate this.

Though many comments I have read from regulars/not pundits said Webb is pretty honest compare to the polish pandering O'Malley. 

[Skye]

The "Who do you think won the debate" question is alright I guess.

It's the "Who would you vote for" results that are utter madness.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The "Who do you think won the debate" question is alright I guess.

Maybe if most people didn't watch the debate.

[Holmes]

This makes no sense. Facebook says Sanders won so...

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Webb-mentum in full force

[DemPGH]

Hahaha.

A broken clock is right twice a day.

[Eraserhead]

I'd be alright with the primary question being accurate, Sanders within single digits of Clinton and giant/lulzy Webb and Chafee surges for no apparent reason.

[Penelope]

The "Who do you think won the debate" question is alright I guess.

It's the "Who would you vote for" results that are utter madness.

[Phony Moderate]

Not quite as absurd as it is being made out to be. 15.3 million (very, very high historically for a primary debate) watched the debate and many more will have seen clips/replays of it. Many of them would not have seen, or even heard of, O'Malley/Webb/Chafee prior to it. They all likely achieved a bounce by merely turning up, though probably not quite to the extent that this poll is suggesting.

[/]

Tee hee

[The Other Castro]

Apparently -1% of people are undecided.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

This makes no sense. Facebook says Sanders won so...

But muh facebook!

[Torie]

The religious affiliation numbers seems about right, and are interesting. Catholics are about equally divided between both parties. The Dems are a bit light on Protestants, and very light on white Protestants (presumably about 10% of the 30% of the Protestants in the poll are black, leaving about 20% for the white Protestants), say getting maybe a third or a bit less of them, and uber light on Evangelicals. They have almost all the Muslims, and about 60% of the Asians. The Jews vote a lot, or there are no Jewish Pubs, which we know is not true (the Pubs get 30% or so now pretty reliably, thanks to a considerable extent to the Orthodox Jews). And the Dems really get the lion's share of the Godless. When I was a gay Godless Pub, I really helped add to the diversity of the party.

[Mehmentum]

...yeah I'm gonna have to wait for some confirmation on this one.

[/]

...yeah I'm gonna have to wait for some confirmation on this one.

You don't need to wait for confirmation on Gravis polls. You already know automatically that they're irrelevant.

[eric82oslo]

The "Who do you think won the debate" question is alright I guess.

Maybe if most people didn't watch the debate.

I wouldn't be surprised if only one in three or one in four Democratic primary voters actually watched the debate, Perhaps even less than that. 15 million viewers aren't all that much after all, and many of them were probably either Republican or independent.

[eric82oslo]

Hahaha.

A broken clock is right twice a day.

Nope. According to Rick Perry it's only right once a day.

[The Other Castro]

The "Who do you think won the debate" question is alright I guess.

Maybe if most people didn't watch the debate.

I wouldn't be surprised if only one in Three or one in four Democratic primary voters actually watched the debate, Perhaps even less than that. 15 million viewers aren't all that much after all, and many of them were probably either Republican or independent.

I doubt many Republicans would willingly sit through that.

[eric82oslo]

The "Who do you think won the debate" question is alright I guess.

Maybe if most people didn't watch the debate.

I wouldn't be surprised if only one in three or one in four Democratic primary voters actually watched the debate, Perhaps even less than that. 15 million viewers aren't all that much after all, and many of them were probably either Republican or independent.

I doubt many Republicans would willingly sit through that.

Do you really think Republican retirees have anything better to do that late on a Tuesday evening? They've certainly stopped playing golf at that hour at least, unless they live in The Villages in Florida.

[Holmes]

The "Who do you think won the debate" question is alright I guess.

Maybe if most people didn't watch the debate.

I wouldn't be surprised if only one in Three or one in four Democratic primary voters actually watched the debate, Perhaps even less than that. 15 million viewers aren't all that much after all, and many of them were probably either Republican or independent.

Debates themselves aren't very important. But the video clips they provide that are played on the news or youtube for the next few days are important.

[Mr. Morden]

Here’s a link to the poll, ftr:

http://www.oann.com/dncdebate/

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Excluding this forum this is the only poll I have seen where it says Hillary won the debate...every focus group and online poll said he won with large margins. Yea they aren't scientific but winning every online poll is kind of a hint.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Excluding this forum this is the only poll I have seen where it says Hillary won the debate...every focus group and online poll said he won with large margins. Yea they aren't scientific but winning every online poll is kind of a hint.

The "Who do you think won the debate" question is alright I guess.

Maybe if most people didn't watch the debate.