Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Time, CNBC, and Drudge vs. CNN
After last night’s debate, CNN, Time, CNBC, and the Drudge Report conducted online polls on their websites of those who had watched the debate. According to CNN, 62% of the voters who tuned in thought that Hillary had won. Time reports that 55% thought that Trump had won. CNBC informs us that 67% thought that Trump had won. And the Drudge Report found that 82.34% thought that Trump had won.
Go figure.
Published in General
CNN and Drudge I get, but Time and CNBC are surprising.
Two words: selection bias.
That explains CNN and Drudge but not Time or CNBC
I suspect that the after debate coverage will have a huge impact on those polls, if you watch CNN tell you how the Republican proved he was the racist, bigot, homophobe the Democrat said he was, you may think that the Democrat won, and visa versa.
So these polls likely reflect less on the debate performance and more on the analysis that viewer was exposed to.
Until someone establishes exactly what “winning” means, these polls are just subjective popularity reality-television contests. :)
Hippies too radical for Clinton (Feel the Bern!) and Democrats disappointed that she didn’t make Trump cry.
I wouldn’t entirely discount the notion that some might over-report Trump’s stats to keep pressure on Hillary’s required special interest groups. Encourages turnout if you think there might be trouble.
A Hannity poll would have been 95%…
More an indication of the enthusiasm gap than polling or how the debate was perceived.
I note that the harshest criticism of Trump’s performance came from #NeverTrump columnists.
I was surprised that Hillary is still talking only to her base and that Trump was even less well-prepared than I expected (and that was a low bar).
I don’t see how this debate moves the needle much except that the more Trump stays away from grotesque gaffes and can manage to look presidential for part of the time, the more people seem to be accepting of his peculiar stylings and distaste for policy specifics. A better performance next time measured against this rather low floor will likely boost him more.
Mate De & drlorentz,
This suggests that the undecided, the uncommitted, the people in the middle were more impressed by Trump than Hillary. I actually thought this would be the result. There was nothing conclusive about the results that would sway somebody who was already well committed. However, Trump was stronger overall. He didn’t appear unhinged, she appeared small and smug.
Regards,
Jim
I think it is a simple equation. The polls reflect the views of the people who tend to view those particular networks of news sources. Obviously, Drudge attracts a large number of people whose views tend to the right, CNN on the other hand attracts people who have leftist viewpoints.
If you listen to the HLC podcast, they saw a clearcut Trump victory. Listen to Commentary and your get a pretty opposite view. Ultimately, people saw and heard what they expected to see and hear.
Talk about burying the lede… Drudge was only at 82%?!
I was listening to Rush Limbaugh (a sentence, BTW, that I never thought I’d write) and his take was that, while those who are really interested in politics and are listening for accuracy in facts and smoothness in delivery judge the debate in one way, “regular” people judge it another way altogether. They don’t know (and perhaps don’t care) if Trump has a “program.” When Hillary acts scornful towards him, they feel that she scorns them. When the moderator and Hillary join forces to push him on the Birther Thing and tell him he’s a racist, they feel (again, accurately) that they are being called racists.
Since we can’t be sure of the composition of the voters in any of these polls, the results cannot be interpreted to indicate the preferences of specific voter groups. In fact, a more reasonable inference runs the other way; the mix of poll participants (not to be confused with viewers of the debate) at each website can be ordered from most favorable to Clinton to most favorable to Trump in the order listed in the OP:
CNN>Time>CNBC>Drudge
CHARLOTTE, N.C. , Kae Roberts and Jay Eardly were leaning toward Hillary Clinton before Monday night’s debate.
By the end, they had both pulled away.
John Kokos and Hank Federal were undecided going in, potential Clinton backers.
By the end, they’d ruled her out.
Indeed, while polls found that Clinton had won the first general-election debate with Donald Trump on Monday, she may not have won actual votes. And she may even have lost some, at least in the battleground state of North Carolina.
In a focus group of 21 voters from around Charlotte conducted by McClatchy and The Charlotte Observer, four who had been up for grabs before the debate had moved away from her by the end.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article104382951.html#storylink=cpy
Has Drudge ever been wrong?
In my opinion it’s not difficult. Voters are looking for someone who will raise hell, change direction of the ship of state, and fire half the crew in Washington, DC. They are not looking for the winner of the college debating club. Liberal nostroms no matter how glib will not take the day.
Oh Kate, we’re bringing you over, slowly but surely you’re coming to the conservative side. I know you’re not there yet but you will be.
Here’s an opinion from someone who was in the Princeton debating club:
“Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) said Tuesday that Donald Trump had the upper hand over Hillary Clinton in last night’s debate and that it was his strongest debate performance so far. He also said the media’s focus on the birther issue is “amusing” because American voters don’t “give a flying flip about” it.”
I remember her trying to say how much the birther thing hurt Obama’s feelings. Does ANYONE actually believe that?
I also thought it was an overreach when the ‘moderator’ as well as Hillary acted as if the very act of questioning the place of birth of a black man was proof of racism. (Was it racism when the left did it with McCain? ) Especially in light of the fact that the very idea that Obama was born in Kenya came from his own publishers website, and the original question came to the press from the Hillary campaign.
I believe drudge linked to time and cnbc
Ok, ok, mea culpa.
Very interesting. Thank you.
it would be 100% A poll of one.
A co-worker and I have a theory that the people who haven’t decided in their responses to pollsters fall into 2 camps:
I add to this that people know Hillary. There is no stigma to telling a pollster you’ll vote for her. Other than #nevertrumpers (sorry) who are probably wondering when do i vote for Herself? Some of those 3rd party voters are coming back to her, but her numbers are her high water mark. Trump’s are hidden in those undecideds.
How Trump won over a bar full of undecideds and Democrats at The Tin Lizzy in swing state Pennsylvania.
http://nypost.com/2016/09/26/the-best-debate-takes-come-from-inside-the-bar/
Could this be one of the Trumpster’s supporters?