Toward the end this article contains a list of polls showing very unfavorable result for Trump among these so-called "legitimate" polls. I don't know anything about these polls I merely bring them to your attention as straws in the wind.
Nor am I happy about citing a left-wing source because it will be dismissed simply for its left-wing credentials which is legitimate when the source offers an opinion but not legitimate when the source is offering up verifiable facts. Nevertheless, the habit on this forum is to denigrate not only the source but anyone who cites it.
We shall see if other more conventional polls show evidence of who "won" the debate. But, of course, our discussion turns on whether the results of the debate somehow move the voters and affect the election. My judgment is that Trump's performance might well have blunted his momentum which would have carried him on to victory. But please remember, I have also said that I misjudged the public's reaction to trumps debate performance throughout the primaries and could well be doing so now.
I try to hold polls to the same standard, so when a poll shows Trump up, I look at the demographics. When a poll shows Trump down, I look at the demographics. I commented a few days ago on a poll that was good for Trump and noted that it’s demographics were distorted. I believe it was in the male/female section in which they showed a 50/50 split, not an accurate representation of the population.
Personally, I think it’s just as bad to think Trump is doing better than he is as to think he is doing worse than he actually is.
So, the CNN poll mentioned at the end of the article you cite has some serious, serious flaws. I looked at its methodology the night of the debate and again the next day, and I was appalled.
1. First, but not most importantly, they had the party affiliation numbers so far out of reality that one instantly discounted the poll. They had a 41 democrat 29. republican split, if my memory serves correctly. This is so biased that it simply shouldn’t be considered.
2. Second, and this is beyond belief in paragraph 2 of the methodology, they admit to having an earlier random poll and from those people they asked if they could call them back after the debate to discuss the debate. In other words, they were no longer random. They were a select group of people who WANTED to discuss the debate. A true poll that night would have called a new random list of people and gotten their 500+ respondents on the poll.
Instead, this group was pre-alerted, picked because they wanted to participate, and then were questioned again.
It is THIS group that had many more democrats wanting to be called again.
This thoroughly discredits this poll, and makes it WORSE than online polling.
3. I have seen a report that this poll, because of the above #2 did not have anyone in the 30 and under age polled. They could not report numbers on those first 2 age cohorts. Why? Because the young either were working, didn’t intend to watch, etc.
Again, a thorough discrediting of the CNN poll.
NOW, having said this about the CNN (supposedly scientific) poll, I have yet to look at the internals of the other polls you mention. It’s possible I will, but it depends on time. WORSE, many of these so-called scientific polls don’t show their internals the way CNN did.
In parting, allow me to point out that the online polls are IMMEDIATE reactions of people who watched the debate.
Making the ‘scientific’ polls less scientific is that they wait until the vast left-wing media machine gets to proclaim their candidate the winner on just about every news outlet known to mankind.
They get their sample from the propagandized.
Wouldn’t you call that a tainted jury pool?
Prior to the debate, Clinton was leading in most of those on-line polls. . .but then she lost all of them after the debate.
This tells me that hitlery supporters were less ethusiastic than Trump supporters after the debate.
So, bottom line, Trump supports were energized whereas hitlery supporters were uninspired and disappeared.
That is what those on-line polls say: Trump has an active base of supporters and that translates to votes. The opposite is true for hitlery.