Posted on 10/13/2004 12:14:04 PM PDT by vmivol00
SPIN THOSE POLLS! SPIN THOSE POLLS! [10/13 02:50 PM]
UPI reports on the efforts to spin online polls and mass-mailed letters to the editor.
President George W. Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry will walk across the stage Wednesday night and greet each other at the beginning of the third and final presidential debate. Already, across the country, e-mail messages are arriving in newsroom inboxes declaring a winner. A new form of spam is emerging this fall, called debate-spin spam, experts told UPI's The Web. The veracity of the e-mail messages being sent as letters to the editor is coming into question, as are the timing and content of many of the messages, because a significant percentage is being generated by bots, or intelligent software agents.
Which reminds me, it's time for the Pajamahadeen to continue our jujitsu operations. We had some success recently, but I think it's time to set our sights higher.
As usual, the instant online polls of news organizations, that the DNC is steering its members to here, will be less valuable and useful if the result is so stunningly skewed that no one believes it. So a poll that shows Kerry won 99 percent to 1 percent is less useful to the DNC than one that shows Kerry won 70 percent to 30 percent....
Thanks for the ping!
Thanks for the ping!
Thats why I'm not into polls.
;)
Me too. I guess that's what I was trying to say, in a roundabout way.
I agree, this is a very bad idea.
People DO believe those online polls, and 19 days before the election is NOT the time to try to educate them.
So freep those online polls! Vote your true views, not a lie.
My view: Kerry handily "won" the first debate, though Bush was truer to the mark on the facts. In the Veep debate, Cheney beat Edwards thoroughly, even though Gwen Ifill was trying very hard to help Edwards. Kerry narrowly won the second debate, though Bush did better that time. Bush finally won one in the third debate, and he did so very convincingly, IMO.
-Dave
Please remove me from this ping list.
Thanks!
Oops. I may have pinged you to something else before I saw your note. Sorry. You have been removed and I apologize for any inconvenience.
Not a problem!
Thanks for the quick reply!!
We're better off exposing the polls for the useless junk that they are - but only if we can really *expose* them. Just running them up to 184% Kerry isn't enough.
Remember, we're dealing with a MSM that *willingly manufactures phony documents* - you think for a second that they won't just adjust the poll numbers to anywhere they want them? If they get numbers excessively skewed toward Kerry, they'll reduce the numbers to something more believable.
In order to pull the plug on them, we'll have to forcibly expose the fact that the polls are being hammered by 'bots.
We could probably get some help exposing it, from our friends in the new media.
We've been artificially skewing polls by hand for years. Now the Demonrats have automated the process. Either way, the fact is that the polls are meaningless and useless and that anyone in the media who uses them to support either side of any issue is acting irresponsibly. That is just a *fact*, and we need to occupy the high ground and start hammering that *fact* down their throats. (or pounding it somewhere else... pick an orifice...).
The American people do not like to be fooled and used and manipulated and we need to occupy the high ground on this *immediately* and *destroy* this idiotic online polling stupidity *completely* and once and for all. There is NO way to make it meaningful in the cyber age, and it just needs to be discredited and wiped out - and now is the time, while there is a critical election at stake.
I agree. I wrote a sort of facetious e-mail on the VP debate calling the debate for Cheney and sent it on the DNC mass mail page about four hours before the debate and my stupid local newspaper (who prints 100% of my letters) didn't even recognize that the email was written before the debate. The last debate, I wrote a legitimate email and again sent through the DNC. This time I just sent a genuine single email to the local paper. No polls, though.
Two days? That's not too shabby. LOL!!
Why don't we pick one or two polls to vote pro Kerry, and blast the others by freeping them. This way there is contrast to show that something is all fouled up in online opinionland.
If, for instance, we decide to skew a SeeBS poll, but freep others, the SeeBS poll will look like it came from Dem's lalaland.
But if we let them all go overwhelmingly pro-kerry, At least some of the sheeple will believe and be demoralized and not vote (for W) or whatever.
IMHO, the electronic vote will be less than honest anyway, we have to be careful about legitimizing those results by giving them supporting polling data.
That might be all they need for that final, psychotic break.
Unfortunately, as we found out earlier in the year, fake letters to the editor dont work and frequently "come out in the wash," further hurting the cause later. Remember those letters home from soldier in Iraq that were shown to be clumsy mass produced forgeries? Journalists are still reminding people of them ... from The New York Times and Frank Rich (= http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/arts/17rich.html =)
"The path of the Bush White House as it has moved from Agnew-style press baiting to outright assault has also followed its antecedent. The Nixon administration's first legal attack on the press, a year before the Watergate break-in, was its attempt to stop The Times and The Washington Post from publishing the Pentagon Papers, the leaked internal Defense Department history of our failure in Vietnam. Though 9/11 prompted Ari Fleischer's first effort to warn the media to "watch what they say," it's failure in Iraq that has pushed the Bush administration over the edge. It was when Operation Iraqi Freedom was bogged down early on that it spun the fictional saga of Jessica Lynch. It's when the percentage of Americans who felt it was worth going to war in Iraq fell to 50 percent in the Sept. 2003 Gallup poll, down from 73 that April, that identically worded letters "signed" by different soldiers mysteriously materialized in 11 American newspapers, testifying that security for Iraq's citizens had been "largely restored." (As David Greenberg writes in his invaluable "Nixon's Shadow," phony letters to news outlets were also a favorite Nixon tactic.) The legal harassment of the press, like the Republican party's Web-driven efforts to discredit specific journalists even at non-CBS networks, has escalated in direct ratio to the war's decline in support."
Please remove me from this ping list.
Thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.