S&R straw poll results
We’ve just wrapped our first S&R election reader poll, and here are the results.
Q: Which candidate do you currently favor for the Democratic nomination?
- John Edwards (47)
- Dennis Kucinich (45)
- Barack Obama (36)
- Hillary Clinton (9)
- Christopher Dodd (6)
- Bill Richardson (2)
- Joe Biden (4)
- Other (3)
Up now in the column to your right – same question, GOP candidates. Let us know what you think.
lullaby pit 
How is it that when i read net-polls or take an unscientific survey of comment sections i consistently see Edwards and Kucinich as the favored Democratic candidates. But when i read corporate polls i always see Clinton and Obama as the front-runners.
Perhaps the DNC should take a long hard look at their constituents and examine the disconnect between what the party fat-cats want and what the voters want. Oh wait, that might mean that we wouldn’t be saddled with the likes of Pelosi and Reid.
The DNC is still fighting the last war (the 90’s) when they decided that the only way to get votes was to be almost Republican. They lost that one, and it wouldn’t surprise me if they lose this one too…
Well, a poll like this measures the sentiment of people who come to S&R, and that’s a self-selected crowd. I could have predicted these results in advance without too much trouble, and knowing what I know about how things work I have some predictions about the GOP poll, too. Real polls go and hunt down people who don’t read blogs or who read other kinds of blogs.
So this poll was never expected to be representative.
Well, a poll like this measures the sentiment of people who come to S&R, and that’s a self-selected crowd.
Right, and because of self-selection biases, there’s no way we can apply these poll results to any greater population, even the greater population of S&R readers. These kinds of polls are statistically invalid, but can be fun nonetheless.
Besides, people who vote in these kinds of polls are probably less likely to vote strategically since they know that it doesn’t really matter, so they’re more free to go for the unelectable candidate they agree with/like the most over the more electable but less ideologically perfect candidate.
I predict *shakes Magic 8-ball* Ron Paul will win this survey. I personally couldn’t vote for any of them so I chose ‘other’. But I do believe that Paul’s candidacy would be a net positive for both the Republican party and America as a whole. Basically this is because I have a hunch that he will lose the primary but have a strong enough support to run as an independent in the general election. Which would then split the republican ticket, expose the dissatisfaction that conservatives have of neo-cons, and produce a landslide for the dems. I’ll have to flesh this idea out and post it.
I think you’d have to be a little loopy to bet against Paul in this survey, wouldn’t you? 🙂
A serious Paul campaign would also allow us to talk more openly about cover-up conspiracies, like how we’ve already nuked Afghanistan and Iraq.
I see the hook on that “cover-up” bait, Sam. Not biting – this time. 😉
Aw hell, I’ll bite. I’m guessing you’re talking about DU shells? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2946715.stm
I’m more talking about this.
Edwards will surprise people I think. Especially after Obama stumbles on stuff like this on health insurance.
“… Obama later watered down the bill after hearing from insurers and after a legal precedent surfaced during the debate indicating that it would be unconstitutional for one legislative assembly to pass a law requiring a future legislative assembly to craft a healthcare plan.
During debate on the bill on May 19, 2004, Obama portrayed himself as a conciliatory figure. He acknowledged that he had “worked diligently with the insurance industry,†as well as Republicans, to limit the legislation’s reach and noted that the bill had undergone a “complete restructuring†after industry representatives “legitimately†raised fears that it would result in a single-payer system.
“The original presentation of the bill was the House version that we radically changed – we radically changed – and we changed in response to concerns that were raised by the insurance industry,†Obama said, according to the session transcript. …”
Waiting to see what Bloomberg’s going to do (although his recent article in the FT wasn’t a good statement from him).
The word “elegant” is overused these days. But that’s exactly what kind of tool the vote is.
Because it’s user-friendly to a fault, people take it for granted. But it’s the most powerful weapon we have at our disposal. The challenge lies in learning where to point it.
Most of us just don’t want to learn the lie of the political land, though. Voting for the wrong candidate out of ingorance is a little like shooting an innocent victim.