Has anyone been watching CNN Today? I've got questions about their polls.

As most of you know by now, since last night CNN has had three different online polls asking who won last night's VP debate. The first poll (Edwards wins 78%-18%) was wiped by this am, and a second poll was opened. When the second poll showed a solid Edwards lead (64%-36%) they opened a third poll in a different section of their website. Unfortunately for them, this third poll also showed Edwards as the clear winner (75%-18%).

Here are my my questions:

Did they ever report the results of any of the polls during any of today's programs? Inside Politics? Wolf Blitzer Reports?

If they did report the results, did they state that they posted three separate polls? Or did they just pick one poll and report it without additional comment?

Thanks for your help.

:kick:

are they getting away with this? These polls may not be that important or they may not be totally accurate but to put a poll out and if you don't get the results you want, take it down and put up a new one until you get what you want, go figure.

This country has got to do something about its media. This is getting outrageous. The media ownership must be getting desperate.

Wolf did read the results off with his typical .."look at this" remark.. :bounce:

Or just one?

And which one did he report? Do you know?

Show...and I only heard ONE poll reported. But, he didn't say which one it was. I do know that here on the East Coast just before Midnight last night, DU'ers were posting that CNN had "changed" it's poll with new wording. When I got up this a.m. the posts said go "vote again" because CNN had changed wording.

If that helps? I didn't hear about three different polls but can say that from what I saw on DU there were two and I saw two when I voted. But, I didn't check back since early this a.m. :shrug:

I've always thought they changed their polls or just had them to get "post count hits" on their website, anyway. So, I do these polls because you asked..otherwise I would ignore them thinking they don't really listen to their "online polls" because it's for "commercial purposes" that they put them out there, anyway. :shrug:

I have no idea since I cannot watch CNN much anymore ...

Skinner ? ... I just wanted to say: thanks for ALL the DU Administrators are doing to help overturn this failed White House ...

The activity level has ramped up mightily here ... with Elad, EarlG and yourself setting the seriously energetic tone here ...

It is DEEPLY appreciated by this old Democrat ....

Thank You ....

Vive Le' Kerry ! ...

We're doing what we can. We're fortunate to have such a great group of people here to inspire us. :thumbsup:

Am I right?

He did announce it with a little fanfare by saying "Look at this!" and "Over 200,000 votes!"

all day, every day, sigh. They never heard about any CNN polls. I had to show my husband the links from DU to prove that Edwards won the debate.
:argh:

(on edit: This post does not concern online polling but rather the "flash" polls conducted shortly after the debate...sorry to be off-topic...but it seems relevant to Wolf's ignorance of any poll that shows a K-E lead...)

Wolf announced the results of three polls.

One was for a Cheney win.
One was for an Edwards-Cheney tie.

They had the visuals for these.

The final poll that Wolf mentioned was for the CBS poll that would have shown a commanding Edwards performance...no visual.




(I post CBS...it may have been ABC - but I'm pretty sure it was the CBS)

which all showed a clear Edwards win.

they're ignoring their own polls. I saw one on the crawl that had Cheney the winner 46% to Edwards's 35%. I can't remember which poll it was. I nearly crapped my pants. These assholes are now officially worse than FOX. I hope they're happy, they've stooped so low that everything looks like up to them.

I don't watch often enough otherwise.

There ARE those of us who suspect, I think correctly, that CNN skews conservative. I didn't watch a lot of ANYTHING today, so I don't know if they referred to yanking these polls for a reason or because they wanted separate polls for separate shows.

What I know is what I HAVE observed. Such things as:

Panels of four spinners that are "balanced" by a conservative, a republi-CON from congress, a wrong-wing think tank member, and maybe Donna Brazile (who always does a GREAT job fending off the sharks and piranhas by whacking at them with slabs of raw meat).

Sitting in stony silence when confronted by their "wag the dog" collusion with the republi-CONS "when Clinton ordered strikes against whatever it was, you all yelled 'wag the dog! wag the dog' but when bush is in trouble and they amp up the "terrorist alert" stuff you say nothing." I forget who said that but Larry King sat there and didn't react AT ALL. OR take delivery, and just moved on to something else.

Kelly Wallace carrying on about Enron's sins and being very careful to point out that Dems were as guilty as republi-CONS of being on the take for Enron contributions - conveniently leaving out how hugely lopsided the Enron donations were for the GOP as opposed to the Dems (like equating a brick with a grain of aquarium gravel), never pointing out the gross inequities, never debunking bush's insinuations that Ann Richards took as much, if not more, from Enron than he did, when he outpaced her either three-to-one or four-to-one. Instead, she painted her report in such a way that it sounded as though there were absolute parity between the two parties.

Watching Bill Schneider react as somber as an undertaker to poll numbers that show Kerry leading bush, AND - on one of the primary nights, he had a whole slate of state polls that showed Kerry leading bush, but spent his ENTIRE REPORT that night on the ONE single state, North Carolina, that had bush in the lead. The ENTIRE report. Frankly, I've seen Frank Luntz act that way on MSNBC when he was getting poll results he clearly didn't like to see. I've also seen Schneider downright giddy when he's got any strongly upbeat report about bush.

Seeing Paula "Monica" Zahn grill Democrats relentlessly and go easy on republi-CONS. Hell, almost every one of 'em does that - Blitzer, Woodruff, Crowley, everybody.

The derisive comments by the young, dimpled Asian anchorwoman (I forget her name just now) who dismissed the - what - near MILLION peaceful protestors in New York City the day before the GOP convention - saying this may be democracy but she just doesn't understand it.

Daryn Kagan, the latest limbaugh love-interest, commenting on his case on the air, when she's supposedly still functioning as an "impartial" anchor.

They've played the swift boat swifties every chance they've had, played soundbites of bush and merely repeated a line or two of what Kerry had said in "balance," put SIX reporters on CBS's case - when that energy certainly could have been used to get to the bottom of where those memos originally came from - not daring to touch kkkarl rove, though. NEVER mentioned his name, at least during the times I was tuned in, when I'd heard and seen it at least mentioned in passing, elsewhere.

Seeing Jeff Greenfield VERY grudgingly allow, in fact SAYING AS MUCH, POINT-BLANK, that "I hate to admit it, but Kerry looked AS PRESIDENTIAL" as bush on the night of the first debate. He actually said that.

Watching Wolf "Monica" Blitzer's behavior every time, and any time Contradicta Rice comes on his Sunday chat show - NEVER EVER EVER EVER holds her feet to the fire. NEVER EVER EVER EVER probes, asks her a hard question, or a follow-up (few of them do). Even when she leaves openings a mile wide.

During the rare bush news conferences, or the White House press briefings with Scotty-boy, the only questions worth anything at all usually come NOT from any CNN people but, instead, from David Gregory (NBC) and Terry Moran (ABC) and occasionally Helen Thomas - when they even bother to throw her a crumb anymore.

I could go on, but I'd bore you, and you probably know most of this already. Polls I'm not too sure about. I'm not even sure about this trio of them. But I do know one thing: their overall track record leads me to suspect something's not on the up-n-up. They have to prove to me that they're at least a little bit more substantial than a Texas souffle. So far, they have yet to do so, except fairly frequently, on Lou Dobbs' show.

or 1 Poll in the end what the hell difference does it make. They do polls as they go along. I'ts all business and "hit money" to them. :shrug:

mention any internet voting. All I heard them mention was the ABC telephone poll and the CBS undecideds telephone poll. Slap my hand, but I've had CNN on all day. :hi:

Otherwise I don't bother.

Journalist Jon Stewart interviewing journalist imposter Wolf Blitzkreig was the last time I actually saw a CNN figure.

I was going back and forth between CNN and CNN headline - so anyway one of them (I think CNN) mentioned (I think) the results of the ABC poll and the CBS poll - one for Edwards, one for Cheney. Didn't mention their own. I thought it sounded like they were trying to make it sound like a draw.

Also - on the headline news they said the there was a "new" report from a weapons inspector that revealed there were no WMDs AND that Bush had a NEW story - that the reason for the war was so that SH would not give WMDs to other terrorists.

I thought they seemed like odd stories to be having now. :shrug: Seems so last year or something. Like maybe they were trying to make their stories jive. :shrug:

I've read several articles over the past few days and heard commentaries on the radio while driving home today about the DNC putting out the word for all Democrats to vote on the on-line polls, and there were even people who e-mailed letters to newspapers saying that both Kerry and Edwards overwhelmingly won the debate before they even started.

My guess is that given the knowledge of the directive from the DNC, the CNN's etc... know the on-line polls are skewed and are pulling them, and they won't be mentioned on TV either I would think.