Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders (& others) finally face off - Polidicks

Facebook posts are at least 1 - 2 post on each article something to do with Bern [editline]15th October 2015[/editline]

[QUOTE=purvisdavid1;48901748]Then she starts running at you screaming like those people from Invasion of the Bodysnatchers[/QUOTE] Thanks, now I'm gonna have Hillary nightmares for a month.

holyshit they made a new pull and just flat out said Hillary won [url]http://www.cnn.com/specials/politics/2016-election[/url]

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;48906228]holyshit they made a new pull and just flat out said Hillary won [url]http://www.cnn.com/specials/politics/2016-election[/url][/QUOTE] Oh my god, they literally reversed the results. [editline]a[/editline] Clintspiracy

Really sick of this establishment garbage.

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;48906228]holyshit they made a new pull and just flat out said Hillary won [url]http://www.cnn.com/specials/politics/2016-election[/url][/QUOTE] I could seriously fucking kill everyone behind this right now.

haha the bias of CNN is real [QUOTE=Doom64hunter;48901905]You should never put much trust into these polls btw, since online voter opinions can be extremely one-sided even on sites like CNN.[/QUOTE] well the polls on slate and TIME also show that Bernie won, but said Clinton won instead.

Why are we deciding who won based on nonscientific polls We have to remember that debates like this one are about gaining new support from people who previously were not into the race. People did not see Sanders at his best during that debate, especially during the gun control segment. Does anyone really think these polls are anything but people simply choosing the candidates they already liked the most before the debate? How many people in those polls were previously undecided?

[QUOTE=person11;48907097]Why are we deciding who won based on nonscientific polls We have to remember that debates like this one are about gaining new support from people who previously were not into the race. People did not see Sanders at his best during that debate, especially during the gun control segment. Does anyone really think these polls are anything but people simply choosing the candidates they already liked the most before the debate? How many people in those polls were previously undecided?[/QUOTE] The problem I see is that it's shady for the polls to be touted about everywhere claiming Hillary demolished the debate, because people who didn't even watch the debate will see it posted everywhere and just give her more unearned reputation.

[QUOTE=SonicHitman;48906602] well the polls on slate and TIME also show that Bernie won, but said Clinton won instead.[/QUOTE] [url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/14/bernie_won_polls_not_the_debate_hillary_won_the_debate.html]Yes, Bernie Won Every Poll On the Internet. Hillary Still Won the Debate.[/url]

And focus groups as well. I think the focus group although a small number in comparison is still good enough.

[QUOTE=person11;48907097]Why are we deciding who won based on nonscientific polls We have to remember that debates like this one are about gaining new support from people who previously were not into the race. People did not see Sanders at his best during that debate, especially during the gun control segment. Does anyone really think these polls are anything but people simply choosing the candidates they already liked the most before the debate? How many people in those polls were previously undecided?[/QUOTE] The point of the debate is to bring attention to how they're planning on handling things once they get into office. They used a poll (as did many other sites) to gauge the effects of these debates, in terms of who appeals more to the average user. Even if the polls were unscientific, then why did CNN not only DELETE the old poll results from their page, but then almost immediately turn around and post bogus poll results? And as for "Clearly Hillary performed better", dude, we just spent the last 8 or so pages ragging on her for the whole "I'm a woman!" shtick, and, for what little I managed to catch of the debate before CNN's streaming service fucked its own brains out, she basically just parroted the same things Bernie's been saying since he started. Perhaps they say Hillary gave a better performance than Bernie because Bernie wasn't acting...

How can a public debate even have a "winner"? Or are people saying that jokingly? It's not like any side is ever going to concede in a public debate, the point is to convince the audience.

How you measure debate performance is entirely subjective. Media pundits like performance, so they liked how confident, aggressive, and quick witted she was. They did not like it when Bernie was not paying attention (Pardon me?), barely looked at the other candidates, blanked a few times on foreign policy, and was ganged up on for offering a poor explanation (rural state!!) for his pro-gun votes. He did not seem ready to debate at all. The public cares more about the substance of what people say and eager supporters of any candidate are more likely to think their candidate won, since the candidates say things the supporters like. One can also measure it by donations (Bernie says he made $1.4 million the night of the debate) or by scientific poll movement in the next week. Will the number of undecided voters go down? Will any candidate's standing change? The point of everything I've been saying is, as a Bernie supporter, that the media has a point about Clinton and Bernie's respective performances during the debate, and that the online polls, no matter what they say, are unscientific, as the Slate article said.

I imagine the election is going to be fixed. Every corner of establishment media pretty much pretends Hillary has already been voted in.

[QUOTE=person11;48909325]the online polls, no matter what they say, are unscientific, as the Slate article said.[/QUOTE] Nobody cares. What we do care about is that the reports of those polls are not only biased but are complete lies. It's one thing to say "that poll was just for fun and not really representative of the real results". It's another to completely skew the results to support your bias.

hillary made horrible points during the debate(while misdirecting most), I wouldn't necessarily say Bernie won the debate but he was definitely doing better than Hillary.

[QUOTE=lxmach1;48910231]Nobody cares. What we do care about is that the reports of those polls are not only biased but are complete lies. It's one thing to say "that poll was just for fun and not really representative of the real results". It's another to completely skew the results to support your bias.[/QUOTE] Yeah it's true that CNN's first and second polls were suspicious as fuck, but I've not seen that behavior anywhere else. It has mostly been like in that Slate article, where the viewers and the journalists just agree to disagree.

Non-American here, how did it go?

[QUOTE=Xonax;48910858]Non-American here, how did it go?[/QUOTE] depends, if you're donald trump you're laughing your ass off, but if you're sane, pretty good, though the media is fucking terrible, every poll said sanders won yet every headline said hillary won, the media really cannot understand sanders [editline]15th October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=lxmach1;48910231]Nobody cares. What we do care about is that the reports of those polls are not only biased but are complete lies. It's one thing to say "that poll was just for fun and not really representative of the real results". It's another to completely skew the results to support your bias.[/QUOTE] ya even non-scientific polls, hillary flat out lost to sanders but no media has picked up on that

[QUOTE=Xonax;48910858]Non-American here, how did it go?[/QUOTE] 3 irrelevant guys humiliated themselves and Hilary got a ton of points for pulling the woman card. According to people that saw the debate Bernie won but the mainstream media has reported it as a Hilary win.

How did she pull the woman card and who in your opinions, won?

[QUOTE=Xonax;48910938]How did she pull the woman card and who in your opinions, won?[/QUOTE] She literally said that what makes her different than Obama is that she's a woman.

[QUOTE=Xonax;48910938]How did she pull the woman card and who in your opinions, won?[/QUOTE] she went after the republican's token woman candidate, made a few quips about how fiorina was full of crap (not exact words)

Is it weird that I actually want the media to continue to say that the candidate that isn't Bernie is "winning?" Just think about it. Bernie is technically winning the popular vote on the democratic side right now, and the more the media tends to push against it, the better Bernie ends up looking in the long run. Just imagine Bernie being elected president when the media is "so sure" that, say, Trump will win the election. Imagine how they'll have to react after being wrong at nearly every step. I seriously want to watch that happen.

good news there facebook comments ( even though they delete posts ) are brining up the debate still one way or the other and some even point of that Time Warner Owns CNn

The journalists may say Hillary won, and objectively from a debate standpoint that could be true, but the real takeaway is that so many people voted for Bernie because they like what he has to say, and that's a good sign that he'll be getting votes in the primary.

In terms of actual debating, most of it involved everyone agreeing with each other and Anderson.

[url=http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/nbc-online-poll-clinton-wins-debate-reenergizes-core-backers-n445546]NBC Online Poll: Clinton Wins Debate, Re-energizes Core Backers[/url] Then check out [url=http://www.scribd.com/doc/285396771/NBC-SurveyMonkey-ToplinesMethod10-15]Question 15.[/url] More than 75% didnt even watch the debate live.

Bernie didn't stand out as much as his supporters wanted him to. IMO it's still a dumb move to compare the US to countries like Norway and Denmark due to the sheer population difference. He wasn't as sharp, maybe due to age or lack of debate experience He keeps focusing on climate change and wall street; while these are huge things it does not show his abilities to lead a country's foreign policy and relations Again, these are all things about the debate, his actual plans are located online and such but most people will not bother with that. Debates are your only chance to say, clearly and confidently, what you are gonna do for the people. The republican debates are all shit up by Trump but some of the candidates look pretty good. Too bad with the GOP you have to please the conservative folks and hold back on progressive social issues, many of which people care more about than foreign policy or economic reform.