I find nothing funny about our elections, they're the joke of the free world.

Damn. I didn't have the time to watch it. Something came up. Quite literally...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTiZ2g3etrw&hd=1

If you believe that 381 voters in an open flash poll, in which nobody knows anything about their backgrounds, are even remotely comparable to a poll among a carefully selected sample that has been statistically/scientifically checked, and found to match the distribution of opinions and backgrounds in a nation well enough to allow predictions, then you're undermining everything you said so far. Sorry. Calling this CNN poll "the only scientific poll" makes you look like someone desperately spreading propaganda instead of actually contributing something worthwhile. And that's coming from me, someone who couldn't care less about the outcome of the current elections.

Thx.

What happened to sex moderators? ;-)

Keep in mind, that 50% of the country are C-students or worse...

If that doesn't make a person sit up at night and worry about the future of humanity, I don't know what will.

Er, why does it sound like you just agreed but then say the methodology is "sound"? The methodology is asking people, they didn't get enough for statistical significance. That's why it doesn't mean shit, even if you did get enough you'd still calculate a margin for error, Wikipedia has an okay launching point article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance

The important thing to note is how the "sample size" fits into that function. They're basically arguing that they had very, very low noise, which is unlikely.
Was she hot?
We haven't graded that way in almost 50 years. If you said 50% of the country feel at or below median level, then I'd agree:)

I consider this a rhetorical question ;-). Oh course she was hot.

I see that you are from Germany so perhaps your English is poor. Otherwise, your reading comprehension needs work. I have said multiple times now that I do not trust polls. CNN is the only poll I'm aware of that wasn't conducted by a bunch of knuckleheads clicking a raidal button 30 times for their favorite guy on some internet site. They adhered to an established methodology WHICH I AGREE IS NOT THE MOST TELLING SYSTEM AROUND. I hope that is clear enough for you.

Now, if you knew anything about political polling, you would know that in most cases pollsters don't weight or normalize data and even if they did only 9% of people contacted even participate in polls. That in and of it self could have huge ramifications on outcomes becuase god only knows what views those 9% have compared to the other 91% of the nation.

Admit it, we've all had our fatties, we just drink more when it happens (and by "we", I mean the rest of you poor slobs, not me!).

Eh, it was meant in the spirit of C being "average". If you're talking about not using C's, then I'd have to say, "Huh?".

I'm watching the debate and shit how much I hate militaristic apreach on everything in foreign policy of Republicans, oh god I hate this...

It's like Republicans response for every foreign policy question is: LET'S JUST BOMB THE MOTHERFUCKERS.

By the way, it's just another "let's just shout at each other" debates... I hate that kind of aproach, it's a common thing in Polish policitics.

As a non-American, i find your view very interesting. Essentially suggesting it is impossible for one party to a debate to win that debate regardless of what he/she said is a novel take on how debates are judged.

My faith in democracy is restored...

I promise I am not trying to be rude but I don't think you understand the word "methodology." CNN conducted their poll systematically - the approach they took is in line with polling norms but you still have to consider that this is a snap poll.

I was/am saying that I am skeptical of all poll results but that CNNs poll is by no means worthless.