Denver Post response to mag ban poll...dipshits!!!

[Boulderar15]

http://www.denverpost.com/opinioncol...l-skewed-polls

In other words they didn't like what they heard so it has to be rigged!



More than 100,000 people voted in one of The Denver Post's online opinion polls last week, which is a significant number.


But the poll's result — with 70 percent of respondents favoring a ballot measure that would overturn a ban on high-capacity magazines — is largely insignificant.


Certainly the result shows passion for one side of the issue, but it also shows something else — ballot stuffing.


On a typical day we'll have a few thousand readers weigh in on opinion poll — maybe 25,000 in a good week. But in the last week, we've counted more than 200,000 "votes" in a series of polls.


Noticing the trend, a reader from Centennial wrote to ask if the polls "accurately reflect the opinions of the people of Colorado?"


He was pointing specifically to a poll asking whether Democrats in the statehouse were overreaching.


When we posted results of the overreach poll in the March 19 edition, 91 percent of 33,681 respondents said "yes." What's notable there is both the percentage who answered in the affirmative, but also the number who participated. The previous high was about 31,000 in a July 2012 poll in the wake of the Aurora theater shootings.


On March 16 we asked for opinions on the bid to overturn a bill limiting gun magazines to 15 rounds.


Watching those results online, one reader remarked:"It's pretty obvious to me that someone is using their computer skills to manipulate the poll."


He's right.


This is not the "skewed polls" argument that challenged the weighting and methodology of many scientific polls during last fall's presidential election.


This phenomenon is real.


Changing results of an online poll is simple and a common practice. If someone is passionate about an issue, they can — and often do — weigh in multiple times on a single question by voting from different devices. They can do it whether they live in Grand Junction or the Grand Caymans.


An organized effort to influence results of an online poll is called "freeping." The name is a nod to an online forum called the Free Republic, whose members are called "freepers." They're notorious for pushing results of online polls in one direction or another — notably on Second Amendment issues.


In fact, they did it to our gun-magazine poll on March 15 (and to other polls on our site). After 24 hours online, the magazine question had received 26,704 votes, with 69 percent favoring a vote to overturn the law. Anti-overturn forces then mounted a campaign that pushed that figure down to nearly 51 percent.


"Basically someone has hacked it and are adding an average of 26 votes per minute to the 'keep the ban' column," one freeper lamented.


"After Dynachrome pings the list it'll look better," another remarked. (The user known as Dynachrome maintains a "ping list" of users summoned to help sway the vote in online polls — and shortly after he or she was engaged, support for overturning the ban climbed to 61 percent.)


The poll also drew the attention of prominent conservative blogger Michelle Malkin and magazine maker Magpul, which posted a link to the poll in its Twitter feed.


As of this writing, 112,000 votes (and climbing) have been received.


That doesn't mean gun-rights supporters are alone in rallying people to vote for their cause in an online poll.


After the presidential debate at the University of Denver, almost 11,000 people voted in our poll, with 40 percent saying they thought Barack Obama won. That's not just statistically irrelevant, it's ridiculous.


So, you're probably wondering, if the polls are easily manipulated and non-scientific, why run them?


Primarily because they engage readers in our product and, at some level, force people to think about issues we think are important.


Online polls are, at best, informative. They are not — and should never be considered — statistically valid on the order of a scientific poll. Like many things you find online, they should be viewed with skepticism.

[Bailey Guns]

Frankly, I think the Post is a leftist propaganda rag but, in this case, they're mostly right. It wasn't a scientific poll. I seriously doubt the results are valid.

[Dingo]

Are there really any even remotely unbiased news organizations out there at all anymore? Fox is a joke, CNN is a whore for the left... I used to get some news from the BBC, but even they have a global disarmament agenda. Infowars is always entertaining, but I already have blood pressure problems and AJ doesn't help that at all. Plus I'm too susceptible to the conspiracy-theory-of-the-month club... don't need to be encouraged in that dept.

[Wolfen]

Does anyone actually read the post?

But most polls are skewed. I would say that any poll that the post does will almost likely be skewed left of center just because of the inner city factor were the left resides. So the fact that this poll was right skewed tells me that if a more conservative rag had done a similar poll the numbers would have been even more heavy to the right than this poll shows. I am sure they will re-poll in order to more properly skew the results to what they want it to read.

[brobar]

We all know that particular poll was hacked. We were discussing it as we saw it happening. We are up nearly 85% one night. The next night the tables had turned and we are down 40-60. Then we wake up the next morning and were up 70-30. Of course the poll was hacked from BOTH sides. At least they mention in the article that BOTH sides of the argument had been hacked in their favor.

The sad reality, though, is legislators would have used those poll results if they would have been in their favor (hacked or not). We know 120,000 Coloradans didn't vote. If you can barely get 1,000 people out to a gun rally... I seriously doubt 120,000 Coloradans care enough to vote on a newspaper poll.

They'll probably do a "scientific" poll now and call 1,000 people in Denver, Aurora and Boulder asking the same question and the results will show 84% of "Coloradans" want the ban to stand. hahaha

[BPTactical]

Funny how when the left skew figures it is "fair and balanced" but when a conservative skews figures it is "rigged and insignificant".

[buckshotbarlow]

i can't wait till the dp closes down....

[SuperiorDG]

Frankly, I think the Post is a leftist propaganda rag but, in this case, they're mostly right. It wasn't a scientific poll. I seriously doubt the results are valid.

This

[hghclsswhitetrsh]

I'm truly curious how it would turn out if it went to the election polls.

[merl]

Frankly, I think the Post is a leftist propaganda rag but, in this case, they're mostly right. It wasn't a scientific poll. I seriously doubt the results are valid.

They are completely devoid of any statistical merit. They are a fun activity that makes us feel good if we win.

But being self selecting and allowing for multiple voting, yeah, statistically useless.
Talk to Pew, Gallup, Rand, someone who knows how to do this stuff. Get a poll that has some meaning. That costs money though, a popular poll on your website generates money.