SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
You may be getting trolled right now without even knowing it.
Donald Trump supporters artificially manipulated the results of online polls to create a false narrative that the Republican nominee won the first presidential debate on Monday night.
The efforts originated from users of the pro-Trump Reddit community r/The_Donald and 4chan messaged boards, which bombarded around 70 polls, including those launched by Time, Fortune, and CNBC.
In this latest incarnation, multiple Reddit users enlisted the Trump-supporting masses on r/The_Donald, which has over 200,000 subscribers, by posting dozens of online polls that are vulnerable to vote brigading, bots, and other forms of manipulation that make these non-scientific surveys notoriously unreliable.
Polls that were not open to public voting consistently put Clinton ahead of Trump. In a flash poll by Public Policy Polling, Clinton led Trump 51 to 40. A CNN/ORC poll conducted immediately following the debate found significantly stronger support for Clinton, who topped Trump 62 to 27.
http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/trump-clinton-debate-online-polls-4chan-the-donald/
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Wednesday September 28 2016, @07:05AM
I live in Australia, where we have a long history of rooting for the underdog (or, if you prefer, cutting down the tall poppy). For that reason, our politicians fear very strong poll results, as it will usually result in undecided voters going the other way in protest. For that reason, stacking a poll in your candidate's favour is a really good way to ensure that your candidate loses.
My limited understanding of the US'ian psyche is that you like to back a winner. Does this mean that it will be more likely that undecided voters will vote for the person who is in front? I'd like to understand why people would do that. Is it because they think that "More people agreeing" == "Better ideas" == "More electable"?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 28 2016, @09:59AM
Polls are manipulated in an attempt to try to discourage people on the "losing" side to not bother going to the polls because "their candidate is going to lose anyway".
I don't know how well (or if) it works, but there sure are some enthusiastic people putting a lot of effort into doing it every election season.
(Score: 2) by romlok on Wednesday September 28 2016, @10:52AM
It's also possible to see it the other way around - if your "side" is winning in the polls, why bother going out to vote when you're going to win anyway?
Which could suggest that the poll-stuffing is being done by the "losing" side, trying to get Trump supporters to stay at home feeling smug.
I do wonder which interpretation has a more powerful effect overall. Surely there must be studies into this effect?
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday September 28 2016, @03:34PM
That doesn't work in Oz. We have compulsory voting. If you have to go vote, you may as well vote for who-ever you prefer;
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 1) by stretch611 on Wednesday September 28 2016, @10:33AM
I agree, this type of poll rigging seems doomed to fail. While we do not necessarily go for the underdog here in the US (and sadly, they seem to generally go for the popular one to be on the winning side) Making the race seem closer than it really is will only increase turnout.
When people feel their candidate will win by a large margin, many will stay home and not vote. If the race appears to be a close battle it will only increase voter turnout and all the hillary supporters will get off their ass and vote.
Personally, i hope for low voter turnout... to increase the percentage of 3rd party results. I doubt they will win... But I will go out and vote 3rd party... Once they get a significant margin, people may start thinking 3rd parties might become viable.
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 4, Funny) by TheRaven on Wednesday September 28 2016, @12:52PM
I live in Australia, where we have a long history of rooting for the underdog
Given the Australian meaning of 'rooting', that's a very odd mental image.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Wednesday September 28 2016, @05:16PM
My limited understanding of the US'ian psyche...
What does Mr. Bolt [wikipedia.org], who you seem to be on a first name basis with, have to do with it?
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org