@skod

400 people. 4 is 1%. So what's the cutoff now? 3%? Then a candidate would need 12 to reach 3$. Actually, rounded, 11. This was I think 401 so 10, which would be 2.5%, rounded to 3, would be 2.4something, rounding to 2.

Ok, so need 11. 1% could be anywhere from 3 to 6 in this poll. But with a 5% MOE 1% could be 6%. 3 people could be 24 people. It's really insane for the DNC to accept a poll with only 400 respondents. If they're going to be all stickler for going by polls then they should only accept polls with 1000 or more. That would still have a MOE over 3% but it's certainly better than this.

The margin of error means another group of the same size, made up of the same demographic groups, could have results that differ by that MOE.

62% over age 50, MoE of damned near 5%.

Seems legit. That is clearly representative of the crowd at the Starbucks located inside the bathroom of the Starbucks located inside the local Walmart. No smiley.

Faugh.

@skod The DNC has stated which polls will be partner polls which are the polls that count toward a candidate making the next round of debates. The number of unique donors is the secondary qualifier with several of the people in the last debate failing to meet the unique donor criteria by a long shot, but were still allowed to participate.

The unique donor criteria for the next round of debates is 130,000. Tulsi Gabbard exceeded that number within four days after the last debate, gaining 40,000 new unique donors in four days. But the DNC says that a poll based upon a sample of only 400 people carries far more weight than nearly 160,000 unique donors!

This is analogous to the weight that super delegates carry relative to actual voters, and it is exactly how the DNC is rigging the system.

62% over age 50, MoE of damned near 5%.

Seems legit. That is clearly representative of the crowd at the Starbucks located inside the bathroom of the Starbucks located inside the local Walmart. No smiley.

Faugh.