Reader Note: The image used for Twitter today on this story below is incorrect & a production error. The correct image for this poll is on our website, copy & link below.— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) September 2, 2020
Now its time, once again it seems, to block some invective spewing Twitter trolls.https://t.co/XA2V8ReiEX https://t.co/YEqsP9pIWW pic.twitter.com/Dm7ghG47gh
Wow. Let me screen-shot it for preservation:
Posts
51 comments:
I like how they airbrushed the confusion out of Biden's eyes.
It took me a minute to figure out the problem...
I'm still voting for bitch-face over totalitarianism...
Funny how these things keep happening, and always in the same direction.
I think the word we're looking for here is "systemic".
Yeah, production error alright.
It really is Trump against the establishment at pretty much every level of politics except the voter level- even at Rasmussen.
"Now its time, once again it seems, to block some invective spewing Twitter trolls."
That comment doesn't seem professional, or dispassionate. Not a good look for an opinion-polling organization. Some brands adopt a rowdy, snarky Twitter persona. Wendy's, I think, doesn't shy away from tweaking its fans, its detractors, and its competition. And that's great - if you're Wendy's.
Coming from Rasumussen, this comment reads like a junior staffer got their wrist slapped for running agitprop on their employer's twitter account, and is still smarting over it.
What I want to know is why Rasmussen was even commissioning art like that in the first place. I don't see it serving any on-brand purpose for a polling organization.
"Now its time, once again it seems, to block some invective spewing Twitter trolls."
WOW. They can't even admit they deserve some crap for this. Any invective they get for something that outrageous is dismissed as just trolling.
And this is Rasmussen, probably the least bad of the bunch.
The gaslighting is so thick at this point, I can't see any purpose to it other than ensuring that one spark is going to make the entire country explode.
Somebody on the Rasmussen staff is not happy about the results of the polling, most likely because they are closer to the truth than the narrative. They editorialized their opinion by way of this picture. The boss was not happy.
I like Trump as Godzilla
CGI-Joe
...expect a lot more shit from the people on the "production" end
Joe is a shell
My amazon account is currently shut down because it was hacked. I'm getting fake orders for things I've never purchased.
My guess is that was a hack of some sort. I doubt even Trump-hating CNN would be so obvious.
I followed Rasmussen Reports on Twitter for a few weeks since they are the only polling outfit that conducts a daily Presidential "approval" rating. They are clearly not pro-Biden and in fact I felt they were fairly pro-Trump in their Twitter posts, (which is why I stopped following, since there really didn't seem to be much neutrality in evidence).
This was definitely a screw-up by someone at the lower level - probably unintentional since I have some impression that Rasmussen Reports is something of a family operation.
They're both Orange. Oh, wait, now I see the problem. Apparently, black did not matter in the original publication. Clearly a production error. Even Albino received top billing. That said, should the color distribution be 50% or proportional to the population?
And this is Rasmussen, probably the least bad of the bunch.
Yes, it's telling. Democracy dies in darkness with a JournoListic choice.
So it’s Divine vs Bob Uecker? I’ll go with Divine.
the spit in the police officer's Starbuck's
...is also a 'production error'
ProgLibDems, et al, seem to have a problem with Quality Control
They could have presented images as poll choices -- that would have been worthy recovering : in style and character and camouflage.
Robert Conquest is again relevant here.
The production error lie reminds me of "I was so angry that I accidentally told the truth!"
Time to take away the monopoly toys from the tech trolls.
Does Rasmussen hold itself out as an objective pollster? If so, that fiction is now destroyed.
The Commission on Presidential Debates announced the moderators of the upcoming debates —
First debate: Chris Wallace, Fox News
VP debate: Susan Page, USA Today
Second debate: Steve Scully, C-SPAN
Third debate: Kristen Welker, NBC News
...don't know the CSPAN pick but it looks like Republicans rolled over again. I assume they'll never actually happen, but we'll see...
As much as I feel the term "gaslighting" is overused these days, it seems pretty appropratiate here. Otherwise whoever is running Rasmussen's Twitter account should be fired.
The moral of the story is to wait for due process. Hopefully, they have identified the "production error". Oh, say, can you see, by the dawn's early light...
Anyone else think that Biden looks like Anderson Cooper (sans glasses) in that image?
So the captions would be:
Trump: (Yelling so old Joe can hear him), "Joe, what day is it!?"
Joe:
Trump: "Joe?" "Joe?" Jeez.
There are two Rasmussen polling organizations now. Tha founder, Scott Rassmussen left the company in 2013 over a dispute with the board over the "future direction of the company". He then founded the new Scott Rassmussen company.
I dont know which is which since the media tends to conflate the two.
Wait, I thought Trump's truculence was half his charm.
So now we officially know how to grade Rasmussen's polling...
Stutefish at 12:02 pm:
"Now its time, once again it seems, to block some invective spewing Twitter trolls...[t]hat comment doesn't seem professional, or dispassionate...[c]oming from Rasumussen, this comment reads like a junior staffer got their wrist slapped for running agitprop on their employer's twitter account, and is still smarting over it."
Agreed. The junior staffer got caught, but only after the fact. They changed the art, but blamed it on a production error. Yeah, sure. To add insult to injury, the junior staffers got a last dig in, adding a condescending insult to their post, as if the complaints were not warranted or justified.
Not a new topic or complaint, but where are those responsible, the supposed adults? Where are the executive/managerial levels of review and approval?
This type of incompetence or willful manipulation appears far too often in the news media. Supposed news articles often include or feature mis-information, wishful thinking or opinion as fact, embellished half-truths, or the latest "what the cool kids say" snark. The articles are almost worthless as straight news.
That this piece was published at all answers my questions, I guess: there ain't none. No one is responsible, no one is accountable, no one suffers any consequences. But to qualify my statement: I speak of the left media and its enablers; there are plenty of consequences to inflict upon all of us on the right, guilty or otherwise.
Thank You
William Jamieson
Reminds me of the cover of nearly every magazine and the front page of manynational and local paper on November 9, 2016. Trump's head silhouetted against a plain background. If the election had gone as planned. I'm sure they would have had a photo of Hillary celebrating, not a dark silhouette.
How many people touched this and thought it was innovative and inciteful?
Twitter manager. !.
Graphic Artist 2.
Social media manager 3.
Traditionally in a professional group about 6-8 people are involved in the roll out of this image.
Saying it was a production error is being dishonest. The org leaders are afraid to tell the truth.
Rassurkel Polls: Did we do that?
Narr
Election can't come soon enough
Being a democrat means being mentally diseased and intolerant of dissent.
Biden's neck makes him look like a snake, of the harmless variety.
Also, in visual media, you always (almost) put the good guy on the right side of the frame, where snake-y Joe is represented.
Just going to toss this over the transom....
I'm on a major but just two-lane arterial here along the Portland border. I just realized that over the last week that there's many pickups driving around with American flags, not just the rando. It's a data point.
At what point does plausible deniability become implausible?
The new profile image, advantage Trump.
Trumps chin juts forward in a smooth upward slope from his collar taking the eye to his discerning stare highlighted by his protruding grandfatherly eyebrows.
Biden's chins are withdrawn with down facing stare like an old man in decline.
The amazing thing is that they are so smug that they think they can attribute such obvious bias to "a production error" and then get away with it.
After all, we're deplorables (Clinton) and the dregs of society (Biden).
Talk about living in a bubble.
I'm OK with Angry Trump. I'm not OK with Dementia Biden.
Trump looks like a rabid dog in that graphic--and old Slow Joe almost looks intelligent. Almost.
Biden didn't ever win the nom legitimately. The left hate Trump with seething rage - but the international globalists have the real power to make sure HIllary - er I mean Biden, is dragged across the finish line.
So Trump was Running against Jeff Sessions? I mean, that is wo the original images looked like.
I've seen Rasmussen reply to tweets before. It seemed mildly pro Trump. Wonder if they just did it to go viral?
If you are tired enough, you can very easily do something that dumb. I've proofread a document a half dozen times and still miss obvious, "am I sober?" sort of mistakes.
I'm not sure why the monster mosaics were even considered, though. Or why it even exists. Yes, quite embarrassing.
I would suppose the young techies are throwing bricks and breaking windows on weekends. Laughing like when they pulled this off.
but it looks like Republicans rolled over
I’m told all of the Commission’s “Republicans” are of the Chuckie-to-Kristol style neverorange varietal. That’s why.
"..?but it looks like Republicans rolled over.."
Nonsense.
The "republicans" on the commission are essentially democraticals and always have been.
Why is there a picture of David Brinkley?
I look forward to a Presidential campaign that will illuminate and enlarge the American spirit.
Graphic artists will always, always, try to slip some sort of dick image into artwork. It's damn near universal. One editor told me it's overcompensation for selling out to The Man instead being a heroic starving artist. Now in the past, some adult would have caught that long before it was seen outside the organization.
But today the artist are kids, the editors are kids, and they're all leftists. And something like this was probably set up for everyone to have a laugh. Then someone forgot to change it before "post" was clicked.
Now some may remember how Steve Bannon's photos in national pubs looked more haggard than the next. It turned out that the photo editors were screwing with the images to make him look bad. That was pure sabotage.
Post a Comment