Mediaboss Marketing

Here is a headline that you might see in an ad from a Democratic presidential candidate running against Hillary Clinton:

This comes courtesy of CNBC, which commissioned a poll asking 500 people "with investable assets of $1 million or more" (this is one poll that, safe to say, we'd all like to be a part of) which of nine potential presidential candidates they prefer. And it has been bouncing around social media this week as we all feverishly try to imagine a scenarioin which Clinton might actually not beat the motley crew of Democrats who will run against her.

How could Sen. Elizabeth Warren see thisand notimmediately decide to forma presidential exploratory committee, you might ask.

This poll is also far less than meets the eye.

Here are the choices offered, along with what percentage of the vote each candidate got:

First of all, yes, Clinton is No. 1. This is also not how people are going to vote for the new president. The only place where this kind of election takes place is Louisiana, and even then, there's a two-candidate runoff if nobody gets to 50 percent.

Clinton especially benefits from this format because:

1) She's more well-known than the other candidates, save Vice President Biden. The rest of the field, quite simply, aren't household names.

2) While the Democrat/Republican split is pretty even overall, Clinton is far more of a favorite on the Democratic side. Hence, she takes 72 percent of Democrats -- aboutlike she does in primary polling -- whilethe Republicans all split up the vote pretty evenly -- Jeb Bush at 36 percent, Chris Christie at 19 percent, Scott Walker at 18 percent. Clinton's share of the overall total is thus inflated.

3) There are more Republicans than Democrats. Yes, it probably only makes a small difference, but there are threeDemocrats, one Democratic-caucusing independent/socialist senator, and five Republicans. Again, that's more people splitting up one party's vote.

See original here:
Hillary Clinton is the preferred candidate of millionaires? Thats doubtful.