The preference stats haven't changed in over 24 hours. Does that...

[LAS14]

... mean almost all DUers have registered? Or can we expect a lot more over time, and thus some change? Of course over a long time I expect the undecideds to shrink, but not for a while.

[DonViejo]

1. More over time and probably a lot more this weekend.

[NurseJackie]

2. I wish there was a "view names" option on the "Current Candidate Rankings" page...

I wish there was a "view names" option on the "Current Candidate Rankings" page... kinda like when you view the names on a DU poll.

I'd also be interested in seeing actual NUMBERS rather than vague percentages.

[BannonsLiver]

23. I saw a registered Gabbard supporter today

It was everything I expected.

[NurseJackie]

26. I'm not surprised.

[Devil Child]

35. Think of the positives

Think of the joyful posts to be made if Gabbard's campaign doesn't go anywhere!

If she survives to my state's primary I will vote for her.

I will vote for ANY Democrat and one independent Senator who secures the Democratic nomination.

Stay salty!

[WeekiWater]

24. I would love to see numbers. NT

[NurseJackie]

25. I'm thinking the actual numbers aren't as large as many imagine them to be.

My guess is 200-300.

[The Truth Is Here]

3. What preference stats? I killed it with my ad blocking software.

Stuff like these are not necessary and sows divisions.

[LAS14]

5. On the contrary. I was thinking about the flood of positive responses...

... in the Announcement thread.... thinking about why it felt so good to so many. And I think one big thing is it removes uncertainty about exactly what someone means in a post. Oftentimes I'm not sure. For me it won't so division. It lets me relax and know who I'm dealing with.

[NurseJackie]

7. On this we agree.

[Tetrachloride]

17. I agree.

Early preferences tend to blot out worthy electable candidates.

Instead of a single preference, I have at least 6, among the well-known possibilities.

Let the candidates campaign and debate in a friendly uplifting manner. Not just at the end, we must come together. We must be together now. Find our best candidates. The cream must rise to the top.

[IrishEyes]

4. The preferences have changed slightly throughout the day.

I think it will change when more people go to the forum. It will also change as new people announce their candidacy, people drop out and the undecided people decide.

[defacto7]

6. Yesterday the preferences added up to 98%.

Right now it adds up to 103%.

[NurseJackie]

8. I'll bet there's some rounding up/down going on.

I wish we could see actual numbers and names (rather than percentages).

[former9thward]

9. Numbers, yes. Names, no.

That just leads to stalking.

[NurseJackie]

10. Nah! If anyone was TRULY interested in stalking they could do so by looking at siglines.

Something similar to the "show names" option for the DU polls.

[defacto7]

11. Yes, rounding matters especially with those 1% ones.

I'd at least like to see the numbers.

[NurseJackie]

12. I know. Yang in particular.

[IluvPitties]

13. I am saddened Amy is not getting much love around here.

[Tetrachloride]

16. I agree. Amy deserves significantly better.

One of my top 6 preferences. I believe Amy is in the top 2-3 for VP, assuming not in the Presidential nominee.

[Awsi Dooger]

27. Gwen Graham would not have fared well in a similar poll

She was the very likable and accomplished but more moderate Democratic candidate for governor last year. Very similar to Amy, IMO.

Many of us in the Florida Forum supported Graham. It was absolutely imperative to win that governors seat. Those of us in Florida understood the dynamic, that you can't just nominate anybody and get across the finish line in this state. Unfortunately the outside influences showed up including a Bernie Sanders endorsement of Gillum and we got stuck with a great guy who shrunk the margin for error dramatically, due to his perceived ideology and the Tallahassee FBI situation.

I'm worried we'll make the same mistake nationally. There is already very low margin for error against an incumbent.

[Tipperary]

34. I like her.

I have no preference yet, but I do like her.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

14. Has there been a reason stated why there is no actual count of those voting?

[NurseJackie]

19. My guess is that the actual numbers are lower than many imagine them to be.

It may end up looking like a DU poll. I'm guessing that 200 people have selected a preference.

[bearsfootball516]

22. I suggested it to Skinner and didn't get a reply.

As NurseJackie said, it may be because numbers are low, and putting those numbers out there could unintentionally show that not many people regularly post here.

DU is an awesome place, but DU polls can often shed light on how few people actually post here when a poll is up for several hours and the votes only reach double digits or barely reaches 100.

[ecstatic]

18. I wish we could pick 2 candidates! Nt

[The Truth Is Here]

20. I wish there was an option to turn it off.

Thanks!

[LAS14]

21. Someone said the display goes away if you turn off adds via your operating system. nt

[customerserviceguy]

28. Wait until after this coming weekend

I would imagine that there are a goodly number of people who don't have time for DU during the week, and they settle down with it on weekends.

[BumRushDaShow]

29. From what I gather

you are only required to select a preference in order to post in this forum.

There are a number of DUers who have "trashed" this forum altogether so I would not expect the vast majority of people on DU to actually come in here to post.... if anything, many are almost sole Loungers.

Also the user "preference" graphics only appear to be visible in this forum. Outside of this forum they are not displayed although if you go into someone's profile, you can see what option they selected IF they did select one.

[LAS14]

30. How do you know there are a number of DUers who have trashed it?

I can't imagine being a DUer and not wanting to participate in the primaries forum.

[BumRushDaShow]

31. All you have to do is go through some random threads in GD

around the time this forum came online!

There were many who also wanted the primary stuff out of GD (I was actually one of them).

Anyone who was around for previous primary seasons can recall how rancorous it can be. I signed up just around the time of the 2008 one and it was god awful on DU.

[LAS14]

32. I was here for the 2016 primaries and am pretty happy that this time seems different. Here's hoping

[BumRushDaShow]

33. It was pretty rough then but there were changes that had been made this last primary season

including revisions to the earlier "jury" system of moderation (which didn't exist until the move to DU3) and the creation of MIRT (the Malicious Intruder Removal Team), that tempered it somewhat once it got into a flow. But the rancor still happened within the candidate Groups, with people purposely disrupting by targeting other users and alerting their posts in those groups... plus there were issues of what was often dubbed "alert swarming" and so forth.

So I am hoping that we don't go there again.