Trolls Tried to Boost Yang and Williamson in Online Polls After the Debate

In one poll, the two semi-obscure candidates came out in first and third place.

Drew Angerer/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Trolls on a prominent far-right message board tried to launch a campaign to get other users to vote for two marginal candidates, Andrew Yang and Marianne Williamson, in internet polls on who won Thursday’s Democratic presidential debate.

Users of the 4chan message board /pol/, infamous for its rampant sexism and racism, pushed others on the board to inflate Yang’s and Williamson’s position in online polls about the Democrats candidates’ performance in the debates. “VOTE FOR YANG IN THIS POLL. HE NEEDS TO WIN IN EVERY POLL WE CAN FIND,” a user wrote in one pro-Yang thread, linking to a Reddit poll. 

It’s impossible to know the actual impact of any coordination efforts, especially as more right-wing and troll groups move toward private chats on platforms like Discord and Telegram, where they can carry out coordinated campaigns less visibly, as Yang supporters did earlier this year. However, coordination might have had an effect in skewing a poll conducted by the Drudge Report. Despite speaking for only around two minutes and 50 seconds, the least of any candidate on stage, Yang won the Drudge poll. Williamson spoke the third least, for about five minutes, but got third in the poll, narrowly edged out by Kamala Harris.

Their strong performance in the Drudge poll contrasts with very low polling numbers going into the debate: Yang was around 1 percent in several polls, and Williamson didn’t even secure a full percent in most polls. 

Yang and Williamson didn’t perform as well in other online polls posted in 4chan boards, including ones run by NJ.com and the Washington Examiner. Still, at the time of this story’s publishing, Yang was in second place in both polls. 

Internet trolls similarly attempted to influence polls in support of Tulsi Gabbard after the first Democratic presidential debate on Wednesday. Far-right and alt-internet personalities hyped Gabbard’s performance after the debate, and as NBC first noted, trolls on 4chan and a pro-Donald Trump subreddit pushed other users to inflate Gabbard’s numbers in the Drudge poll and other debate polls.  

Standard, professionally conducted polls cited by news organizations are more rigorously run because they’re generally only open to people pollsters contact, not anyone on the internet, making them less prone to manipulation. Even so, some right-wing news outlets, including Breitbart and the Daily Caller, ran stories about Yang winning the Drudge poll, without addressing its vulnerability to being manipulated. 

Thursday night wasn’t the first time Yang got a boost from 4chan and other seedy internet communities. In February, his supporters coordinated raids on 4chan discussion boards organized on pro-Yang Discord servers, posting memes and messages in support of the Democratic candidate. A founder of one Yang Discord told Mother Jones at the time that the group was made up of many former Trump supporters who felt abandoned by the president and thought Yang’s proposal for a $1,000-a-month universal basic income would be a better deal.

Despite the attempt at coordination on /pol/, Yang’s support there is by no means unanimous. Since Yang came to prominence on the site, anti-Yangers on 4chan have fought against his devotees in the imageboard, calling them “shills.” 

Yang has also repeatedly disavowed support from the far right since gaining traction among their community.

“I’ve already disavowed any racist and hateful ideologies,” he told Mother Jones in February. “I don’t want their support.” 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate