So, last week, Jim Cramer went on the Daily Show and had his ass handed to him, brutally, by Jon Stewart. And this was obvious on its face to everyone watching the show, and those people all went to work the next day and described what happened to the people who hadn't seen it, and the general consensus was that, yes, Stewart beat Cramer to death, with facts and videos, so much so that the National Broadcasting Company and their affiliate networks decided that they didn't want to talk about it, because of the shame and sadness, and besides, maybe those KING DICKS OF THE UNIVERSE at AIG would do something malevolent and evil over the weekend to get everyone's minds off of Jim Cramer.
This is all objective truth, observable in reality. But what if you are some sort of analytically-minded savant, or suffer from the same eye problems as Jessica Alba in that movie where she gets a dead person's eyes and starts seeing Japanese-style horrorporn everywhere, making it difficult for her to discern objective reality from a bunch of skittery hallucinations of dead children and what not? Well, lucky for you, POLLING TO THE RESCUE! And once again, the obvious has been proven, with the maths. Editor and Publisher has the news:
The HCD Research/Mediacurves survey, taken on Friday, sat nearly 450 people (a cross-section) down and had them watch the "Daily Show" debate from the night before. Asked to judge who benefited most, i.e. won, 74% picked Jon Stewart, 9% Jim Cramer.
I am assuming that this poll has a margin of error of AROUND NINE. Anyway, the larger story here is that polling is apparently a recession-proof business, or so I surmise by the way they just flaunt this stuff.
[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]