thanks ap/ipsos or should I say
bogus polls 'R us
There should be an effing law just like side effects in drug commericals to report the damn internals of political polls. Yeah I think oversampling democrats by 12% might just make a teeny weeny difference in the results.
What we have here is the left thinking out loud, publishing their wishful thinking.
When they say "the American people" they really mean that little group who post at a web site called DU.
It's comforting to see the circulation and stock value numbers dropping through the floor at The New Duranty Times
Poll: Most Want Court OK for Gov't Taps
By KATHERINE SHRADER Associated Press Writer Posted January 8 2006, 3:28 AM EST
WASHINGTON -- A majority of Americans want the Bush administration to get court approval before eavesdropping on people inside the United States, even if those calls might involve suspected terrorists, an AP-Ipsos poll shows.
AP Rigs Poll To Show Republicans Are Doomed | Sweetness & Light
http://www.sweetness-light.com/archive/ap-rigs-poll-to-show-republicans-are-doomed/
AP Milks Rigged Poll For A Second Story | Sweetness & Light
http://www.sweetness-light.com/archive/ap-milks-rigged-poll-for-a-second-story/
Why? Sounds like the news they bought was exactly what they wanted.
The good news is that ABC doesn't get away with this stuff anymore. Every time they are called out on the carpet, their credibility (whatever is left of it) takes another hit and less and less people trust the media. They are administering their own arsenic.
Just look at the advertising on the ABC Evening News and you'll know who watches the show and it's not the movers and shakers.
Odd.
John Armour's work is usually much more clear, more easaily understood than this.
It's almost like we were reading his working notes, rather than his finished analysis. For example, without careful study (or already knowing the percentages!), you would not be able to understand the pool-taker's jargon and percentage differences between the people polled and the actual "market shares" of typical Americans: numbers of democrats to republicans, numbers of church-goers to those who don't attend, number of low-income (democrats) to low incomes at large, numbers of yuoth (predominnately liberal and heavily under the influence/propaganda of educators!).
Alll of these factors influenced the results of the poll, (as he points out) - but only in the last part of the last paragraph!
This is an important article, and important results, but it seriously needs an editor.
"Every single one of the following crosstabs from the poll are wrong, and in every instance the error favors the Democrat responses."
I always assume that's a given for any poll numbers released on any given day by the MSM, so I tack on an average of 10 points for the Pubbies and get on with my life. :)
They are measuring registered voters, not likely voters and certainly not those who voted in 2004. The comparison that the author is making above is to actual 2004 results which everyone would admit were "abby normal" in that turnout was way higher than normal for both sides... higher for Dems among youth vote and higher for Republicans among those living in the far out suburbs and among religious voters. Those who voted in 2004 may or may not vote again in 2006 or 2008. Taking actual results for 2004 rather than an average of the last couple elections is probably just as biased as oversampling for Dems.
Also realize what the poll is attempting to show. It is reporting and it says it is reporting the beliefs of registered voters. This far out from an election not many polling outfits are going to spend a lot of extra money to determine or estimate likely voters. Be aware that in most off year elections, more party dieharts typically vote and independents say home. With the war and a lot of other issues perhaps resonating with independents they may actually show up and vote this year. Too early to tell.
Democrats only believe polls when they are in their favor.
Bump for later use, in case our local rag prints anything about these polls.
The actual IPSOS question says NOTHING about overseas. See Below:
1. Should the Bush administration be required to get a warrant from a judge before monitoring phone and internet communications between American citizens in the United States and suspected terrorists, or should the government be allowed to monitor such communications without a warrant?
Should be required to get a warrant.......................................... 56
Should be allowed to monitor without a warrant ............................. 42
Not sure ......................................... 2
They believe the people are stupid.