Posted on 06/15/2004 3:56:25 PM PDT by .cnI redruM
The most recent LA Times Poll has me absolutely convinced. Absolutely convinced that John Kerry will have a huge election day victory; in LA County. After all, Kerry steamrollered his way to a 51-44 advantage, with a mere 5% being undecided. However, before sending the Senator your resume, I advise you that this had to be one of the most poorly conducted propaganda polls in 2004.
The poll has raised my hackles in ire for two reasons. First, the sampling technique came straight out of the Propaganda Warrior's Handbook. Secondly, the poll had a release date contrived to strongly influence the direction of the election momentum. This poll was not an informational product. It was a bandwagon propaganda sales pitch.
The sample from which the poll was taken included 25% Republicans, 37% Independent or Third Party voters and 38% Democrats. In a nation consisting of approximately 35% Republicans, 35% Democrats and 30% Independent voters, the likelihood of this happening at random goes to zero if more than maybe 300 voters are called for the poll. This result was an intentional attempt at distortion.
Assuming other recent polling from Quinnipiac U. holds water, President Bush should take 90% of the GOP vote. Kerry will steal about 10%. Among Democrats, Kerry takes home 80% of the bacon, Bush steals about 10% and 10% stay undecided. Where Bush gets hammered is among independents who are currently about 45% Kerry, 40% Bush and 15% undecided.
Among the LA Times sample, we can thus compose the following figures:
Bush: 22.5 from GOP base + 3.8 stolen from Dem base + 14.8 from Independent voters. This gives President Bush 41.3%.
Kerry: 2.5 stolen from GOP base + 30.6 from the Dem base + 16.7 from Independent voters. This gives Kerry 49.8.
Absent Ralph Nader, approximately 9% of the electorate remains up for grabs. The statistical noise present seems to favor President Bush slightly, but the choice of sample clearly has driven the result.
Given a more representative national example, again assuming Quinnipiac nailed their result fairly well, we can predict the following.
Bush: 31.5% from GOP base + 3.5% stolen from Dem. base + 12% from Independent voters. This gives the President 47%.
Kerry: 3.5% stolen from the GOP base + 28% from the Dem. base + 13.5% from independent voters. This gives the Senator 45%. Approximately 8% of the voters remain undecided.
In light of the fact that undecided voters traditionally go 2 to 1 for the challenger, my revised sample still suggests President Bush has work to do if he really wants that second term. However, this is probably a far more accurate gauge of where the country stands than what the LA Times put out the day before Ronald Reagan's funeral service.
And let's mention the timing of the LA Times release. Surely, everyone expected a Bush bounce in the days of Reagan Remembrance. This was not what the editorial staff at the LA Times wanted.
Certainly, the LA Times had planned a poll on this date well in advance. Certainly, given the success of The Times in predicting the California Recall Election, a rational mind would expect them to shank the poll a wee bit to the left.
However, given the past behavior of this particular 'news' outlet, I can't help but believe they dumped a little extra sauce on this one. As a result, the only thing they barbequed successfully, was their own reputation for fairness and objectivity.
Could it be because they're LIBERAL!(DUMB QUESTION ALERT) LOL!
It is in a Major Crime state?
LA Times has been losing its credibility exponentially.
He got the figures wrong on the LA Times poll.
What is so amusing about Bush trailing Kerry by 7 points in this poll is that he actually won the independent vote 49% to Kerry's 46%.
Had the polling been representative, the final result would have closely matched the independent vote.
It can constipate a canary in 6.4 seconds.
But less every day. A story just came out in the last day or so about staffing cuts due to lower ad revenue--in a booming economy to boot. Ah, schadenfreude....
The Orange County Register needs to change it's name and expand it's circulation into LA county.
I trust the LA times less than the Globe or National Inquirer.
Even the headlines stink of extremist socialist/liberal opinion.
For instance, the enemy terrorists are "freedom fighters","opposition" or "gunmen".
They are owned by Chicago interests these days (SEE: Tribune). That makes them pretty much a colonial operation that does little more than reprint stuff handed them by their owners.
Then there's that problem with the whole gang ~ the ABC (Audit Bureau of Circulation) investigation, and so forth. Frankly, I don't trust any of the periodicals in that particular stable anymore.
The business of the rigged polling is just the sort of thing you should expect from them.
Won't publishing a poll that shows Kerry with a sizeable lead only prompt a larger turnout for Bush? I don't understand their thinking.
The internals as I saw them were as follows:
___: GWB / JFK
IND: 49% / 46%
GOP: 92% / 4%
DIMS: 7% / 86%
I did a straight 33% / 33% / 33% and came up with Bush 49.3% / Kerry 45.3%
Not by me. I don't read it.
"If you read the Los Angeles Times, you know less about the world than if you drink gin straight from the bottle." [with apologies to Garrison Keiler]
the Los Angeles L'Opinion e Times is very close to a large ocean and there are more fish per capita to be wrapped
This is easy. Look at your local paper and see the sources for their national news. Most small papers are syndicated to receive their national news because they are too small to have their own reporters. About 99.5% of their national news comes from the NY Times, Washington Post, and LA Times. The small bureaus use and pay for access to the MAJOR papers and the LA Times is a supplier.
Why is the Los Angles Times the most hated big city newspaper?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.