Posted on 09/11/2005 7:51:28 AM PDT by new yorker 77
Final Topline Results (9/10/05)
N = 1,009 national adults, 18 and over
Margin of error: plus or minus 4
Interviewing dates: September 8-9, 2005
SAMPLE SIZE/MARGIN OF ERROR FOR REGISTERED VOTERS/
SUBGROUPS:
901 Registered voters (plus or minus 4)
SAMPLE SIZE/MARGIN OF ERROR FOR KEY SUBGROUPS:
300 Republicans (plus or minus 7)
334 Democrats (plus or minus 6)
331 Independents (plus or minus 6)
------------------------------------
793 Whites (plus or minus 4)
195 Non-whites (plus or minus 8)
Should read "its" rather than "it's" -- I obviously can't watch a football game and type at the same time!
[NOTE: The plural themselves is now accepted usage.]
The Newsweek people will tell you that party IDs go up and down all the time, and since they're not constant, it makes no sense to screen for them. The Dems were screeming all last summer because a Gallup poll that showed Bush ahead also sampled comparitively more Repubs than Rats. Why was this? Because with Kerry at the helm of the party, many fewer Americans wanted to identify themselves as Rats.
Show me the math.
The entire states are off-line? What percentage of the population do you think you're talking about here?
Folks,
This went on last year. Come on, we all remember the obsession with polls during the campaign and how we trumpeted those that showed Bush slippage as having an over sampling of Dems. Well, the DU people did the opposite, and the opposite did occur on occasion.
Polling methods have become dated and the polling companies are trying to address it. They are not doing a good job. Rasmussen has pointed out that most money that pollsters make does not come from politics. It is from market research. They have a financial interest in accurate surveys. They aren't doing this on purpose.
Rasmussen is ahead of them. He is sampling with an insistence that his result conform to a pre-specified partisan mix. There is debate about this because it does indeed render his sample non random.
The poll showing Bush slippage is because of who was sampled. The polls showing anything always show that because of who was sampled. Odds are if the poll in question was meaningful Rasmussen would have detected it.
Odds are, however, that high gas prices do have an effect on that few % in the middle that don't care about politics at all and just see their own pocketbook. Conversely, given that most people in the US don't have illegal immigration on their top 5 list of concerns, it is unlikely Bush's immigration stand is relevant.
John Kerry found that out!!
Math, simple or otherwise, can't even be performed until you're comparing apples and apples. 37% represents the proportion of people who actually voted in 2004 who were enrolled as Republicans. The 29.7% represents the proportion of registered voters who are enrolled as Republicans. They're two completely separate measurements.
Not much of a choice for you, is there?
I don't have the time or patience to explain why response rates matter . . . I have football games to watch and a beautiful, sunny day to enjoy!
Just one question: Were these pollsters able to do a comparative analysis between the MANY who refused to answer their polling questions and the FEW who did, what do you think they'd discover?!
MSM pollsters have been noted to have paid polling candidates in the wings, waiting to be called, especially on weekends, e.g., roommates, friends and spouses of employees. Thus, coupled with oversampling of Democrats on weekends, the polls are always a setup. It's the broken wing trrick.
These polls have no purpose of measuring public opinion. They have a single purpose, which is to destroy the Presidency of George Bush. I skipped past MSNBC on the way to another channel, and as they showed the President live at Andrews on his way to LA, they ballyhooed this poll. They said one of the questions was answered by only 38% saying they have trust that that George Bush can make good decisions for America at home or abroad, while 54 or 56% (forgot which) answered that they no longer trust the President to make any wise decisions on any issues, whether domestic or foreign. I believe this poll is the most garbage poll I have seen in a long time.
Ask anyone who has ever done any research. You pick the expert you want to ask.
I have. I have never heard anything about a 10% requirement. Please support your claim.
"Today, Rasmussen has President Bush at a 50% approval among 'likely voters' and a 47% approval among 'national adults'. "
I didn't know you could consider Democrats as "adults".
Besides, conservatives don't read Newsweek ot Times - not if they have any brains that is.
Yes, the false polls also didn't work starting back in 1994 when the liberals (Democrats) really started losing power on Capital Hill.
When "news" organizations start citing polls I know they aren't "reporting" anything. They are MAKING news, not REPORTING it! They have an agenda and they think we are too stupid to know it.
And I am wondering why you continue to argue with a basic fact about polling that the rest of us all know.
Do you, or do you not understand that the left skews its numbers to get negative results for the President? And do you, or do you not have a problem with that?
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.