Posted on 03/02/2006 11:54:36 AM PST by slowhand520
What is with the slanted sampling? First CBS now Fox?
For only the second time of his presidency, the poll finds that President Bush’s overall job approval rating has fallen below 40 percent — today 39 percent of Americans say they approve and a 54 percent majority disapproves. Late last year the president’s approval hit a record-low of 36 percent (8-9 November 2005).
This is also one of only a handful of times that Bush's approval has dropped below 80 percent among Republicans. Today 77 percent of Republicans approve, down from 82 percent in early February. Disapproval among Democrats went from 79 percent in early February to 84 percent today. Approval among independents is essentially unchanged at 35 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I can't wait for Scrappleface or the Onion to come out with a story saying that Bush has an approval rating of 3%. The poll was of 95% Democrats and 5% Independents. C-BS and the F-Word network continue to ABUSE polling data.
I just saw that being reported on Fox as news.....
Turn it off.....It's b.s.
43% Democrats, 33% Republicans. That tells me all I need to know about this poll.
"What is with the slanted sampling? First CBS now Fox?"
My guess is that when the President is under multiple attack, only Dems have the patience to answer poll questions.
43% Dems, 33% Reps
HUH?? On the face of that, I am scratching my head.
This is getting so old.
Actually if they took 50% republicans and 50% democrats it wouldn't be a scientific poll for the Presidents approval rating.
Wonder if Britt will mention this?
Party preference is volatile. It moves up and down as people decide they like or don't like certain parties. Not everyone has his head screwed on as straight as those of us who follow politics closely, sadly.
Etu Fox News? If they weighted those demographics correctly to be about 35% Democrat, 33% Republican which is about where the actual voting population is, then we'd get to Bush being at about a 45 to 46% approval rating which is close to where the much more accurate Rasmussen is showing things.
Unfortunately Fox and their hosts will be touting this poll all day long in another fit of news creation that the rest of the MSM is engaging in with rigged polls as well. None will question the skewed demographics, including real political pros like Fred Barnes and Mort Kondrake who should know better. I'll be surprised if they bring up the demographic skew in their discussions.
It doesn't matter how many times some people are told this; they still just simply won't get it. But, for decades now it's been well-known that when one party is on the upswing more people claim in polls to identify with that party than when it is on the downswing. The arguments now are precisely the same arguments the Dems where using in their inane rejection of the 2004 pre-election polls that showed Kerry trailing Bush and consistently showed more Pubbies than Dems.
But of course it just makes more sense to imagine FOX is part of the vast polling conspiracy to oversample Dems. I'm sure some of this derives from the mythology that the 2004 polls were showing Bush headed to lose, when they were actually showing Bush headed for a win across the board. The perception seems to have persisted that they were showing a Bush loss because they were showing Kerry narrowing the gap, and a lot of analysts were predicting that the undecideds would break Kerry's way on Election Day to put him over the top. But, as a point in fact, the poll numbers themselves still had Bush in the lead.
And finally, maybe some of this has to do with hyperpartisans that just cannot imagine how someone might say they identify with one party in one poll and then say they identify with the other party in a future poll.
Another consideration is conservatives could respond unfavorably because they wish he were more aggressive to these liberal onslaughts. This also can explain why Bush could get low numbers on Iraq policy. Liberals want him to leave. Some conservatives unhappy he's not been agressive enough. One has to know the precise question asked and even then you can't always draw too broad a conclusion as there may be several underlying answers.
A low score on Iraq for example may be good (when viewed objectively) because it shows that he is ticking off both ends of the spectrum and governing for all the people.
Fox has lost me
And that approval rating would be false. Ya guys wanna guess who conducts his polls that way? Yup, Zogby. He's the only one that I know of. That's why Zogby's polling has been so screwed the past couple elections. Everyone else takes a random sampling and lets the chips fall where they may. That's the correct way to conduct a poll.
They sampled registered voters, only 39% think Bush is doing well. 43% happen to be democrats. Its not that Fox picked 43% democrats its that there are more democrats than republicans. You can't ask for a weighted average based on that. That would be basically a fake poll. This is the same way they have always done these kind of polls why stop now? Because Bush isn't doing well. This isn't the kinda game republicans are supposed to play.
I was totally wrong in my figures. I'm no statistician, but I caught myself. This is a formal retraction of my inaccurate poll.
What's this? FReepers catching the slanted sampling and methodology behind press polls?
I believe meteors are falling from the sky, as the end of the world has begun.
No, at this rate I do believe that's scheduled to begin on Nov 2. ;)
So the news readers expose their ignorance yet again? They only read the results and don't even bother to look at the sampling? FOX just went WAY down in my estimation.
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.