Posted on 6/8/2005, 12:45:37 PM by crushkerry
For about the 9 millionth time it's up to us to tell you why the latest MSM poll, this one from the Washington Post, which purports to show that President Bush and his policies are as popular as Michael Jackson at a Boy Scout meeting, is flawed. Let's get to it.
Ok let's first make sure we give you the link to the raw numbers before we get going.
OK, you done? We'll do this in number order.
1. Party Leanings - Go to page 20 of the results. The respondents tend to "think of themselves" as follows: 30% Democrat; 31% Republican, and 34% Independent. Sounds fair you say (even though the 2004 exit poll showed R's and D's split at about 37%). Yeah, it sounds about right - till you read the next question and you find that the respondents "lean" towards the Democrats by a percentage of 48% to 34%, which confirms something I long thought. People in polls who ID themselves as "Independent" are mainly Democrats and liberals.
2. Sample Group and Timing Of Poll - First of all, the Post polls only "adults," not "registered" or even "likely" voters. As you know 36% of the respondents aren't even eligible to vote, and of those that are eligible, only 60% vote.
Next, 1/2 of the polling nights are considered weekend nights, and weekend polling is notoriously unreliable and favorable to Democrats.
3. Age of Respondents - The poll also over samples the number of 18-29 year old voters, the age group that voted most for Kerry. In 2004, 17% of the electorate was between 18-29, and Kerry's advantage among them was +9%. In the Post's poll that age group was 21% of the sample.
4. Income Level of Respondents - Next take into consideration the annual income of the Post poll's respondents. In 2004, 45% of the electorate was making under $50K, and voted for Kerry 55-44%. But in the Post's poll, 55% of respondents make under $50K. That's a huge jump in likely Democratic voters among the Post poll's respondents.
5. Religion - Next, let's look at the religion of Post poll respondents. In 2004, 54% of voters described themselves as "Protestants" and voted overwhelmingly for Bush (+19%). In the Post poll, only 47% of respondents were "Protestant". Also, in the Post poll 14% of respondents had "no" religion, while in 2004, only 10% of voters had "no" religion, and they voted overwhelmingly for Kerry (+36%). Catholics are also underrepresented by 4% in the Post poll, another group that went for Bush in 2004.
Now let's take a look at some results that just don't make sense.
First, the Approve/Disapprove Numbers for both parties in Congress are identical 42%/56%. Yet respondents claim to want a Democrat in Congress by a net of +5%. Interestingly though, people overwhelmingly approve of their own Congressman by a margin of 61% to 32%. Yet 50% say they were "inclined to look around" for different representation. Talk about schizophrenia.
And let's look at the Social Security privatization question in which an equal number of respondents approve of as disapprove, a 5 point gain for PRA's. Yet, their question still sucks, as it reads as follows:
Would you support or oppose a plan in which people who choose to could invest some of their Social Security contributions into the stock market?
Under any plan that's proposed no one will be able to invest in the "stock market". They will be given a choice of broad based mutual funds (some of which will contain a certain percentage of stocks) similar to those used in the Thrift Savings Plan, which has never returned less than about 4% a year, even in bad years.
Using the word "stocks" and "stock market" makes people think they can blow all their retirement on the next Enron if they choose. And why not mention in the poll that under the plans out there, a person would have to shift to very safe bond index funds as they approach retirement so as to be subject to far less risk. Or even mention that bond funds are available. How about telling them that if nothing is done their benefits are going to be cut by about 30% anyway?
Yet they persist in their ignorance:
How about this question asked of personal account supporters:
What if the plan reduced the rate of growth in guaranteed Social Security benefits for future retirees?
As we have said ad nauseum there is no such thing as a "guaranteed benefit." And how about mentioning that if people die they could pass along the personal account to their heirs. Also no mention is made that the a portion of the funds in the personal account would have to be used to buy an annuity which actually does "guarantee" a stream of income for life. Don't you think those thing should be in the poll to paint a true picture?
Also schizophrenic is the responses on the economy. While people are seemingly pessimistic about the economy 44% to 56%, they are optimistic about their own financial situation by a 59% to 40% margin. Kind of shows you that the constant bad news the MSM reports about the overall economy being in the crapper seeps into people's heads even though there's an obvious disconnect to their own situations.
So there you have it folks. That's our take. As always we look forward to the guru of polls, Freeper Gerry Daly (a/k/a "Dales") of Daly Thoughts and his analysis, which is like gospel on the topic of polling methodology.
Ping
They left out a couple of statistics: Ineligible voters such as convicted felons or dead people account for 110% of voters in Democratic precincts.
Polls are news generators for these people who are to lazy to go out and get it theirselves.
Has the Wa Compost written or printed anything that is true in the past 4 decades?
Good article.
Here's an interesting question: could the MSM possibly do any more to help lower morale and lose the war than it is already doing now? The answer should be "what a ridiculous question! They are not trying at all to do those things!" But the fact that it could even be asked, and that the above answer doesn't spring automatically from everyone's lips, tells us a lot. I think.
I couldn't understand why number 5, religion, even made a difference when it's a RDD survey. Basically it should be you get who you get and that's the numbers but using religion in a poll, that's not about religion, would mean the pollsters are purposely trying to skew the results.
George $oreA$$ is the most dangerous single individual to our country and the safety of our families.
EXCELLENT analysis . . . BUMP!
The date.
Excellent work.
Glad you pointed that out to us. It never ceases to amaze me how you can put bias into a poll simply by leaving information out or using one word over another.
I often wonder about the question "Do you approve or disapprove of the Presidents handling of "blah blah blah". It is always automatically assumed that people that say they disapprove are against the President when in fact they may be thinking (examples)he should be tougher with the other party, use less negotiation, hit the enemy harder than we are, or that he never went far enough on tax cuts or spending cuts, etc. etc!
Ping
BOL!
Yes I dropped the WaPo last year for this reason but you must accept that this is wonderful when election years come along and we hear the refrain about....."no one supports the Republicans", "I dont know anyone who voted for Him/Her", " Polls show Hillary would win by a landslide", "Where did we go wrong".....this is where the Dems always go wrong...feel good polling!
The whole herd of them should be ashamed of their lack of accuracy and retire to the woods they so love. The trouble is the woods are Red!
I don't think it's wise to put a lot of stock in polls. After all, it was polls who told us that John Kerry was going to win the election by a landslide.
Thanks for an excellent post.
Excellent analysis.
bump
Have J Schools shown any inclination during this same time period to teach their students about such distortions of the truth as this type of misleading polling as a "story?"
Thanks for digging the info up.
Number 2 answered the question about this poll for me.
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.