Skip to comments.Newsweek Poll - Only 29% of the polling sample are Republicans. (MEDIA BIAS ALERT)
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/
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)
THIS INFORMATION CAN NOT BE FOUND ON THE MSNBC SITE. THEY DO NOT PROVIDE A LINK IN THEIR NEWSWEEK SECTION AND NOW WE KNOW WHY.
Total Sample - 1,009 Registered Voters - 901
Therefore, 108 polled are not registered to vote. That means 11% of the people polled are not registered to vote.
Also, 40% of registered voters will not vote.
Therefore, 361 of the 901 registered voters sampled will NEVER vote.
This means only 540 of the 1,009 people polled will vote.
This means 53.5% of the people polled will vote, 46.5% of the people polled will NEVER vote.
Now let's look at party affiliation:
Republicans - 300
Democrats - 334
Independents - 331
Other - 44
Republicans - 29.7%
Democrats - 33.1%
Independents - 32.8%
Other - 4.4%
Newsweek undersamples Republicans. 29% is 8 points lower than how many Republicans voted in 2004.
Much like the CBS poll, Newsweek buries people who lean Democrat in the Independent and Other columns. A useful trick for pollsters who bury their oversampling.
Today, Rasmussen has President Bush at a 50% approval among 'likely voters' and a 47% approval among 'national adults'.
FAKE POLLS DO NOT TRANSLATE INTO REAL VOTERS!!!!!!!
I meant to say 1,009 national adults.
Only 901 are registered voters.
Thank you very much for posting this. I have yet to be polled by any of these, even during election season...and with all the polls they've run, each person in the US, heck the world, could have participated in at least one of them. And THAT is why I don't bother listening to them.
WOW! So that's how they generate all their nonsense that never seems to ring true. What a scam!
Newsweek is also saying the hurricane "delay" was Bush's fault because Bush should have sent the army in under Rumsfeld, the person Bush most relies upon. This is the same Rumsfeld they all said is a total screw up who should resign. Saw Newsweek "reporter" Adam something reach this conclusion on MSNBC this morning.
My guess is that these pollsters still play with dolls and toy soldiers. Mostly dolls though.
This is bigger than just the FAKE POLL itself.
The FAKE POLL justifies the biased news coverage.
The FAKE POLL gives cover to reporters who say, "The American People think .... According to the Poll ...."
It is part of the propaganda structure of the MSM.
The MSNBC website does not have this data.
I went to Yahoo.
I did a News Search for 'Newsweek Poll'.
That is how I got the polling sample.
Is anyone surprised? I ALWAYS assume a bias against Republican in ANY poll conducted by the MSM.
Well, toy soldiers are attracted to dolls. Mostly the one who go into toy bars, though.
And the 33% who are registered Democrats - that's how much lower than the number of Democrats who voted in 2004? You might want to examine both sides of the equation before jumping to too many conclusions. It's to be expected that registered members of both parties are more likely to vote in an election than unenrolled voters.
When the dnc talking heads talk about polls always tell them this
EXIT POLLS SAY KERRY NEXT PRESIDENT NOTTTTTTTTTTT
You are clueless.
Independents who LEAN DEMOCRAT are buried in the Indpenedent column.
CBS does the same.
Does it bother anybody that so many polls, that at least claim to be ramdom smaples, have Reps polling 29-30 %? Could Rep party ID have sunk that much? Let's be objective about this. I recall when Rasmusssen was ripped on this board.
These fake polls or push-opinion polls worked well in the past - Problem for the MSM is they are working less and less anymore - More and more people now know these polls are junk and tweaked for the result the MSM want - (which allows them to run "news" stories about) -
And the fact is these polls are now being written for the people conducting them (more than anything else) - Which is the MSM - They want to believe it so much, that they go out and tweak polls until they are meaningless in terms of reality....but nonetheless they at least feel good about looking at the results of their "fake" poll.
The MSM (and Democrat Party) are imploding before our eyes - They know the polls are junk, they know the push polling method doesn't work anymore, yet they still go ahead and waste all their energies producing them.....just for the few minutes of false gratification it brings them.
In the mean time President GWB just continues to lead and move the Country in the correct course.
A sidenote I would suggest Rasmussen (old POA) has a few years to go (with shown results) before one can take his polls seriously -
And independents who lean Republican are...what? Like I said, look at both sides of the equation if you want to be taken seriously.
And for extra credit, get a copy of the literal questions.
Published polls are propaganda. The decaying Legacy Media
loves them because they can treat them as (invented) news,
and mold the results to support their agendas.
Sometimes they aren't even really polls designed to
discover opinion, but instead are "push polls" intended
to create opinion. And we won't even talk about polls
that include solicitations for contributions.
There is agenda in deciding to run a poll.
There is agenda in choosing the topic.
There is agenda in scripting the questions.
There is agenda in selecting the subjects.
There is agenda in conducting the survey.
There is agenda in processing the data.
There is agenda in reporting the results.
"Real" polls are run by people who intend to act quietly
on the results, rather than for publication.
I knew this poll was phony. Rasmussen shows the President's approval rating at 48% and newsweak shows it at 38%? That's a 10 point difference. And guess who got the 2004 election results right on the money- Rasmussen.
Newsweek had to do some serious manipulation to get that 38% percentage.
The bosses at Newsweek probably said to their pollsters,"48%? That's too high. Go back and churn that data until you come up with 38%! You hear me! We already have our stories written with that number!"
I am sure the poll is biased, but there is a cautionary note.
The bias would be the difference between the fraction of Republicans sampled and the fraction of Republicans in the general electorate. I don't know that number. However, if, hypothetically, only 29% of all registered voters were Republicans, then the poll would not be biased.
I did not quite understand your quote that I reference above. Does it mean that the number of republicans in the general electorate is 37%, and the poll is 8% undersampled?
If you want to cash in on the FOOL's GOLD of FAKE POLLS, be my guest.
When CBS/NY Slimes has Bush's Job Approval at 41% in July 2004 and 42% in September 2004, I laugh while libs celebrate.
It is the same reason that Newsweak and CBS and AP have Clinton's job approval at 65% in 1996 when he only gets 49.2% of the vote.
Republicans have won too many elections in the face of such clearly FAKE POLLS.
Do not let the glare of TRUTH get to you.
FAKE POLLS DO NOT TRANSLATE INTO REAL VOTERS!
Here we go:
A LESSON IN POLLING.
20% of 'national adults' are not registered voters.
60% of 'registered voters' voted in 2004.
37% of 'likely voters' who voted in 2004 were Republican.
37% of 'likely voters' who voted in 2004 were Democrat.
26% of 'likely voters' who voted in 2004 were Independent.
Here's some truth.
You may learn something.
Whisper: Liberal news organizations undersample Republicans and oversample Democrats. They also hide those who lean Democrat in the Independent column. And they poll non-voters.
These are FACTS.
Here's a FACT:
Bush 51% - Kerry 48%
Something Rasmussen polled consistantly from day one in 2004 while other polling firms gave Kerry a chance and had the GOP getting crushed in 2002 midterms.
I think Election Results in the face of FAKE POLLS in 2002 and 2004 do it quite nicely.
FROM A LIBERAL WEBSITE:
But guess what? On Election Day, exit polls showed Republicans matching Democrats 37 percent to 37 percent. Pollsters who assumed that historical patterns would temper the Republican intensity in this year's surveys got it wrong. Those who bet on the data instead of the historical patterns got it right.
Also, keep in mind that the 'historical data' was based on liberal polling firms over the years.
These people picked Clinton to win bigger than he did and Reagan to win by less than he did.
Republicans have always been there.
All you have to do is poll them.
Enjoy TRUTH. IN CAPS.
Hey, did these "pollsters" learn the trade from zogby???
BASED ON REGISTERED VOTERS
Rep/Lean Rep -38
Dem/Lean Dem -50
I just scrolled down the yahoo finance page.
This is the TRUTH.
Newsweek oversamples DEMOCRATS OVER REPUBLICANS BY 12 POINTS.
You seem to have either a reading or comprehension problem There have been multiple posts pointing out that the % of Rep voting in the last election was in the 37% range and yet you seem to be stuck on the 29% figure as being accurate.
Our side always complains about the polls. I have an idea;
How about we start to put out the word that Republicans are refusing to cooperate with the pollsters so the polls are useless. This will harm the ability of the MSM and left to use polls to further their story.
Also, it is probably true since the reason the exit polls were so off was that Bush supporters refused to be interviewed by the exit poll folks.
Most of us know or at least suspect that this is going on and has been going on for years or decades or always, but the point is that we know it and the sheep believe it or don't question it. I ask you, where are the Republican leaders and their outrage? I don't see 'em, I don't hear 'em - either they are too stupid to comprehend it or they don't care, and that just may be closer to the truth. I am beginining to despise the Republicans more than I hate the homo, drug ingesting liberal left. At least they have the balls to fight while the 'Pubs' retaliate with references to 'our misguided colleagues across the aisle'. Where the hell are all the men in this gutless society?
If 82% of Republicans support Bush, 20% of Democrats support Bush and 39% of Indpendents support Bush, it is immposible to get Bush's approval below 47% among 'national adults' and 50% among 'likely voters'.
People are polarized. This is true.
The only way to change that is to change minds.
People are not changing their minds.
Liberal news organizations are changing their polling samples.
It is as clear as day.
If I believed polls, Republicans would lose every election in a landslide and Bush would never be President.
In the era of three networks and the NY Times, that may have worked.
Today, it fails every time it's tried.
Maybe the Washington Post can get their foriegn corrspondents to go to Mississippi and Louisiana on a more regular basis.
Has anyone here been surveyed by MSM pollsters? I've been waiting for a call since I was 18. Apparently, it'll never happen!
Do not wait.
Do what tens of millions of Republicans do.
Work, take care of family and friends, and go to church.
Also, VOTE WITH YOUR REMOTE.
I do not watch CBS, NBS, ABS, MSNBS, CNBS, CNBS, CNNHBS, or PBS.
I do my part with PARENTAL BLOCK.
20% of Dems don't support him.\
But no matter. There is no question that more Dems were polled than GOP, but it is not likely this was done on purpose.
This was going on last year too. Only Rasmussen has his telephone robot keep calling until he gets the desired partisan mix (with that desire equal to the turnout at some previous election). It's largely why he was right.
The other pollsters don't do this, but they are still random because it is in their financial interest to be random. It may be a change in the electorate that causes this. It may mean that more Dems want to respond than GOP. This would be consistent with what was seen in exit polling. GOP voters don't want to be bothered to entertain in the media. They prefer to speak only where it counts -- at the polls.
It is cheaper to poll 'national adults' rather than 'likely voters'.
It is biased to undersample Republicans and oversample Democrats.
This poll is taking freedom of speech into levels of fraud. Your protest is very accurate. 29% polled by Newsweek were Republicans while in fact 37% of voters are Republican. They also polled a slight higher number of Democrats and independents when there are really only 30% and 31%.
A great strategy here would be to write Newsweek's sponsors and threaten to boycott their products if Newsweek does not right this wrong.
The purpose of the FAKE POLL is not to inform the public, but to manipulate the public, pacify their everdwindling liberal audience, and justify their biased news coverage.
It did not work in 2002.
It did not work in 2004.
It will not work in 2006.
And if a lot of these Republicans are "mean" like me, well we tend to hangup the phone when liberal time wasters call us.
It is biased, but not intentionally. This happened during the campaign too. There were some results that oversampled GOP too. It was not just Dems. The problem is the methodology seems to have evolved to be flawed -- Even Though It Hasn't Changed Over The Years.
For some reason random samples grossly oversample one party vs the other at different times. If I had to bet on what's happening now, I would bet that GOP voters have already become bored with Katrina and are not at home watching TV waiting to be polled.
Looks like they undersampled Democrats as well, by that reasoning. But you forgot one thing: The polls sample from registered voters, not from people who actually do vote. I was asking for your evidence that significantly more than 29.7% of registered voters are enrolled as Republicans. Do you have any at all?
It is intentional.
Dick Morris would call the NY Times and ask them to run a poll to help Bill out in 1996.
Newsweek, the AP, Zogby, CBS, NY Times depend on FAKE POLLS to justify their news coverage.
Since Bush is not running for office again, they can do whatever they feel like and their will be no referendum to debunk it.
2004 was a clear case of FAKE POLLS. It was limited by the 'likely voter' sample which liberal news orginations had to follow.
The many who got it wrong in 2004, did so by oversampling Democrats and undersampling Republicans.
It was as intentional then as it is now.
I'm 43, I've been voting since 1980, I have a listed telephone number and I've never been called by a pollster, not once.
You are obtuse to a degree that is unmatched.
Let me educate you.
Liberal polling firms undersample Republicans and bury Democrats in an oversample in the Independent column.
Ask Scott Rasmussen, the polster who got the 2002 election and the 2004 election right, How Bush is doing.
Newsweak is biased. Their poll proves it.