Posted on 04/21/2011 8:56:07 AM PDT by unique
Sarah Palin may be having some trouble with the voting demographic from her own home state of Alaska. According to results released Wednesday, the Dittman Research Corporation’s AlaskaPoll showed the former Governor and potential 2012 Presidential candidate rated at 61% unfavorably by a survey taken between March 3 and March 17th of approximately 400 Alaskans.
All I'm saying is that the survey had notable results - there appear to be a lot of negatives out there.
Take that up with the author of the article, not me.
What’s the source of your post?
Or left the small town to end up rejected, sort of like a trip to Hollywood.
My source is my opinion and I have the right to state what I think. I am going to say what I know in my heart is the truth and only Jim Robinson himself has the power to stop me... all that he has to do is ask.
LLS
That’s my plan too.
Now I hear that the left is trying to start the coffee so they can rally against the tea party.
Have you heard this?
Interesting. That must be the same reason why Clinton lost AR in '92 & '96. Oops, that's not right.
Upon closer inspection, I'm not sure your argument is very persuasive. Isn't it more likely be that the Republicans who know her best like her least?
Simply posting ‘news’ in this case a poll that didn’t come out well for Palin does not make one a “Huckaliar/Obama freaky fan” now does it?
Aren’t we here to discuss events, pro and con - Palin would be just one candidate to consider if she runs and there are negatives to also consider.
But, you didn’t note that it was your opinion - you noted it as fact - that doesn’t seem right to me.
They surveyed the 400 Alaskans who put in at least 2,000 votes for MurCOWski.
Newsflash: Poorly Conducted Alaskan Poll Produces Poor Results
The Dittman Research & Communications Corporation, let out a doosie today.
In a poll of 400 “public-at-large” (and not Alaska residents as Amanda Coyne of the Alaska Dispatch claimed), Murkowski was determined to be well loved across the state and Palin was determined to be unliked.
The views of Alaskans, which encompass a diverse population of over 700,000 residents covering over 550,000 square miles of vast terrain, were somehow easily summarized by 400 “public at large” who answered their phone between March 3rd and March 17th, 2011. The survey, as is customary for this organization, fails to identify likely voters or registered voters. It fails to show sample size of republicans, democrats, and independents represented.
During the 2010 elections, this same organization took significant flack from conservative websites and continues to be often linked to by Alaskan liberal websites. They have also been quite wrong at times.
Take that up with yourself you commented on my comment. If you do not want someone to respond then do not post to them.
Everybody I know up here is always saying how much better everything was going here in Alaska when Palin was Gov. In fact, I heard Shawnna Moore (Moore Up North) Anch liberal tv show, mention that she even misses Palin because even though Palin was about Palin; she always had the best interests for Alaska; kinda Wally Hickel style in her scope. That's very telling when Ole Moore states that because for as goofy as Moore is she really believes herself and you have to respect her for standing up.
The pollsters up here are all big Dem supporters, bought and paid for. Nobody ever believes anything they say anyway. I find it hilarious that a FREEPER would even believe it themselves; course I lived in ALaska for many years.
Seriously, everybody sees all the repub corruption back running the show and they all say they wish it was back like when Palin had all the Repub politicals worrying about their future living arrangements in the pokey.
>> but I’m thinking you’re probably the kind of guy who doesn’t put much faith into this fancy math stuff, and whatnot.
LOL - that’s rich given your emphasis on probability and an intrinsically non-distributive single sample of 1. Should I have faith in “fancy math stuff”, does that disrupt the balance of your reasoning?
“Or left the small town to end up rejected, sort of like a trip to Hollywood.”
In your dreams. Palin draws crowds and sells books like no other. Romney can’t even pay people to equal half her crowds.
I may be wrong. I know little about AK.
It was telling that Murkowski was able to defeat Palin (by proxy) as a write-in. Suggested that she may have fallen out of favor back home.
If that isn’t true, I’ll take your word for it.
They probably took the poll in Homer or South Anchorage, the most Liberal crap holes in the state.
“like probability theory and continuous probability distribution”
You have no idea of what you say in relation to Public Opinion Polling.
A small population state does not make a small opinion poll any more accurate.
The numerical weight of those polled is constant and equals a normal distribution error range + or - a certain percentage.
Don’t use big words if you don’t have a clue as to what you are talking about.
No. It pretty much reinforces precisely what I thought. Only a douchebag would suggest that a sample size of 1 out of 1750, is statistically the same as a sample size of 400 out of 750K.
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.