Palinisms In Polling

Read this closely and then tell me how reliable Rasmussen's polls are:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 46% of Likely Republican Primary Voters who favor Palin say they are at least somewhat likely to vote third-party if she isn't nominated. That includes 22% who say it is Very Likely.

What this is saying is that less than half of people who still use landlines as their primary phone that are considering not voting for Obama in 2012 because they think Palin is "cool" aren't sure whether or not they would actually cast a vote that matters - including a minority of people whom, with a sufficient amount of prodding, would get off the couch and just push any button that caught their fancy at the time that wasn't Palin or Obama.

That's how Rasmussen results read - completely and utterly pointless.

Look for the modern American Right to get all in a tizzy over this, complete with Fox"News" doing their best to ensure that she does get the nomination.

Media Perceptions

A recent Gallup poll shows that "trust" in the "media" is at an all-time low.

For the fourth straight year, the majority of Americans say they have little or no trust in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. The 57% now saying this is a record high by one percentage point.

The 43% of Americans who, in Gallup's annual Governance poll, conducted Sept. 13-16, 2010, express a great deal or fair amount of trust ties the record low, and is far worse than three prior Gallup readings on this measure from the 1970s.

Trust in the media is now slightly higher than the record-low trust in the legislative branch but lower than trust in the executive and judicial branches of government, even though trust in all three branches is down sharply this year. These findings also further confirm a separate Gallup poll that found little confidence in newspapers and television specifically.

Nearly half of Americans (48%) say the media are too liberal, tying the high end of the narrow 44% to 48% range recorded over the past decade. One-third say the media are just about right while 15% say they are too conservative. Overall, perceptions of bias have remained quite steady over this tumultuous period of change for the media, marked by the growth of cable and Internet news sources. Americans' views now are in fact identical to those in 2004, despite the many changes in the industry since then.

When one takes a look at the breakdown of whom holds these particular views, there's one question that quickly springs to mind: Is Fox"News" not part of the media any longer?

73% of those calling themselves conservative thought the "media" had a liberal bias. This is not surprising, as one of the pillars of the modern conservative movement is to vilify the media - that is, unless you are Fox. So again, are they left out of this equation? When you look at the polling data, it's readily apparent that conservatives consider this to be a question about everyone else.

I found this hypothesis even more plausible when I noticed that Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air had taken this in the predictable direction of "who is to blame" for the loss in trust. Naturally, he cast the blame directly at the feet of Dan Rather:

What happened? The CBS attempt to smear George W. Bush with the phony Texas Air National Guard memos. That episode made clear the political tilt and the situational ethics of the “layers of editors and fact-checkers” at CBS, providing a clear basis for the always-present suspicion that the national news media occasionally cooked a story for their own political purposes.

While the Rather piece was accurate, despite the alleged "fabricated font" in the memo, this is the conservative line of attack - all media is biased against us if they attempt in any way to hold us accountable.

Again, just as in the Gallup results, Morrissey never makes mention of Fox"News", even though just days ago he cited polling data to push the narrative that most Americans "trusted" Fox"News" - despite the fact that the poll done by Politico and George Washington University had nothing to do with "trust", but simply what people watched regarding political information.

It becomes glaringly apparent that Morrissey ( and most conservatives )is attempting to have it both ways, and you simply can't do that. Well, you can, but free thinking people aren't going to take you seriously if you do.

As for me, I have to question everything put forward to me - media or otherwise. Despite the fact that conservatives operate under the failed notion that liberal/progressive Democrats will blindly follow Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, or anyone else on MSNBC, I have to dig deeper into things that they report on simply because that's how I've always been.

Were I to be questioned in this survey, I would have to offer the opinion that I don't think there is an across the board "liberal bias" in the media. I do, however, feel that there are far too many people working in media that allow conservative memes to run unchecked and unchallenged. And to take this further, I believe that of the big three cable news networks, MSNBC does have a more liberal leaning prime time line-up that completely distinguishes itself from the more straight-forward reportage that makes up the bulk of every 24hr cycle. Compare that with the unblushing way in which Fox"News" not only allows but urges virtually all their programs to be seriously tilted towards conservative Republican points of view and theatrics over solid reporting and you'll get not only a sense of why conservatives prefer Fox but why they would shy away if asked to defend their standpoints in the Gallup versus POLITICO polling data.

Those Media Bastards

In which Palin degrades that which created her. No, really.



Yeah, polls have no relevance if they say bad things about you. This from the woman that consistently references polling data that shows that Obama is below 50% in approval.

--- Just a side note, Obama is polling about even with Reagan during his second year in office in 1982. But don't tell Sarah, shhhh ---

Her blathering about her Q-score aside, this woman is a creation of the media - and not just Fox"News", mind you. If it weren't for the fawning mass media, then Palin would be about as meaningful to the socio-political landscape as Joe Eszterhaus is to screenwriting. To those that catch that last reference, you get extra "cool points".

It's almost to the point that we have reached a saturation point with Sarah Palin. It would almost make sense for her to quit Fox"News" at this point, just so she doesn't become any more stale than she already is. But where would she go? She couldn't do talk radio, as that would require her to take calls; and we all know that this woman can't survive in an unscripted landscape.

The Face Of A Tea Bagger

I've said multiple times that I believe the Tea Bagger movement really doesn't have any clear goals in mind, nor do they have any form of leadership. It is clear, however, that every shoutfest that erupts throughout the year is clearly orchestrated by people like FreedomWorks with the accompanying PR push from Fox"News".

Now, Edison Research has compiled polling data taken from last week's Tax Day Protest in Washington and come up with some revealing answers as to who the Tea Baggers look up to.

The survey, an exit poll conducted Thursday by Edison Research at the massive Tax Day protest on the National Mall, found that the attendees were largely hostile to President Barack Obama and the national Democratic Party — three-quarters believe the president “is pursuing a socialist agenda.”


Yet they aren’t enamored of the Republican Party as an alternative. Overall, three out of four tea party attendees said they were “scared about the direction” of the country and “want to send a message to both political parties.”


The results, however, suggest a distinct fault line that runs through the tea party activist base, characterized by two wings led by the politicians who ranked highest when respondents were asked who “best exemplifies the goals of the tea party movement” — former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), a former GOP presidential candidate.

It's always been clear that animosity, hatred, and misplaced rage were part of the glue that kept this group in a semi-stable state, but it's only within the last few months that the Paulite's have been showing their true colors.

Anyone remember how conservatives reacted when Ron Paul won the straw poll at CPAC? It was at that moment, that you could tell that the nuttiest were starting to take over the nut house.

Palin has always been a "face" of the Tea Bagger clan, and is often referred to as a "leader" of the movement, though the spin has continuously been that since there is not an "elected" leader of the movement that THAT is what makes it organic and pure grass-roots. But Palin's status is actually no greater than the status of a movie star. Conservatives, by and large, prefer the gimmick over the substance, and Palin fits the former quite well. She's learned to be coached and to stay on message with some of the top conservative performers.

What was puzzling to me regarding this poll was that it made no mention of Glenn Beck, Michelle Bachman, or the Tea Bagger's former favorite politician Jim DeMint - and boy did he disappear fast after healthcare reform passed. This leads me to believe that, like all people that idolize a particular actor/actress/musician/author, the "idol" will become marginalized at some point when something louder, flashier, and with more pretty colors catches their attention.

The Alleged "Will" Of The People

Far be it from me to put myself on the same playing field as Nate Silver, but I have to say that I have been talking about this same thing for months now.

Reasonable minds can come to the conclusion that the bill is bad policy, and people are also 100 percent within their rights to believe that the bill might be bad for them for self-interested reasons (if they make greater than $200,000 per year and would be subject to the increase in the payroll tax, for instance.)

With due respect.....the debate over health care is not playing out like the one in elite circles of public opinion, in which Ezra Klein and I represent the pro-bill coalition......As this month's tracking survey from the Kaiser Family Foundation makes clear, there are a lot of beliefs the public has about the bill which are objectively wrong.

This can be true with any poll. It's all based on your source of information. Take this for example.



What proof does he have to make these claims? None, actually. But considering the fact that Limbaugh has a really big microphone and millions of people listen to him that apparently lack the ability to do any sort of fact-checking, reading, or are incapable on independent thought ( ever wonder why his drooling fanbase are called "Ditto-Heads"? ) then you begin to see how this "Will of the people" meme takes shape.

The same is true for people that only read the ghost-written dribblings on Sarah Palin's Facebook page. You need to verify your source.

Misinformation and disinformation have poisoned the healthcare debate almost as much, if not more than, the initial campaign for Barack Obama prior to his election. But, just as in that case, most Americans have the ability to see through the fog to the truth. So if you're buying into this notion that 73% of Americans don't want the healthcare reform that is literally inches away from completion, you might want to think twice about where you are getting your information.

Of Course They Are

I'm even from the state and I embarrassed for them.

The Bachmann survey results, released exclusively to the Minnesota Independent, measure responses to the question, “Do you think Congresswoman Michele Bachmann does Minnesota proud in Congress or embarrasses Minnesota?” While 56 percent of respondents statewide said they were embarrassed by Bachmann, 29 percent answered that they were “proud” of the Sixth Congressional District Republican, and 15 percent were “not sure.”

I think the two most rational voices from Minnesota that are elected officials are Keith Ellison and Al Franken. To this day, I still can't fathom how this woman actually won elected office. It certainly doesn't speak well of the people in her district.

Misplaced Admiration

Still trying to wrap my head around this USAToday/Gallup poll that shows that Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin are essentially tied for the "Most Admired Woman In America" title.

The woman hasn't finished anything since her stint as Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. She quit her elected job as Governor in order to take credit for writing a book that someone else wrote for her and then toured the country trash talking Obama and any and everyone that asked her a valid question she couldn't answer.

If this is the new high-water mark in conservative political action then I don't see 2010 being that bad of a year for Democrats.

The Unreliable Data

The favorite conservative meme of late is that Obama's 47% approval rating shows that he is failing and will likely be a one-term President. The only problem with this is that this rating shows that most people polled don't seem to comprehend the very reality of his job duties. From attempting to pull the country out of a massive recession not seen in over a generation to ensuring that the continued war in Afghanistan is brought to a swift and proper conclusion, this rating doesn't accurately reflect what it is intended to.

You may remember that Bush had a near 90% rating around this same time in 2001, bolstered simply because of his rhetoric in response to the attacks on Sept. 11th. But his actual job performance as President was completely dismal.

A new Senate Foreign Relations Committee report says that Osama bin Laden was within the grasp of U.S troops in December 2001, but bin Laden was allowed to escape into the Afghan mountains. The Daily News reports, "The report asserts that the failure to get the terrorist leader when he was at his most vulnerable in December 2001 - three months after the 9/11 attacks - led to today's reinvigorated insurgency in Afghanistan."

And while the reality of this closely mimics that conservative talking-point that Bin Laden was "on a silver platter" during the Clinton administration and was missed, it does tend to shed new light on the relevance of the polling data then and now. Bush missed a perfect opportunity to catch the most wanted man on the planet versus Obama not being able to fix Bush's economic mistakes fast enough.

That aside, some conservatives - and repeated en masse by many on Fox"News" - are touting that Obama's rating is the lowest of virtually any president since Gallup began gathering data at the end of Roosevelts term in office. The only one that was close to Obama was non other than the conservative Jesus, Ronald Reagan at 49%. But with margin of error taken into account, as it is with any poll on any subject, the two are theoretically tied.

This is another interesting situation that can provide a little more context to Obama's numbers and the reality behind them. While Reagan enjoyed two terms as President - trickling down the economy into near oblivion, supporting both sides of the Iran/Iraq war, and selling arms to terrorist organizations, and doing virtually nothing to stop AIDS in it's infancy - his legacy is nothing more than giving a speech in Germany which conservatives have spun into him single-handedly ending the Cold War. Obama is just now nearing the end of his first year and the economy is already on the mend, diplomatic relations are being cooled, and healthcare reform ( in some shape ) is likely to be complete before Spring.

For the most part, polls are an interesting snap-shot of a given place and time but do nothing to predict how a person with speak, act, or especially vote. The data may seen bleak to some, and there are those taking full advantage of this, but the reality behind the numbers is what matters.

Some Thoughts For Your Morning

- Blogger and citizen journalist Mike Stark has been tracking down all of the Senators that voted "no" on Al Frankens "rape amendment". It seems that not everyone was keen answer Stark's very honest, very relavent questions. What were these men thinking? Not to delve too deeply into the "what if" realm that conservatives continually inhabit instead of what is transpiring in the real world, but what if someone like Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, or Michelle Bachman were raped by members of an organization they were assiting? Certainly they would claim that justice be swift and unflinching.

- Is Jake Tapper angling to get a job at Fox"News"? Each an every time Tapper goes off on some tangentical, abstract, pointlessness, conservative bloggers cheer his journalistic creds and hoist him upon their pedistal of diefication. The strange part of all this is that some conservatives think that anyone within the executive branch is not allowed to express their opinion on what is and what isn't a news organization. I guess no one told them about all the blathering that Dick Cheney did when he was VP. Oh, that's right, he wasn't part of the executive OR the legislative branch, was he.

- The Public Option certainly looks good in this ad.

- In an obvious attempt by the Senate majority leader from my state of Kentucky, Mitch "Beeker" McConnell, to boost moral within the Republican party, he completely distorts the facts on how Republicans are doing in polls related to the upcoming mid-term elections. The truth of the matter is that fewer and fewer people are aligning themselves with Republicans and the distance between them and their Democratic opponents has remained virtually unchanged in the last 2 years.

- With all the conspiratorial nonsense that Glenn Beck delivers to America each evening, Media Matters thought they would pay tribute to the man by using his own tactics against him. It turns out that the only difference between what Beck does and what MMFA has done is that the later actually fact-checks their research.

Misrepresented Data Seems To Make Them Feel Better

The Fox"Nation" has a highlighted story around a poll by Gallup that appears to show that "conservativism" is the dominant ideology in America.

Thus far in 2009, 40% of Americans interviewed in national Gallup Poll surveys describe their political views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This represents a slight increase for conservatism in the U.S. since 2008, returning it to a level last seen in 2004. The 21% calling themselves liberal is in line with findings throughout this decade, but is up from the 1990s.

While looking at the figures from the particular perspective can provide supplication for those that are railing against the Obama adminstration, perhaps even validating their silly, little, tea-parties, the numbers tend to shift when the data is more detailed in your polling sample.

In this [ State of American Political Ideology ] study, however, the electorate is broken down using a more expansive five-point scale of political ideology that reflects the variety of approaches people ascribe to today. Employing this more calibrated measure, 34 percent of the country identifies as “conservative,” 29 percent as “moderate,” 15 percent as “liberal,” 16 percent as “progressive,” and 2 percent as “libertarian.” After moderates are asked which approach they lean toward, the overall ideological breakdown of the country divides into fairly neat left and right groupings, with 47 percent of Americans identifying as progressive or liberal and 48 percent as conservative or libertarian. The rest are unsure or scattered among moderate and other approaches.

You can see the full, detialed, report from American Progess here.

See which demographic you fall into. Take the quiz

I scored in the "very progressive" catagory. It's a rather interesting quiz.

AOL Hotseat Poll

Sarah, Are You Still Thinking What I'm Thinking You're Thinking?

A poll was released today by Public Policy Polling, that shows that Obama would easily win a second term is Sarah Palin decided to run in 2012.

Obama leads Palin 55-35 in the hypothetical contest. He has an 89-7 advantage among Democrats. Among Republican he trails 66-17. Last year exit polls showed Obama
winning only 9% of the Republican vote, so it appears Palin would lose a lot more voters
within her party than McCain did.

Of course, we all know that polls are simply snapshots of a given groups mood at a specific place and time.

Palin wasn't exactly a shining example of a candidate when she was John McCain's running-mate, and she's got a lot of ground to make up if she is even considering a 2012 run.

Then again, Public Policy Polling just may be part of the "vast, left-wing conspiracy"

Who Leads The Republican Party?

Sarah Palin?

Well, she's leading in the poll right now.

But Limbaugh and "No One" aren't that far behind.

So, 4th Place Is Better Than 1st?

Pew Research recently polled adults 18 and over about "politics" and here's their findings:

The survey, conducted April 30-June 1 among 3,612 adults ages 18 and over, found that about half of Americans (53%) knew that the Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives, while 42% could identify the secretary of state (Condoleezza Rice). Fewer than three-in-ten (28%) could name the prime minister of Great Britain (Gordon Brown). Just 18% of the public answered all three questions correctly.

While majorities in most news audiences knew that the Democrats have a majority in the House, regular viewers of Hannity & Colmes (84%), and listeners of Rush Limbaugh's radio program (83%) scored best on this question...

The later paragraph is all it took for Right-Wing bloggers to claim - en masse - that Hannity and Limbaugh viewers had "more informed" than any other program.

Ed Morrissey at HOTAIR chimed in on this story and even attempts to show that this somehow vindicated John Zeigler:

This follows on John Ziegler’s work at How Obama Got Elected, although in a less partisan manner. Ziegler also conducted his surveys of Obama and McCain voters to demonstrate the fecklessness of media coverage, a theme he put together as a documentary in Media Malpractice. Pew essentially finds the same problem working from the other direction — most of the mainstream media outlets fail to inform their audiences properly for political discourse.

Then there's Erik Erickson's "Morning Briefing" at REDSTATE:

Now what to make of all this? Rush and Hannity get bragging rights of a sort.

At best, this poll only shows that Hannity and Limbaugh audiences complain so much about the Democratic majority in the House that they were bound to at least get that question correctly.

That being said, they are still in an overall 4th-place position. Hardball, NPR, and The New Yorker / Atlantic come ahead of them.

My question is this: how can PEW even consider a person's ability - or lack thereof - to answer 3 relatively simple questions about politicians ( and not important issues ) proof positive that they are "more informed"?

The answer - they can't.

Regardless of where you stand on the reliability of polls, it's extremely easy to see that this one serves little to no use - other than for Hannity and Limbaugh to brag about something that they think they provide, but don't

Hannity Breezes Past The Obvious And Fox Let's Us Know Something

Sean Hannity - and his producers, most likely - try and go the "hot chick-pundit" route as Sean seems to think he can pull one over on them both. He's wrong.

BarbinMD highlights a brunette-beatdown on Hannity's own Fox"News" program.



It seems that Sean , like man lunatic-fringe conservatives, are blatantly misusing the term "socialism" when it comes to Obama. But, most of you know that already.

When she talks about having "faith" in America, and that that same "faith" extends to the American pulic, Sean - in true reactionary fashion says:

Where has Socialism worked?

Our lovely pundit counters that the Obama administration isn't the first to spend or raise taxes. To which Hannity says "not on this level".

Kind of a flacid retort, taking into consideration what Obama is having to correct.

The money-shot is when she mentions Reagan raising taxes and Hannity counters with a pathetic:

...only slightly, as an adjustment

I'd love to see the actual numbers on Reagan's spending and taxing, just to see how Hannity's deity plays out against W and his father.

Also, there's this poll from Hannity's same home-court that seems to paint a slightly different picture of Obama that he is willing to admit.

Of Scientific And Tilted Polling Practices

This was posted on a message board that I frequent:

When asked how they feel about President-elect Barack Obama as commander in chief, six out of 10 active-duty service members say they are uncertain or pessimistic, according to a Military Times survey.

In follow-up interviews, respondents expressed concerns about Obama’s lack of military service and experience leading men and women in uniform.

“Being that the Marine Corps can be sent anywhere in the world with the snap of his fingers, nobody has confidence in this guy as commander in chief,” said one lance corporal who asked not to be identified.

For eight years, members of the U.S. military have served under a Republican commander in chief who reflected their generally conservative views and led them to war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Now, the troops face change not only at the very top of the chain of command, as Obama nears his Jan. 20 inauguration, but perhaps in mission, policy and values.

The full article can be found here.

The problem with the poll was how it was conducted.

Although public opinion pollsters use random selection to survey the general public, the Military Times survey is based on responses from those who chose to participate. That means it is impossible to calculate statistical margins of error commonly reported in opinion surveys, because those calculations depend on random sampling techniques.
The voluntary nature of the survey, the dependence on e-mail and the characteristics of Military Times readers could affect the results.

That's like going to a 20 raves and asking how many people like electronic music and then randomly selecting people in Louisville, Kentucky and asking the same question.

Brandon Friedman at VetVoice.Com has more.

Look for this to be a major talking-point within the right-wing conservative realm within the next few weeks. They do love to use the military as a stick with which to beat people. This will be no exception.

At Least They're Trying To Stay Positive About It

For some reason, this screen-capture of the Fox"News" website is funny to me.

If you'd like accurate polling data, check here

Everything Is Bigger In Texas, Including Ignorance

A new poll from The University of Texas shows, in one of it's sections, that there are a lot of people that think Obama is a Muslim:

When asked to identify Obama’s religion, 45 percent of respondents accurately identified him as Protestant, however 23 percent erroneously identified him as Muslim.

Not only does this show that 1/4 of the Texas population are ignorant, but those same people more than likely think that all Muslims are terrorists.

Not to be completely outdone, my home state of Kentucky seems to have the same problem:

Despite heavy national media attention about Obama's faith, more than half of likely Republican voters — 54 percent — and one of every four Democrats in the state do not know that the Democratic presidential nominee is a Christian, the poll found.


The poll showed that 14 percent of likely Kentucky voters — 28 percent of Republicans, 4 percent of Democrats and 11 percent of independents — think Obama adheres to the Muslim faith.

While the Kentucky poll focuses on "likely voters" I have talked to no less than 5 people where I work that tell me they aren't going to vote this year. It would be interesting to see what non-voting Kentuckians have to say.

Let's See What Non-Voters Have To Say

You can start to see Drudge's propaganda showing more and more when he chooses the Nickelodeon "Kids Poll" in order to show that McCain just might still have a chance.

Drudge and National Review's Campaign Spot -- with a measure of conscious self-parody -- link the Nickelodeon Kids poll, which has Obama up only two points.

It's an online poll. Of kids.

"The Nickelodeon Kids' Poll is one of those polls that is always interesting to keep an eye on," writes NR's Geraghty.

Kinda.

via Ben Smith @ Politico

If you really wanted to stretch for some rationalization, for all the "realiability" you can get from this poll, this just might reflect something positive that mommy or daddy had to say about McCain or Obama at dinner one night.

Be sure to keep an eye out for Drudge and NRO's new poll of likely Marvel Superhero voters.