Rasmussen Polls: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
(Aggregated results of in-person telephone interview polls)
Shameless. Rasmussen Reports released a poll which makes it appear as though 60% of the entire nation thinks health care reform should be repealed. Only, they haven't really polled health care reform since March, so how'd they do that? Well, they didn't ask about the law, per se. They asked whether the law should be repealed. And to get to 60%, they had to really stretch.
Eighty-one percent (81%) of Republicans and 65% of voters not affiliated with either major party favor repeal; 56% of Democrats oppose it. Part of the doubt about the likelihood of repeal may come from the fact that Democrats could still control Congress after November. Part of it also may come from skepticism that Republicans would be any different. Recent polling showed that just 42% think there would be a noticeable change if Republicans win control of Congress. Republican voters overwhelmingly believe that their party’s representatives in Washington are out of touch with the party base. Just 21% believe that Republican officeholders have done a good job representing Republican values.
(Aside: The real story in this poll is the last sentence of that paragraph)
Of the 60% who favor repeal, only 39% strongly believe it should be repealed. It's also worth noting that Rasmussen polls via telephone polls, so their voter responses are likely to be older, retired people who are home to actually respond to the poll.
This is nothing more than a shameless effort to shift attention away from the truth. The truth is in that embedded graph at the top of this post. FACT: Support for the health care reform law is INCREASING.
Last week several polls were released affirming this fact. Rasmussen couldn't have that, so they conducted a quickie poll on repeal. Here's what the chart above looks like with Rasmussen results included:
Aggregated results of all polls, including automated telephone polls (Rasmussen and PPP)
As Ezra Klein notes, support for the law hasn't been this high and trending upward since President Obama's speech in September, 2009. Therefore, it was incumbent upon Rasmussen to set to the task of shifting the trend and the narrative to the Republicans' advantage.
And there you have it: lies, damn lies and statistics.
If the dustup between Daily Kos and Research 2000 didn't convince everyone to be a bit skeptical of polls which consistently support one position or another, this should seal the deal. Rasmussen isn't trying to inform, they're trying to actually change the story to one that benefits Republicans. They're blatant, they're shameless, and they're wrong.
The problem with polls now days is not only is Rasmussen primarily polling republiturds on republiturd issues
But even in the Gallup poll they say the polls are pointing away from Democrats toward republiturds for the 2010 mid-term elections
Which may be true enough since Democrats have control of Congress, and people typically vote against the party who has the presidency in mid-term elections
And they're the incumbants, and there seems to be an anti-incumbancy mood in the country,
But I think the numbers are being skewed by self-described independents who are actually teabaggers who are no more likely to vote for a Democrat than any other republican.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
can be skewed to get the results they want by polling certain demographics. I no longer trust any of them.
I am an older voter (over 55). I am polled frequently, so much so, that I can tell by the caller-ID when it is a polling call.
When Schwarzenegger was running for re-election, we were getting polling-calls that ONLY wanted the oldest Male in the house. They didn't want a female's response to those polls. One time I pretended to be male...I don't think I really fooled him...
(I have fun with these guys.)
I recall a few years back, a right-wing newspaper called the National Post, founded by Conrad Black, who is now in a US detention facility after having been convicted of fraud related charges, published a poll that seemed to indicate that the overwhelming majority of Canadians wanted a return to private insurance rather than our single payer system.
The poll was patently fraudulent, obtained through the use of a deceitful question. Most of our politicians were wise enough to realize it, so none of them, even the right-wingers, actually came out to advocate the dissollution of our universal medicare system.
Reslugs are born liars.
But once they realize the conundrum of only advocating the interests of 1% of the population but having to have the support of an additional 50% to win elections, they turn to lying in all its overt and covert forms pretty quickly.
So my choice is between spineless and evil?
we see a MSNBC/Wall Street Journal poll. I could trust it if Rachel, Keith or Ed Schultz were the ones that drafted the questions but anything that involves the Wall Street Journal is not to be trusted.
are genetically incapable of lying, eh?
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
...just intellectually.
But his telephone "polls" on his show are variants of "Have Republicans stopped beating your wife yet?" questions, and you're only allowed to call "yes" or "no" numbers to respond.
[I may just have stuffed cotton for a brain, but even I know this is just wrong...]
Are rhumba panties
What women fart in?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Off topic, but if you find the answer, let us know...
Someone named bush should know
And putz?
http://www.cluthas-cave.com/web_images/Athame...
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://ww...
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Point 1 - Rasmussen polls are wrong and they're liars.
"Rasmussen Polls: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics"
Point 2 - Other polls show the opposite and they're right.
"FACT: Support for the health care reform law is INCREASING.
Last week several polls were released affirming this fact."
Point 3 - Polls cannot be trusted.
"If the dustup between Daily Kos and Research 2000 didn't
convince everyone to be a bit skeptical of polls which consistently support one position or another, this should seal the deal."
Talk about thought gymnastics...
when twisted tightly around an unpunctured thought balloon.
(Can you believe I haven't heard back from BP's "Anybody Got Any Ideas?" website?)
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
What you point out is a completely valid syllogism.
Point 1: A, not B, is true
Point 2: B, not A, is true
Point 3: Both A and B cannot be true. So, either A or B is false, or both A and B are false
There is no 'thought gymnastics' here at all.
and their Chicom wannabes care about gymnastics anyway.
Viva Espana. Viva el Generalissimo.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Point 1: Start by saying Poll A is not true
because
Point 2: Polls B, C and D are somehow FACTS
followed by
Point 3: You can't trust Polls
By stating that Poll A is not true, but Polls B, C, and D are FACTS, and summarizing the post with you can't trust Polls, is the opposite of logic. I agree with your Point 3 that both A and B cannot be true. But that was not the post. The post was Poll A is wrong, Polls B, C and D are FACTS, and you cannot trust Polls.
If you argue that you can't trust Polls, then you cannot reference a Poll you agree with to make your case that a Poll you disagree with is wrong. That is logic.
Where do you get "Poll A is not true, but Polls B, C, and D are FACTS?"
karoli simply points out that Rasmussen's own data point to an increase in approval, which has been replicated in other polls (B, C, and D, as it were). The conclusion is that Rasmussen is burrying the lead in their own and other's data: approval for health reform is INCREASING. Their own data point to the same trend, but they've chosen to ignore it.
So, I'll try this again:
Point 1: A, not B, is true (Many more disapprove than approve [even though, parenthetically, approval numbers are rising])
Point 2: B, not A, is true (Approval is increasing)
Point 3: Both A and B cannot be true. So, either A or B is false, or both A and B are false (Rasmussen has selectively interpreted their data by collapsing over time rather than interpreting the trend)
I'm sorry but that's deductive logic, plain and simple.
I get "Poll A is not true, but Polls B, C and D are FACTS" by the following:
Title of post is "Rasmussen Polls: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics" hence implying that the Rasmussen poll is a Lie, IE Poll A is not true.
Next I quoted from the post the following:
"FACT: Support for the health care reform law is INCREASING.
Last week several polls were released affirming this fact." IE Polls B, C, and D are FACTS. I hope that clears it up for you.
And finally, I quote from the post again that in the final paragraph:
"If the dustup between Daily Kos and Research 2000 didn't
convince everyone to be a bit skeptical of polls which consistently support one position or another, this should seal the deal."
It is illogical to call out one poll as a lie, others as facts, while at the same time hold the belief that polls cannot be trusted. Surely you can see the gymnastics in that.
I see what you're saying, and that makes sense.
Our difference is that I don't read the title quite so literally. In my reading, the implication is that Rasmussen's interpretation is flawed, hence a "lie" of sorts, and not that the entire poll is a lie. Statistics can be "true" in method, but "false" in interpretation. I read karoli's post as an argument for the latter, as evidence by the fact that other polls uncover the same trend that Rasmussen chooses to ignore.
crooks and liars!
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. ~ Abraham Lincoln
unbiased and consistent over time is the Kaiser Family Foundation poll which focuses on health care policy and issues.
Their June Poll shows a favorable view for the Health Care Reform Law held by 48% of the public, while 41% have an unfavorable view. Among those with an unfavorable view, 66% favor immediate repeal, which is 27% of the overall sample.
http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/8082.cfm
* The Kaiser Poll is not affiliated with either Kaiser Permanente or Kaiser Soze to my knowledge.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
is drill down on the "unfavorable" category. I would like to know what percentage of those who answered "unfavorable" feel the law was too watered down. Meaning, do they not like it because it contains mandates but lacks a public option? For instance, I happen to have an unfavorable view of the health care reform legislation, but I would be tempted to answer "favorable" in order to indicate my support for health care reform in general. The way it is now, it's too much like a "have you stopped beating your wife" question.
Real polling services are embarassed by Rasmussen's obvious slanted, pro-Republican push polling methods.
If it were not for Rasmussen's ridiculous level of pro-Republican bias, Real Clear Politics' "RCP Average Poll Ragings" would almost never show so much as a fractional trend toward Republican candidates and office holders.
RCP relies heavily on Rasmussen to make their pro-Republican, anti-Democrat case for them. They cite them and factor their pro-Republican mis-conclusions into their "averages" about every third entry.
Look at Rasmussen's polling on Obama --
7/06/10 Rasmussen 45.0 to 54.0 on approval
7/06/10 Gallup 44.0 to 46.0 approval
6/30/10 Fox News 47.0 to 45.0 approval...
Rasmussen's numbers are soooo out of wack... they make FOX News look sane...
Rasmussen was started up by three Republicans. I don't remember their names and it is no longer available on their website...that takes a "Premium Login" to access that information. They don't even allow the public to know in what city their corporate headquarters is located. Hum.... What are they hiding???
Again, the problem is binary questions. Approval or disapproval. Obama is a centrist, so he is inevitably going to get disapproval from both sides. He certainly is getting disapproval from me right now, but I'm certainly not looking to the Republicans for an alternative.
This worked a little better when Bush was in office because he governed very much from one end of the political spectrum. Then again, his stance on immigration, and his wild spending started playing havoc with that also. (I suspect these subjects gave conservatives an excuse to express disapproval of such an obviously incompetent boob, but can't prove it quantitatively.)
If you are going to pay attention to polls, give credence only to specifically directed questions, and pay attention to how those questions are worded...and how the sampling was done...and to the weighing of responses and....well you get the idea.
So my choice is between spineless and evil?
"Just 21% believe that Republican officeholders have done a good job representing Republican values."
New data out of Gallup suggests that premise isn't right, as nearly seven in 10 tea party supporters describe themselves as "conservative Republicans."
All told, nearly 80 percent of tea party supporters describe themselves as Republicans, while 15 percent say they are Democrats and just six percent are, in their own minds, "pure independents."
Code word = Liberty √ aka Religious liberty. Why should they be forced to pay for health-care, when our sickness is part of gods special purpose?
Study the symptoms not the virus...
Please accept my congratualtions to whomever persons helped in analyzing these Rasumussen (FoxNews)polls.
I know it takes time, effort, and analytical skills to dissect these false representations of political talking points.
MediaMattes does a fantastic job, but the work of proof-reading polling data from political operatives is consuming and rarely attempted. Certainly the speed and velocity of the output of false information is exponentially greater than the meager resources available to analyze and certify.
Keep up the good work.
The graph looks like a Christian "fish" symbol that's been bitten by a shark! I wonder if that means something...
[I may just have stuffed cotton for a brain, but even I know this is just wrong...]
Polls regularly show that the public would like more news, documentaries, and other information, and less sex, violence, and other entertainment, even as they do listen to and watch the latter. There is little reason to believe that they would not like to understand why they are working harder with stagnant or declining incomes, have inadequate medical care at high costs, and what is being done in their name all over the world. If they are not getting much information on these topics, the propaganda model can explain why: the sovereigns who control the media choose not to offer such material.
The force of anti-communist ideology has possibly weakened with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the virtual disappearance of socialist movements across the globe, but this is easily offset by the greater ideological force of the belief in the “miracle of the market” (Reagan). The triumph of capitalism and the increasing power of those with an interest in privatization and market rule have strengthened the grip of market ideology, at least among the elite, so that regardless of evidence, markets are assumed to be benevolent and even democratic (“market populism” in Thomas Frank's phrase) and nonmarket mechanisms are suspect, although exceptions are allowed when private firms need subsidies, bailouts, and government help in doing business abroad.
When the Soviet economy stagnated in the 1980s, it was attributed to the absence of markets; when capitalist Russia disintegrated in the 1990s, this was blamed not on the now ruling market but on politicians' and workers' failure to let markets work their magic. --"Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media"
Study the symptoms not the virus...
It's from "Yes Minister", a delightful British sitcom from forty years ago, but it still applies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fszM11k-Zjk
[I may just have stuffed cotton for a brain, but even I know this is just wrong...]
I can't trust a poll that seems to fudge the numbers on the direct opposite of what all the other polls. I also challenge the accuracy of the media claiming that it was the most accurate in the end of elections. If this is true than I think that their is a good possibility that a fair amount of cheating was happening.
By the time election day arrives, there are very few dramatic out-liers among the major polling services. That's why "Dewey Defeats Truman!" headlines made history. Any major polling service getting it wrong by then is very, very rare. All Rasmussen has to do is conduct more legitimate methodology polling on a large scale starting around October 20th to fall in line among "the most accurate".
For all those months leading up to the last few weeks before election day, Rasmussen is generally the out-lier from the rest of the major polling services, clearly displaying their political bias.
It is far more logical to assume Rasmussen finally falls in line in terms of legitimate methodology along with the rest of the polling services in those last few weeks rather than the other way around.
Comments are closed on this entry