I went over to Drudge to look for what I'd seen, and I didn't find that but I found:
Under oath, Edwards pollster admits polls were 'propaganda'...And here's what I remember seeing this morning that brought on my pollemic: "New CNN/ORC poll less skewed for Barack Obama than the previous one."
POLL: Plurality of Americans believe POLLS biased for Obama...
The survey, that includes a smaller eight percent over-sample of Democratic voters, has Obama leading by a 49 percent to 47 percent edge....See? I think they adjust the skew to get the result that suits the propaganda purpose, and they're temporarily making the race look tight to make the debate seem super-important. (That's good for CNN's ratings, so there's a commercial, nonpolitical reason too for poll fakery.) Then they can make a show of breaking the news that Obama got big debate bounce.
The news here is not that this poll is slightly skewed, but compared to the 15.4 percent skewed in favor of the Democrats in the controversial September 10 CNN/ORC poll, this latest one is based on a far less skewed sample.
IN THE COMMENTS: EMD said...
Pollcats?
Polltergeists?
Skewballs?
पोस्ट्स
१४० टिप्पण्या:
realists
There is a massive conspiracy among all the pollsters to make it seem like Romney is losing.
The earth isn't getting warmer.
Evolution didn't happen.
Obama sent guns to Mexico in order to engineer some shootings so he could repeal the Second Amendment.
The HPV vaccine makes people retarded.
Oh, I forgot,
There is a massive conspiracy among all the pollsters to make it seem like Romney isn't losing even though he really is.
The way I read the Edwards article, the pollster cherry-picked the results, it wasn't a case of skewing the polls themselves as you seem to believe.
Bottomline: pollsters are commercial enterprises and subject to competition, which must make their results unimpeachable.
A little background here, the whole birther controversy was started by a democrat in PA filing the first lawsuit to have Obama disclose his actual birth certificate. Just like Al Gore with Willie Horton.
Are the polls skewed? Yes. Of that there is no doubt. The real question is are they skewed with an intent or are they skewed based on faulty assumptions?
Althouse--have you checked in the mirror to see if there is frothy, white foam in the corners of your mouth? Really.
I wonder how skewed Barry's internal polls are? I mean if one pollster felt pressure to lie to that wimp Edwards, imagine the pressure on someone to lie to Barry and his Chicago thugs.
Lies, damned lies and polls.
Republican?
Andy R. said...
Oh, I forgot,
There is a massive conspiracy among all the pollsters to make it seem like Romney isn't losing even though he really is.
10/2/12 11:45 AM
Give us a preview of how you are going to explain Obama's inexplicable loss the day after the election.
"Bottomline: pollsters are commercial enterprises and subject to competition, which must make their results unimpeachable."
Sorry, bullshit on this one. Pollsters want to keep selling their products and if that means pleasing the customer by skewing the results they most certainly will. Oh they will be careful about it, but it's fantasy that they are somehow better than that.
My non-smartass entry is "scatistician."
They're saying it's close right in advance of the debate so they can say, after the debate, that Obama went up. He won the debate.
J. Bruce Ismay cabled a marconigram to NYC giving a false (late) ETA to the White Star offices the day before the disaster so that he could deliberately beat the expectations. Then he kept the pedal to metal to beat the phony date. History was unkind.
I don't think the polls are skewed. I just weep for a country that thinks the current incompetent in the White House deserves an encore.
I vote for "poller bears".
I am shocked, shocked, that our media would do something this dishonest. lol
If your audience were chem savvy I'd suggest the term Umpolling derived from the German word Umpolung.
I prefer the term "poll lackies."
Skeptic. It has acquired a derogatory connotation in the age of enlightenment.
It is most commonly associated with the Global Warming redistribution scheme, but it remains perfectly suitable to describe individuals who question other inconvenient truths.
"perceptive"
Andy R. said...
The HPV vaccine makes people retarded.
How many doses did they give you?
"scatistician Heh. I like that.
How about poll dancer?
Clearly the "customer" is not the average person and certainly not independent polling experts. The customers are generally the media which is undoubtably in the tank for Obama.
Skew hard the polling (loser Romney-Winner Obama) to support the journalistic story (loser Romney-Winner Obama). They can tighten things up the closer they get to the election. Win Win
This is an easy call and very likely to work
What would it take to get today's Republican Party to accept the reality of the world we live in?
Even without a propaganda purpose, news organizations still have a vested interest in distorting polls to make races more interesting to viewers -- just like sports networks have a vested interest in making opponents in a football game seem more evenly matched.
I hear Mitt has some debate ZINGERS all lined up though that will even up the polls. Can't wait!
"I flew in all the way from Boston and boy are my arms TIRED!"
Will Andy R be poll sitting? All this poll manipulation and ego stroking is giving POTUS an election.
I'd propose pollpaganda
I hear Mitt has some debate ZINGERS all lined up though that will even up the polls. Can't wait!
Get Your Zingers On
What would it take to get today's Republican Party to accept the reality of the world we live in?
Andy, you are just a fucking stupid kid.
What would it take to get today's Republican Party to accept the reality of the world we live in?
The reality in which we are $16 trillion in debt, the Fed is buying 70% of our debt and no level of taxation that doesn't halt economic growth can begin to whittle that burden down?
I hear Mitt has some debate ZINGERS all lined up though that will even up the polls. Can't wait!
Thanks for reprising Obama's campaign speech last night, garage.
Vodkapundit:
In North Carolina, Empty Chair has moved into a dead heat with Mitt Romney — if you assume, as PPP does, that the President can generate 25% more Democrat voters there than he did in 2008.
That swing-state poll WaPo ran above the fold yesterday? Their sample was just 161 voters spread across eight states. I wouldn’t publish a poll of my four-member family with a sample that small, yet WaPo thought it was the story of the day.
Nationally, CNN manages to get Obama up to +3, by sampling Democrats +9. That’s absurd on the face of it, since the same poll shows Romney winning indies.
Shameful stuff from the Complicit Media.
Good to see you got the talking point, Garage. Romney is preparing "zingers" is a good thing to talk about today, to make it easier to dismiss any pointed criticism of Obama that he may make in the debate.
The reality in which we are $16 trillion in debt
Speaking of Republicans having a hard time with reality. There is even a helpful chart if you're not in the mood for reading.
Pollcats?
Polltergeists?
Skewballs?
Wanting to get off some zingers, or one liners, that make the news cycle makes sense I guess. But why on earth would you announce it ahead of time? Romney's campaign is just painfully dumb sometimes.
Andy R. said...
Oh, I forgot,
There is a massive conspiracy among all the pollsters to make it seem like Romney isn't losing even though he really is.
10/2/12 11:45 AM
Give us a preview of how you are going to explain Obama's inexplicable loss the day after the election.
Racism.
And homophobia.
But mainly RACISM!
Andy R
Take 5 min.,go over to an economics site like ZeroHedge.com. You don't even have to bother reading the articles, just checkout the graphs. Then I'll discuss reality with you.
Polls? Just ask President Kerry about the accuracy polls.
Andy R. said...
What would it take to get today's Republican Party to accept the reality of the world we live in?
Replacing a few more of the establishment Republicans with tea partiers would be a good start.
Andy R. said...
Speaking of Republicans having a hard time with reality. There is even a helpful chart if you're not in the mood for reading.
Hysterical.
You could not begin to explain what goes into such a silly chart, nor can you defend it.
But remember, you live in "reality"
Or something.
I love watching the little queer pretend things such as:
There is no single policy we have passed that has added as much to the debt, or that is projected to add as much to the debt in the future, as the Bush tax cuts,
constitute "reality"
If the little queer knew that reality was actually that the single policy driving the debt is Medicare which has expenditures 10 times larger than even the most optimistic "cost" of the Bush tax cuts, the little queer probably wouldn't know what to do.
So the little queer will pretend.
Life is simplier that way.
There is even a helpful chart if you're not in the mood for reading.
Which does nothing to invalidate my comment.
Clearly, it's 'weighter' or 'sampler'...since the question isn't about the legitimacy of the responses of those polled, but how the selection of pollees was chosen.
A Pollen Press?
I didn't know what this was until the ending.
Honest.
Oh, and it is funny that the little chart doesn't seem to factor in that revenues went up after the Bush tax cuts were fully enacted.
I guess that is just some sort of oversight.
"What's the birther/truther word for those who think political polls have become, basically, propaganda?"
There are two only two possibilities: "unskewer," or "poll birther/truther." Let me explain.
The only intelligible argument for why the polls are systematically biased for Obama is that they are "oversampling" Democrats. If you actually believe that argument -- which is in fact bogus -- then you ought to believe that the actual state of the race is reflected at unskewedpolls.com, which has Romney ahead by a healthy margin. If so, you are an "unskewer."
If, on the other hand, you recognize unskewedpolls.com for the absurdity that it is, then you do not have an intelligible argument for why the polls are skewed. Your only reason for believing they are "propaganda" is based on a pungent brew of paranoia and stupidity, much like the birthers and truthers. In which case you are a "poll birther/truther."
Andy R. said...
There is a massive conspiracy among all the pollsters to make it seem like Romney is losing.
Nice strawman you got going there.
But, since you're like super duper knowledgeable about polls and stuff, why don't you tell us the value of polls which assume 8% more Democrats than Republicans are going to turnout and vote in November?
Why, it is almost as if you attacking strawmen allows you to avoid those questions or something.
I'm not the first to make this comment, but 'Poll Cats' is what first came to my mind.
(Proud to be a Poll Cat.)
is that they are "oversampling" Democrats. If you actually believe that argument -- which is in fact bogus
Actually, your statement is bogus and frankly, retarded.
Skewpie Polls?
@Andy "... accept the reality of the world we live in?"
You mean like accepting the reality children murdered with guns from Obama? Rather jarring pictures from Univision. Curious as when democrats like you will admit the reality of "Executive Privilege" to hide the bodies of kids you helped murder.
What about Obama pushing for a law to notify workers of impending layoffs. And now, as President, asking companies to break that same law cause it hurts your election chances. And offering to use taxpayer dollars to pay for the legal costs.
What a man you love and adore. Murder, guns, executive privilege, and lies.
Welcome to reality.
Andy R.
How does a tax cut create debt?
Spending creates debts. Anyone who says differently is lying and/or stupid.
Why would you seek a pejorative nickname for those people (like me, and perhaps like you yourself) who've correctly deduced that the polls are being slanted, Professor Althouse?
What's needed is a pejorative nickname for those who haven't figured that out yet. "Sheep" would fit, but it's a bit obvious.
Andy R. said...
What would it take to get today's Republican Party to accept the reality of the world we live in?
You mean the "reality" where you pretend that Obama's policy & security failures didn't lead to a dead Ambassador?
Or the "reality" where you pretend that raising taxes on those making over $250,000 reduces the debt?
Or the "reality" where you pretend that Obamacare hasn't led to the increases in health insurance premiums?
Pollprogandists make those. It is pollproganda.
Trey
If, on the other hand, you recognize unskewedpolls.com for the absurdity that it is, then you do not have an intelligible argument for why the polls are skewed. Your only reason for believing they are "propaganda" is based on a pungent brew of paranoia and stupidity, much like the birthers and truthers. In which case you are a "poll birther/truther."
A more clear example of stamping one's feet on the floor in impotent rage would be hard to find.
Pole dancers
You don't know whether to admire them or pity them.
There is a massive conspiracy among all the pollsters to make it seem like Romney is losing.
Ah, actually the polls show the race as being close. If the actual voters on November 6th (as opposed to hypothetical voters in late September/early October) skew as far Democrat as the pollsters show, then I suspect that it really will be that close. But that's not the way to bet from where I sit.
The earth isn't getting warmer.
Since the peak of 1998 the global mean temperature has been pretty constant; whatever warming there is happens to be down in the hundredths of a degree. The sole reason for fearing global warming was Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph, which was debunked decades ago.
Evolution didn't happen.
Well, not in your case it appears.
Obama sent guns to Mexico in order to engineer some shootings so he could repeal the Second Amendment.
Actually it was Holder, who has passed Nixon's Mitchell and is now challenging Wilson's Palmer for the title of worst Attorney General of all time. And if you can figure out any reason other than an attempt to build up a case for stiffer gun laws in contravention of Heller I'd like to hear it.
The HPV vaccine makes people retarded
Actually, the notion that there is a correlation between vaccines and autism is a liberal meme that Michele Bachmann picked up to attack Rick Perry, to her shame and humiliation.
An honest liberal might admit that Rick Perry's move to require HPV vaccinations in Texas was honorable. But we'll never know because, like the Dodo bird and passenger pigeons, honest liberals went extinct years ago.
You can always spend the money you save, you can't save the money you spent.
Polliana's, like Pollyanna in the books.
"Pollyanna's philosophy of life centers on what she calls 'The Glad Game', an optimistic attitude she learned from her father. The game consists of finding something to be glad about in every situation."
I for one am glad that CNN is only oversampling by 15.4%, not 25%, which would mean Mr. Obama would REALLY be ahead.
Interestingly enough Ezra Klein doesn't mention that in 2008, Federal outlays were 2,524,000,000. In 2011 outlays exceeded $3.6 trillion. Further, revenue in 2008 was $2.5 trillion and in 2011 2.3 trillion so roughly $220 billion less yet Obama is spending almost 3/4 of a trillion more than in 2008. Thats after TARP and a pullout from Iraq.
Klein is a dishonest partisan hack. That's a reality too.
Andy and I disagree on much, only occasionally do we agree, but I wish the rhetoric were above calling him a name about sexual orientation. That is quite uncalled for in a discussion of ideas.
Trey
I suggest "Pollergeists."
I think every single pollster is trying to make this a boring race. Surely that's in their best interests.
Ann said:
" . . . in advance of the polls . . ."
I think you mean in advance of the debates.
Andy R. said...
What would it take to get today's Republican Party to accept the reality of the world we live in?
10/2/12 12:08 PM
Fascinating comment from a man whose worldview is a funhouse mirror.
Correction, 2008 outlays were $2.9 trillion. In 2011 outlays were $3.6 trillion.
"Why would you seek a pejorative nickname for those people (like me, and perhaps like you yourself) who've correctly deduced that the polls are being slanted, Professor Althouse?"
Beldar, what do you have against bears?
TMink said...
Andy and I disagree on much, only occasionally do we agree, but I wish the rhetoric were above calling him a name about sexual orientation. That is quite uncalled for in a discussion of ideas.
Trey
I'll second that!
Mac
TMink said...
Andy and I disagree on much, only occasionally do we agree, but I wish the rhetoric were above calling him a name about sexual orientation. That is quite uncalled for in a discussion of ideas.
I'll second that.
I was posting at the same time as McTriumph. Okay then, I'll third it.
Since the peak of 1998 the global mean temperature has been pretty constant; whatever warming there is happens to be down in the hundredths of a degree.
1998 was a very strong El Nino year, and that explains a lot of the warmth that year. I read an excellent analysis of warming earlier this year that breaks years into El Nino Years, La Nina Years, Neither Years, and it did a very cool temperature analysis on those years individually. And it showed very interestingly warming years.
(Digs around). Ah. Here.
Andy and I disagree on much, only occasionally do we agree, but I wish the rhetoric were above calling him a name about sexual orientation.
Remind me again, is this the same Andy who refers to proper who oppose same sex marriage as bigots?
Putz Poll
A*hole poll
Troll Poll
Oh come on people. Nobody came up with Poll Smokers?
Shame on all of you.
I read somewhere the other day that only 9% or so of people agree to participate in polls.
If that's true, how can any poll have good data? How can it not be entirely dependent on polling only the sorts of people who don't hang up on you?
Even if only 50% of eligible voters vote, that's still means that almost everyone who *does* vote is a no-poll-taker.
I pretty much told all of you that the polls aren't real and they are being made up as they go along. Now you are seeing it for what it is. All bullshit.
Pollution.
Realists?
Until Rasmussen screws up, I'm trusting his polls.
Rush appears to have fell for the poll narrative the the race is tightening...
Althouse ahead of the curb!
ZOMG! Republicans Are Stealing Your Ladyparts Polleramastrafarian.
Good one AllenS.
So long as Andy isn't hypocritically dissing the entire christian community for the actions of a few, we all ought to treat his views with the respect they deserve.
But when he starts using the same tactics and techniques he claims to abhor against a diverse group of people (Christians), based on the actions of a few, I think it's fair game to use whatever stereotype and slurs that help him to get the point.
Nobody came up with Poll Smokers?
Is that what is called?
See video @ 12:24
Poll-pagandists.
I, too, like scatisticians.
There is a massive conspiracy among all the pollsters to make it seem like Romney is losing.
The earth isn't getting warmer.
Evolution didn't happen.
Obama sent guns to Mexico in order to engineer some shootings so he could repeal the Second Amendment.
The HPV vaccine makes people retarded.
Homosexuals didn't make HIV endemic in the US because they either couldn't keep it zipped or use condoms.
Astro said...
I'm not the first to make this comment, but 'Poll Cats' is what first came to my mind.
How about LOLPOLCATS?
How many people refuse to answer polls because they get phone calls pretending to be polls that include such statements as "Did you know Eric Hovde once..." whatever sounds bad.
So you say, "Sure, I'll answer some questions about the election," and what you've agreed to do, you find out, is listen to someone ask questions that are really statements that belong on campaign ads.
So you say no from then on.
Are we up to fourth or fifth now? Whatever it is, I Xth it.
Fprawl 10/2/12 12:33 PM
Pollyana was my first thought, too. How about Pollines?
My vote is for "skewballs" from EMD. Love it.
@MadMan, your article is interesting, but so many allegedly reputable climate scientists have been caught cherry-picking their data that I'd like to be certain about the raw data before I drew any conclusions.
At any rate the charts show a general upward trend, but the also show that global temperature rise has been on the order of 6 tenths of a degree over 40+ years. Which works out to 0.015 degrees annually (i.e., the hundredths of a degree that I stipulate). Note that the charts do do not show the units of the ordinate. I'm guessing that they're in degrees Fahrenheit.
@Synova I hang up on pollsters. I don't have the time to listen to push polls either.
Pollshit.
Pollaver.
Delusional hacks?
Polliticians.
9 percent response rates seem pretty bad. Polls that over sample D's by upwards of +10 are ridiculous. I don't even know how to read the polls any more.
I suggest The Pollice.
I love watching the little queer pretend things...
Jay - Shut the fuck up.
Colonel asked "is this the same Andy who refers to proper who oppose same sex marriage as bigots?"
Perhaps! And I am one of those so called bigots! But I stand by my statement. Using racial or sexual slurs demeans the conversation IMHO.
Trey
Note that the charts do do not show the units of the ordinate. I'm guessing that they're in degrees Fahrenheit.
The text uses Celsius. I'd be very surprised if the chart units were Fahrenheit.
pollution
Poll-u-shun
Pollooters
The Roly Poll-ie Man?
Here comes the roly poly man and he's singing songs of love,
Roly poly, roly poly, roly poly, poly he sang.
Hurdy gurdy, hurdy gurdy, hurdy gurdy, gurdy he sang,
Hurdy gurdy, hurdy gurdy, hurdy gurdy, gurdy he sang?
poll-vaulters.
poll-vaulters.
Sample Minds. The Sample-Minded.
Polltergeists
Pollmics?
What's got Andy all revved up today?
He find out he's gay or something?
Pole lackies.
Poll baggers
A Poll Vault Democracy Assault
To Beget a Judgment by Default
A Poll-ish Somersault
Who the Hell's John Galt?
Insults Adults to Catapult a Cult.
Some researchers in the 1980s determined that Democrats (much more than Republicans) stay home if their candidate is behind. Republicans see it as their civic duty and vote no matter what the polls say. Conversely, Democrats (much more than Republicans) are more likely to go to vote if they think their candidate is going to win in a landslide. They see it as being part of history. Kos send around "confidential" early exit polling results--fake ones--that showed Kerry winning 3 or 4 to 1 on election day 2004--even in heavily Repub. areas. Those emails went to JournoListers and were made to look as if a mistake had been made--sent to all instead of a single person at the polling company. It didn't work, but I suspect the election was closer than it would have been.
Subsequent research studies still back up the original claims.
The media is doing their job as Democrats. Obama is significantly behind as evidenced by emergency action by George Soros and judges striking down voter ID laws. With 70+% of Americans wanting picture IDs used, judges who have to face re-election in the future won't fare well.
At first I thought Poll Bear was PERFECT, leaving those that trusted polls in the Poll Bull camp.
That might get some more people to at least THINK about the economy. You know, the economy? The one that's going, going down so deep, it will soon need SCUBA equipment?
Then, on second thought, I realized that there are way too many people out there who would visualize those polar bears who supposedly are going hungry due to climate change.
"Awwwwwwwwwww ...
How can you care about the economy when there are dying polar bears?"
Leftists--so eager to get those manmade climate change taxes without borders are now saying that more than 5 million people a year die from climate-change-related problems.
Of course, the Lefties also want to reduce the Earth's population to a sustainable 1.5 billion. That means that 5.5 billion have to die for their dream to come true. Fuck every one of them with the biggest pole you can find.
Biden is going around saying that the middle class has been hammered at every turn in the last four years. Damn those in power!
Listen to him. Throw out every one of them.
Polltroons?
Andy R. said...
Oh, I forgot,
There is a massive conspiracy among all the pollsters to make it seem like Romney isn't losing even though he really is.
Yeah, Ras now has the gap closed to 1.
And, off Drudge:
NFL BIGS GO ROMNEY...
Political donations favor GOP 3-1...
POLL: Doctors choose Romney...
What would it take to get today's Republican Party to accept the reality of the world we live in?
You mean the one where we're out of money and looking like the Weimar Republic?
The one where our foreign policy is a freaking disaster we didn't pull our people out of Libya because we knew an attack was coming?
(is it me or does Hillary look like she's using arsenic face powder?)
The one where Zero and Holder ought to be tried in the Hague for the murders of 16 Mexican teenagers?
(and take a long, hard look at the picture in the player; that's your Messiah's doing)
That's the one Republicans live in.
Democrats are in de Nile.
Someone please explain to me why we need a term of abuse for those who can see that the polls are being skewed?
How about "realists" as in the first comment?
Professor?
70% of Obama's 16 million Tweeter followers may be fake, but they all just Tweeted that Barack Obama wiped the floor with Mitt in the first debate.
You can't argue with that, can you?
Obama is significantly behind...
A glimpse of life inside the bubble!
A glimpse of life inside the bubble!
A glimpse of life with your head up Marx's ass.
Poll dancers, Pollsheviks, leg pollers.
A glimpse of life with your head up Marx's ass.
Because anyone who disagrees with your opinion must be a Marxist!
That'll teach me to accuse you of being delusional.
Poll weevils.
Appolled.
My first thought — I just blurted it out loud — was: They're saying it's close right in advance of the debate so they can say, after the debate, that Obama went up. He won the debate.
Wow. Is that really how you think? (Must be, since you wrote it.)
It's weird how easily you've turned into a conspiracy theorist. Aren't you ashamed?
I'm definitely becoming glad I didn't finish college, so I never got subjected to professors, because you guys are really, really out there. (I now read Reynolds with my mouth hanging open, he's so biased and dishonest.) I know you've turned the phrase "But you, a law professor!" into a joke, but the real joke is how little respect you have for the title.
I mean, you are openly telegraphing that you're nuts.
What is wrong with you, Ann?
"70% of Obama's 16 million Tweeter followers may be fake, but they all just Tweeted that Barack Obama wiped the floor with Mitt in the first debate.
You can't argue with that, can you?"
I'm just blond enough that I thought... "I missed the debate?"
Also, seriously they did just tweet that?
Poll Dancers!
similar professions . . .
Because anyone who disagrees with your opinion must be a Marxist!
No, because anyone who always spouts the Democrat Party line--which is in lockstep with Marxism-- is a Marxist.
You are probably too stupid to even realize it. Revel in your "useful idiot" status!
Also, seriously they did just tweet that?
I wouldn't be suprised.
#BarackObamaIsAwesome
Skepti-poll.
Denis Navratil had a nice one with
"Pollsheviks."
We may have to use all of them, like we do with Elizabeth Warren's "indian" names. They--like she--are too big an insult to the American way to confine ourselves to just one.
No, because anyone who always spouts the Democrat Party line--which is in lockstep with Marxism-- is a Marxist.
Confirmed: Darrell is delusional. And an idiot.
Pollshitters
Wingnuts imagined there was a massive conspiracy in 1980 to make it seem like Reagan was losing to Carter. This continued until after election day when Carter won. Oh, wait....
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा