Is There a Conspiracy in the Latest Polls?

[louis c]

I posted a link in which Scott Rasmussen, of Rasmussen Reports debunked the Time Magazine poll and criticized its methodology. Later in the day, I saw another post by another DUer which discovered the same mistake in the Newsweek poll. Initially, I thought it was a dupe.

As it turns out, both polls used the same, obvious incorrect data, which skews the numbers heavily in favor of the President. I can't believe that it is a coincidence and that both of these polls made the same mistake, and came out with nearly identical results. If you look at the DU links below, you will probably come to the same conclusion. Check it out.



Link to Discussion and information on Newsweek Poll

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x749430#749430

Link to Discussion and information on Time Magazine Poll

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x747008#747008

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. I think that this is a good reason

never to trust polls. I never have, because I know how easy it is to create a poll so that it will show whatever you want it to show.

[Frodo]

2. That's got to be a first. Rassmussen critizing another polls methodology?

Newsweek and Time both (intentionally or not) overstate leads and often show the biggest gap for each candidate.

But Rasmussen is the one doing automated polling.


That having been said. Newsweek and Time didn't use "the same data". And it's interesting to note that the SAME incorrect overbalancing was greeted here as the CORRECT result when it showed Kerry up big.

[wurzel]

3. And by almost exactly the same amount. It is total garbage.

[louis c]

4. Not by me.

You can say what you will, but I follow Rasmussen and Zogby, and strike a balance in between.

There is no way this is 11 points Bush. I lived through the 1972 election, and if those numbers from Time and Newsweek are to be believed, Kerry is in McGovern territory.

I never thought Kerry could win this by more than 3 or 4 points, or the President could, either.

Even those numbers may be too wide.

[stewert]

6. Frodo

Frodo wrote:

And it's interesting to note that the SAME incorrect overbalancing was greeted here as the CORRECT result when it showed Kerry up big.

That's a pretty blanket statement when you have 50,000 members, most Democrats I know do not believe any of these polls except maybe Zogby.

I do not (and have not ever) fully trusted any poll put out by any media outlet or polling company.

I somewhat trust the zogby polls, but that's about it. I do not think you can just say everyone here believed the polls when Kerry had a big lead.

[Frodo]

7. My observation has been

that we tend to belive polls that tell us what we want to hear.

[louis c]

10. When the LA Times Poll

came out with Kerry up about 9 points, Rasmussen explained the problem and declared the Kerry lead about 2 points

Now, he points out that the 11 point Bush lead in the Times poll is really only about 3 points, for the same reasons.

I believed him then, and I believe him now.

Kerry has fallen behind, but by a margin that can easily be made up.

the convention bounces were about 3 points each, and this election will settle into a dead heat with a month to go.

[Frodo]

19. I agree with you up to that last point.

It's wishful thinking to look at the two conventions and say the bounce was the same. It wasn't. The highest bounce recorded for Kerry looks a lot like the lowest bounce (so far) for Bush, but that's not the same.

I'll wait for a few of the better polls to come out before saying exactly what I think the "bounce" was (it sure wasn't double digits).

[louis c]

20. I'll trust

a mixture of Rasmussen and Zogby, which give me those numbers.

I just feel more comfortable with daily tracking than with large corporate media polls.

[Frodo]

21. Then perhaps it's your math I disagree with.

Zogby showed a seven point bounce from their last pre-convention poll to their current poll

Rasmussen was three to four points.


For the Democratic convention, Zogby showed a bounce from +2 Kerry to +4 Kerry (in the three-way race) and Rasmussen showed one or two points.


That's an average of five verses an average of two. Not the same number. And we can't ignore the other polls that (even when bent back in to reality on partisan balance) show much large gains.

Now - we can surely debate a three day rolling average and try to say where the "bounce" should be measured from, but Kerry had two and three point leads going in to the convention, dipped down to a tie for one day (doesn't mean much in a tracking poll) and came out with a four point lead that didn't hold even as long as Bush's 4pt stretch. Bush was tied or one point up except for a single day leading in to their convention and four points out for a statistical significant three days afterwords. So we can make it LOOK like a similar change by picking the one single day that makes the argument in each case, but in a three day tracking poll that doesn't make a very firm argument.

[louis c]

22. I humbly disagree

Kerry's lead disappeared before the RNC, due to the Swift Boat Liars ads.

We're quibbling over nickles and dimes here, or how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

The Time and Newsweek polls are way off, as described. Bush got a 2-3 point bounce, and went into RNC tied. There is no way to prove either of us correct, but that's my gut feeling based on the data I've read.

All in all, it comes down to a slight Bush lead right now, regardless of how or when he got it.

Now, we have to get it back.

[Frodo]

23. Oh, OK then. "Gut feeling"/

I thought we were talking about Zogby and Rasmussen (two opposite ends of the polling reliability world in my mind, but whatever).

:hi:

Carry on.

[autorank]

5. Back into the conspiracy, it's easy! and accurate!

In a post from C_j:

Fight Over Gulf War Film Escalates
By Elaine Dutka
Los Angeles Times

A clash between David O. Russell and Warner Bros. over the DVD re-release of his Gulf War film "Three Kings" intensified Thursday as studio executives informed the filmmaker the video could not be released before the November election.

----
OK, work with me here: A subsidiary of AOL Time-Warner won't let an unpopular film be re-released on DVD because it's critical of Bush (a film that was a flop!). Thus we conclude that the 'parent', AOL Time Warner, is bat shit crazy about protecting the Bush and getting him re-elected; or that they're afraid of what the president and his henchmen will do to anyone who harms his re election. The support or fear is so palpable that they make sure there are NO signs of disloyalty. NOW for the logical conclusion: Why would the parent company allow its crappy little cable network, CNN, put anything on OR run any polls that hurt the president and his henchmen? CORRECT, the answer is it wouldn't.

We do, as many propose, live in a nation with a state-intimidated and controlled media. They commission the polls, they present them, and they are total whores as demonstrated by just this little analysis of the DVD episode.

Forget the polls and validity-reliabliity issues. Concentrate on secure, reliable voting and get folks there to take advantage of that freedom.

[louis c]

9. kick

[senseandsensibility]

8. The answer is yes

Any polling group tied to a corporate media outlet is part of the conspiracy. We are seeing example after example, starting with the CNN/Gallup polls throughout the summer that had the race closer than other polls. Their goal is to set the stage for * to steal the election again.

[AmerDem]

11. there was an agenda for sure.

This trick has been used before.

[louis c]

24. kick

[Chichiri]

12. I do smell a Rove behind the whole thing. (n/t)

[louis c]

15. That's my point

It doesn't seem plausible that two major polls could make the same obvious mistake on the same f**king day by coincidence.

I just don't buy it.

[GOPAgainstGW]

13. We Know For A Fact the Time Poll was GOP Rigged - Which I Posts 3 Times!!

all the poll garbage is getting very old. Maybe this would be of help:

Why Political Polls Are Totally Worthless in this Election Cycle
From a Political Insider with 28 Years Experience
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x742180

ALSO HERE:

"Insider’s News”, Vol 1 - Kerry-Edwards Campaign Doing Well

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x748458

------------------------------
Beltway and Texas Republicans
Against Bush-Cheney ’04, Inc.
------------------------------

[louis c]

14. kick

[BillZBubb]

16. Maybe conspiracy isn't the exact word.

But, I think the media powers wanted results showing a "big news" story. Their paid pollsters obliged. It's very, very easy to skew a poll--and there are no adverse legal consequences for doing it.

[louis c]

18. By definition

a conspiracy is two or more people contriving an outcome.

It doesn't have to be criminal in nature.

Hence the term criminal conspiracy. You see, if a conspiracy by its nature were criminal, there would be no need for the adjective.

I believe that these folks know that a poll that has far more Repukes in it than Dems., when the country is more Dem than Repuke, that that poll would be inherently inaccurate.

Now, when two polls have that same obvious mistake are released on the same day, with the same outcome, it gets to be like the Russian Jets that were sabotaged, it's to much to be just a coincidence.

[SayitAintSo]

25. Figures don't lie, but liars do figure. n/t

[leftofthedial]

17. part of the Repuke Nazional CONvention

propaganda effort.

Utterly bogus and contrived.

[louis c]

26. kick

[rocktivity]

27. There's something else Time and Newsweek have in common

They're print publications with weekly deadlines. Both those polls were taken before the convention was completely over in order to appear in their next editions. If they'd done the polls on the day after like they should have, the result wouldn't have been available to be published until the following week.

:headbang:
rocknation

[louis c]

28. I like your point