SPAM this Poll -- Reveals why polls BIASED to pukes!

[Octafish]

Why You Should Ignore The Gallup Poll This Morning -
And Maybe Other Gallup Polls As Well

Friday :: Sep 17, 2004

This morning we awoke to the startling news that despite a flurry of different polls this week all showing a tied race, the venerable Gallup Poll, as reported widely in the media (USA Today and CNN) today, showed George W. Bush with a huge 55%-42% lead over John Kerry amongst likely voters. The same Gallup Poll showed an 8-point lead for Bush amongst registered voters (52%-44%). Before you get discouraged by these results, you should be more upset that Gallup gets major media outlets to tout these polls and present a false, disappointing account of the actual state of the race. Why?

Because the Gallup Poll, despite its reputation, assumes that this November 40% of those turning out to vote will be Republicans, and only 33% will be Democrat. You read that correctly. I asked Gallup, who have been very courteous to my requests, to send me this morning their sample breakdowns by party identification for both their likely and registered voter samples they use in these national and I suspect their state polls. This is what I got back this morning:

Likely Voter Sample Party IDs – Poll of September 13-15
Reflected Bush Winning by 55%-42%

Total Sample: 767
GOP: 305 (40%)
Dem: 253 (33%)
Ind: 208 (28%)

Registered Voter Sample Party IDs – Same Poll
Reflected Bush Winning by 52%-44%

Total Sample: 1022
GOP: 381 (38%)
Dem: 336 (33%)
Ind: 298 (30%)

CONTINUED...

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/002806.html

Gee. Maybe the polls ARE wrong.
Who'da thunk it with a glorious leader like
Fearless Psychotic Moron?



Who you calling Ron?

Edit: Can't you spill?

[katmondoo]

1. The Democrats have never

been so united in their desire to see this Fascist dictator out of office. How can they ignore the huge amount of people protesting, and the huge amount of people so dedicated to removing Bush. What do they think we will do? Stay home and let the GOP continue to lie, cheat and destroy all we have gained in the last half century. I know we have a huge majority, I don't care if they don't count us now, all the more to enjoy their defeat come Nov.

[patdem]

2. AGREED! When I watched the protests in NYC during the convention

I thought, you want a poll of likely voters...poll them!

If they were willing to march in a protest they damn sure will show up at the polls in November!

NOOOOOOO...Gallup asks the couch potatoes who they will vote for! Couch potatoes being home and able and willing to answer the phone and all? :grr:

[smaug]

4. Poll are deliberately biased . . .

Plus, a lot of us have caller ID and won't answer strange telephone numbers that don't show up.

However, reading the internals on the polls has proved fascinating. Polls are deliberately biased, and I remember a few years ago when the ReTHUG whose our reverend guv (the Huckster, as most people call him in our state now) was having telephone polls. The pollsters didn't know about me :D, and I was very anti-Huckster, and the stupid pollster (of COURSE I asked him where he was from - South Dakota - I asked why not employ Arkansawyers for an Arkansas poll? - but I digress) ARGUED with me that the Huckster was a fine, Xtian man and minister.

I told the asshat if he wanted to live in a theocracy, move to Iran. The pollster hung up on ME.

Guess I was a little cranky that day :D.

[whistle]

5. How many protesters were there in NYC and how many were...

...arrested? Will those who were arrested be denied the right to vote in their respective states? Remember, many of these arrested protesters were held way longer than normal. And, how many of the protesters were ID'ed either by the police or by secret service? Will they fall victim to voter list purges? I really hope that polls as they are being done are now dinosaurs for all the reasons identified here in the various threats. I read some place that telephone surveys have become very unreliable as something like only 3% of all attempted calls ever get answered and agree to complete a survey. The use of call centers and auto-dialers still allow these types of low contact numbers to be cost justified, but how could anyone fell comfortable that they have a representative sample if 97% of those numbers call never answer the survey.

Also 3% on a survey of 1,000 completes means that there had been 33,334 numbers called to get that 1,000 to cooperate. What are the tests these polling companies do to validate that the 32,334 who were called but did not participate, would have answered in the same way that the 1,000 did? These are not very reliable statistics in my book. Some others figures I recall were that over half (maybe 60%) of the numbers that answer refuse to take the survey, which tells me that people are not happy about giving out their opinions. Sorry, I have no link or source, just my recollections.

[Octafish]

7. Our numbers match.

Everybody voting who voted for President Gore in 2000 will vote for Sen. Kerry.

A majority of people who voted for Ralphie the Green Capitalist in 2000 will vote for Sen. Kerry.

A majority in the middle who actually believed the Compassionate Conservative bushwa in 2000 will vote for Sen. Kerry.

That leaves the GOP base to Fearless Smirko McCokespoon.

And that won't be enough -- no matter how many same-sex flag-burning fear-mongering proposals Frist the Catless sends up for a vote.

PS: A most hearty welcome to DU, katmondo! I look forward to reading your posts!

[whistle]

3. I smell Texas rats here, there is something very sinister going...

...on and this needs to be investigated. Why would Gallup and I believe some other polling companies assume that with the past voter turnout patterns being what they have been that suddenly for this election, 18% to 20% more Republicans will show up than ever before? The proportions they are assuming could only happen if total turnout was reduced but the same number of republicans who voted in 2000 voted in 2004. Here are the numbers for 2000:

Gore(dem).....50.9 million (48.2%)
Bush(rep).....50.4 million (47.7%)
Nader(grn).... 3.9 million ( 3.7%)
Other......... .4 million ( .4%)

total........105.6 million (100.0%)

The percentages and numbers of registration affiliation I don't have but obviously when independents vote they vote far more with the two majors than with the various other parties. This seems like a case of "figures never lie, but liars always figure". In this case, the liars are the media and the polling companies, but who is pulling their cords and what really makes these people believe that Bush will have higher turnouts of republicans? I smell Diebold touchscreen voting machine/ballot tampering conspiracy.

[Octafish]

6. I smell the same BFEE rat.

These sneaks always prepare "Exculpatory Evidence" when there are politicians to kill, wars to wage and treasuries to loot. Same goes for election 2004.

By getting some lopsided GOP numbers out now, Rove's toadies can better tweak the election numbers later -- especially electronic.

Otherwise, why wouldn't Gallup or whomever poll a representative sample in a straightforward manner? Are people being softened up for a November Surprise -- a monkey "victory"?

[whistle]

8. It's about money and research companies have been starving...

...for the last half dozen years. Gallup has bent over holding their knees for the Bushies. Lost all credibility in my book, no more professionalism with these companies, they are after the bucks, ethics and principles out the window....weighted edge indeed! Bushit numbers throughout the whole corrupt process. Capitalism has reached the cadaver state, but the participants still don't yet know it. Corporatism (a.k.a. fascism) is what we are now in. Bush feeds rhetoric into the great American dream of everyone owning their own business and having economic freedom, while a small clique of super rich players manipulation and falsify the data stream. Look out people, look out.