It has begun: the CNN/Gallup Bush* job approval polls are being Diebolded!

Just look at the numbers. Bush job approval ratings have fallen in 28 out of the 30 months since 9/11. They have risen only twice: in March 2003 when he invaded Iraq and in December when Saddam was captured.

But CNN/Gallup is claiming that his job approval rose from 49% to 53%. This defies all logic. It should have fallen to 47%.

Now what has happened to reverse this trend in late March? If anything, we should expect another drop in ratings from the 1) devastating Clarke 9/11 testimony, 2) the disgusting TV commercials exploiting 9/11, 3) the $100 billion Medicare scandal and many others.

The trend since 9/11 is unmistakable; Bush NEEDS a major positive Rovian event to prop up his numbers. But the major NEGATIVE event for Bush this month was Clarke, who has destroyed whatever remained of the phony Bush claim to be a heroic War President. Bush IGNORED TERRORIST THREATS, and by so doing MAY HAVE CAUSED 9/11 to happen. This grievous malfeasance should have caused his ratings to decline even faster than average.

Yes, it has begun. The media is starting its final assault on our democracy. They are preparing the way for Bush to enable him to steal the election - by keeping his ratings above 50%. Its a very easy thing to do. Just bias the sampling universe by overweighting for Bush respondents so as to force the results and make Bush look good. No one will ever know it.

But astute DUers will not be fooled. We have warned about this for weeks now. Bush cannot steal an election when he is so far down in the polls.

Zogby is the pollster I trust. He was right in 2000. He was right in 2002 - efore Diebold "patched" the machines and the Exit Polls were conveniently hidden. Now Zogby has Bush down at 46%, seven points lower than CNN/Gallup.

And with Bush passing Kerry in the latest polls, this is further indication of an impending media scam to keep Bush close and let Diebold do the rest..

Check three years of Bush monthly job ratings in this thread I posted a few weeks back.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1261264

And compare that trend to this:
Early March - Late March

Newsweek 48 49
Fox 48 47
CNN 49 53
Pew 46 47

...and I've suspected for a long time that his polls are being targeted very carefully to elicit the response he wants. It's really a shame, he used to run a respected outfit.

I would strongly suggest polls be watched for trends and consistency. Polls that are obviously skewed either way can easily be spotted and discounted.

The poll, as used by the media, is a special form of the fallacy Ad Populum. The irony about polls is that the very act of reporting a poll either reinforces or changes the opinion that the poll measures.

The actual questions asked in the polls are never reported. They simply divide the results into simplistic "for" and "against" categories, but these results are skewed because of deceptively phrased questions.

For instance the question could be "Do you support balancing the budget by putting senior citizens out on the street?" The majority of answers will probably be in the negative. They then report something to the effect of, "A majority of Americans believe that the budget should not be balanced by cutting Medicare and Social Security."

Or, the poll is skewed because of an unbalanced sample population. For instance, Kinsey’s study on homosexuality polled prisoners (kinda like doing a study on virginity in a whorehouse).

The methods of the poll are usually not very scientific and it is designed to get a specific result. And the purpose of polls is to say to the audience, "Here is what everyone else thinks, you should too."

Now, there are accurate polls. But these polls are used by the politicians to gauge the sentiments and beliefs of the populace so that they know precisely what to tell them. These are really not just polls though, because usually they are coupled by "test balloons" in which the responses of the audience are measured and then re-polled. Politics is down to a science now. Polls help the political class to scientifically pander to the voters. Political campaign propaganda is a specialization of the science of modern propaganda.

http://www.propaganda101.com/Propaganda/NewsMediaPropaganda/newpage114.htm

on edit fixed link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1311448


demdem's post:

Oh the gallup poll was only done with adults

Not likely voters, not registered voters, but adults. I wish they would tell us that before reporting these polls. What does it matter what adults think since 54% of them wont vote. This is why Zogby is a better poll, he only polls likely voters.

These results are based on telephone interviews with a randomly selected national sample of 1,001 adults, aged 18 years and older, conducted March 26-28, 2004. For results based on this sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum error attributable to sampling and other random effects is ±3 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

An approval poll has nothing to do with the election; its just a snapshot of Bush's performance. Of course, Repubs will give Bush a excellent or good rating, and Democrats will give him a poor one. Independents will fall in the middle.

But if the sample is heavily weighted toward Republican respondents, obviously this would effect the results to make the Chimp appear to be better than he is.

The only polls that matter now are those of likely voters, this isnt even a poll of registered voters. It really is worth nothing.

Seriously.

When you consider how much publicity Bush is getting, the sheer amount of spun stories in the media about him, his position as a "wartime president", and scattered disasters whenever his approval ratings take serious hits...

All of that should give Bush approval ratings in the sixties. But he is such a pathetic loser that he still can't convince much of the country that he isn't anything more than a bumbling, lazy, half-witted moron who is at the very least dangerously incompetent and underqualified.

as much as I do. So the 53% works for me--since there's always a margin of error. That's the other thing, they never report the margin of error in a lot of the less reliable polls.

Why does all the media hide that Kerry is the clear winner???

TIA

The central Gallup Organization was bought out in 1988 by SRI (Selection Research) of Lincoln or Omaha, Nebraska which merged the companies into the Galllup Group. Jim Clifton of SRI, who currently resides in Washington, D.C. has been CEO ever since.I think this is a privately held business and information on who is on the Board of Directors is not easy to find.

Clifton seems to be an incredibly successful businessman.

Jim Clifton, The Gallup Organization

Jim Clifton began his career in Lincoln in 1977 by starting a marketing research company with a $5,000 loan from Union Bank. In his first year of business he used this $5,000 as seed money and was able to generate $80,000 in total sales. Following acquisitions, including the renowned Gallup Organization and worldwide expansion, his organization's billings exceeded $200 million. Jim has been CEO of The Gallup Organization since 1988. The Gallup Organization is one of the world's largest think tanks and providers of public opinion polling and management consulting. Under Jim's fourteen-year leadership, Gallup has enjoyed a ten-fold increase in billings volume and expanded from a predominately U.S.-based company to a global organization with offices in fifty cities in 24 of the world's largest nations. Mr. Clifton's current projects include the creation of a 75-acre Gallup University campus on the Missouri River in Omaha, Nebraska and a living internet-based record of "what man thought" named the Gallup WorldBrain which stores 65 years of polls on almost all issues the world has faced.
PHOTOS COMING SOON

<http://www.cba.unl.edu/outreach/ent/eoy/>



Cynthia Milligan is the only board menber I've found. She is the dean of the College of Business Administration at the University of Nebraska in Lincoln, Nebraska. Ms. Milligan is also the former Director of Banking and Finance for the State of Nebraska.

<http://www.wellsfargo.com/about/corporate/boardofdirectors/milligan.jhtml>


Home page for Gallup: <http://www.gallup.com/>

that was used in Iraq that gave such favorable ratings to the war? I thought those polls were extremely biased, especially since they had to use translaters. I'm gonna see if I can find this.

here are some polls taken in Iraq and alot from Gallup

http://www.cpa-iraq.org/government/polling.html

...is also the one that predicted Gore might win an electoral majority but not a popular one in 2000. Just the opposite happened.

has it's hand in korporate America as well. Every year companies take the Gallup Workplace Survey to give those in the ivory towers a feel for the attitude of their workforce. I've taken several times and let's just say that I'm less than impressed.

They are spinning teflon all over the Chimp.

The average Bush CNN/Gallup job rating for 38 months is 64.92%
The average for 10 other Polls is 62.54%
The difference = 2.38% is significant.

Over the past 7 months, CNN has Bush at a 55% average. The other 10 have him at 51.26%, an even larger 3.74% deviation.

Something is afoot.

CNN...other..diff
55 51.9 3.1
54 51.9 2.1
63 55.6 7.4
60 53.9 6.1
51 49.5 1.5
49 48.4 0.6
53 47.7 5.3
Average
55 51.26 3.74


Seems like CNN is biased to me.

Its the Neofascist way.

TIA