The Washington Post thinks 56% pro- war is a "solid majority"

http://www.msnbc.com/news/951647.asp?0cv=CA01

"A solid majority (56 percent) of those surveyed approve of the way Bush is handling the situation in Iraq"

then they asked their question another way just so they could get a better response - 60 percent - "Is the war worth fighting?" - what kind of lame assed question is that? Why not just phrase it, "Did my son die for nothing?" "Did we murder 7,000 innocent civilians for nothing?"

They think Bush is sitting pretty for the campaign ahead (with his approval at its highest in their polls)

and they also think Lieberman is THE LAST WORD on all things Democratic - since they didn't give anyone else's positions credence.

If someone hadn't sent me this link, I would not have read the article. I don't go anywhere near the Post anymore.

And don't the moonies also think that President Bush's 47% is a "mandate?"

in the new America. After all, looks like California's new governor will get elected with 10% of the electorate.

... altho I continue to read them, I recognize their propaganda, and send letters to the editor when absolutely necessary.

They should poll the people on the facts of the war. The people who support the war, or a portion of them are the same people who think that Iraqis wew pioting the planes on 9/11 and that WMDs were found and used on us.

Polls are wrong. This is the fault of the media.

Bill Clinton was under 50% twice -- thanks to 3-way races -- so numbers alone sheldom tell the whole story.

... compared to the "majority" that put Bush* in office in 2000.

it shows that the overwhelming majority of people who voted for Gore actually disagree with the war...and yet the media still tells us that it and * is popular.

To take a purely fictional exmample -- suppose Dean won the presidential election with 56% of the vote. You could be pretty damn sure that Dean's supporters would be claiming he received a solid majority of the vote.

majority

:hi:

peace

i say we are in the 40's by fall, bet...

peace

A friend asked me about polling, and had a good point.

Supposedly the calls are randomized for sampling purposes. However, if you own caller ID and it shows "Unavailable" it's usually a solicitor or pollster. So don't answer, right?

So, are polls biased against people smart enough to buy caller ID?
Also, are polls biased against people who spend most of their evenings away from home? What are the demographics for those groups?