Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why in the hell are B** approval numbers going up ????

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Laura PourMeADrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:41 AM
Original message
Why in the hell are B** approval numbers going up ????
http://pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

L.A. Times/Bloomberg 4/8-11/06 Approve 39 Disapprove 57 Uncertain 4
USA Today/Gallup 4/7-9/06 Approve 37 Disapprove 60 Uncertain 3
ABC/Washington Post 4/6-9/06 Approve 38 Disapprove 60 Uncertain 2
CBS 4/6-9/06 Approve 37 Disapprove 56 Uncertain 7
Cook/RT Strategies 4/6-9/06 Approve 37 Disapprove 56 Uncertain 7
FOX/Opinion Dynamics 4/4-5/06 Approve 36 Disapprove 53 Uncertain 10
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
shenmue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. They're drunk?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
2. Nothing really horrible has happened for a little while.
Some people prefer to grant their approval to anything that isn't an out-and-out disaster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skooooo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. cause they're bringing out the scare tactics again....

They still get a little milage out of that, but not as much as they used to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laura PourMeADrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. You're right. I saw that they dug up an old al-Qaida tape from
NOV - saying they will annihilate Israel. MSNBC said that there was not explanation on why the tape was held so long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
4. Because he's threatening to scam us all over again with Iran?
:shrug:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. flags
Yesterday on the freeway in Phoenix, I saw 6 or 7 cars and trucks with American flags (big ones on wooden poles, not the small ones on plastic arms) hanging out of car windows or flat beds. Looks like the call to patriotism is again ramping up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
5. It is a slow pattern they'll need in order to pull of Election Theft 06
The goal is to get them up to the upper 40's again, ideally 47-48%, within the MOE, so they can say that "ultimately, it appears Americans trusted Mr. Bush and the GOP to protect their security."

Just a replay of 2004, but they'll try to pull all the GOP numbers up with them in order explain the "stunning upsets" Republican will win all over America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
6. Selective Polling......when all else fails, call your friends. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:45 AM
Response to Original message
7. Dead-cat bounce n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trogdor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #7
14. * has hit bottom.
Or close to it. There is more resistance at 35% than there is at 48%. Simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laura PourMeADrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #14
20. Interesting thought. I asked a republican why, amid all the
horror and evidence B** lied, that people would still support him. He said that what you have left in support are the stubborn people who know he lied and know he has really fucked everything up, but they will not change because they can not or refuse to admit they were wrong to support him. A pride thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mwb970 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #20
31. It's more that they can't admit *we* were right. (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
8. Those Aren't Increases
Everyone one of those is within the bounds of precision of the polls. No need to be alarmed about this. Statistics aren't exact, when one only polls one of every 300,000 people.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaLynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #8
18. Exactly.
What matters, IMHO, in polls is that you look at the over all trend and * is in free-fall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #8
19. Agreed. I've always thought 1000 people or less IS NOT a good
representation of the voting public. It's really pathetic
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:02 AM
Original message
I Know Folks At Three Of Those Companies
The folks at Pew are friends, at one company is an former grad student, and i know others through professional organizations. We all agree that a good sample is between 22,000 and 45,000, depending upon the confidence interval and statistical power chosen, and which equations are used.

But, they tell me that the cost of doing that weekly or biweekly would be prohibitive, and these are sharp people. I believe them.

However, one of them and i have figured out a way to "rerandomize" the totals for all those polls. This gets us a distribution based upon averages that, of course, has a lesser margin of error, and a more normalized distribution. Using that technique, Silverspoon's numbers have been unchanged for about a month.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
25. Have you published that method, Prof GAC?
If so, would you PM me the reference?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #25
29. No
The fella at Pew is trying to get them to use it, publicly. So far, he hasn't convinced the management of its value. But, we're still tryin'!

The problem is twofold:

There is an intellectual property issue, in that the responses and results of each company's polling belongs to them, airtight, and legally. So, using several sets of results and then publishing it could tread on copyrights.

Second: We can't be 100% sure of the value of individual polling, unless we can actually analyze the question itself, against the responses over a time series, to be sure that the "rerandomizing" normalizes push and pull type questions. Of course, Gallup isn't going to send their questions to Pew or ARI for review.

So, it's still sort of experimental. Mathematical valid, and seems to be quite accurately predictive, but not firm enough to convince the polling firm to consider its use.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. Seems if you could replicate methods of leading polling firms
to the best of your current knowledge and apply this method in an academic analysis, get it published in a leading statistical journal, the polling companies would have to take notice. Of course the cost of replicating poll methodology would require grant funding$$. Seems there ought to be some source of funding for this? :shrug: Certainly make for a great Masters thesis or even PhD dissertation for a student?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #33
35. That's A Very Good Idea
I might just do that. That would be a good backdoor method of getting it published, even if my name isn't on it! Thanks.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
41. Thank you for explaining how this is done with these groups. All
of these polls lately are driving me nuts and it's hard to know what to believe. I appreciate the information.

Would you know if the newspapers who poll 1000 or so people and come up with some of these stats & percentages go to these lengths to be as reliable?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #41
50. The Newspapers Commission Studies
They don't do them on their own. If they do, it's highly doubtful they have the stratification methodology to make them statistically valid. Most newspapers don't higher statisticians!

Many of the chains, and the big papers, co-comission studies with electronic media (like CBS/NYT or NBC/WSJ). They share the costs so they can be done weekly instead of monthly, and the big media companies (Chicago Trib, NYT, Time, and the like) publish the same results in all their papers.

So, with the Trib, for instance, the Tampa, Orlando, LA, Chicago, et al papers are all publishing the same survey.

Most of these surveys are done by the big 5 that we usually see, and there are a few smaller companies that are doing them independently or are subcontracted. Then there are a couple of purely partisan firms that work specifically for one party of the other. (See Rasmussen.)
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #41
51. Doggone It!
Edited on Thu Apr-13-06 01:57 PM by ProfessorGAC
Double posted again.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #19
24. Stupid Multipost
Edited on Thu Apr-13-06 09:02 AM by ProfessorGAC
..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
taught_me_patience Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #19
46. Its plenty enough to get a decent statistical result
if the sample is unbiased. This is a very common misperception of statistics.

taught.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #8
36. It's never a good idea to compare different polls to get a trend
you should compare the past polls with the current ones of the same company, like Gallup vs Gallup last month
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. If You Say So
I guess all that education and experience was for nothing. Thanks for the good advice. I guess we'll just trash that three years worth the work.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. i accidentally replied to you, I meant to reply to the op
Edited on Thu Apr-13-06 01:18 PM by jsamuel
I was saying that you could look at Gallup and say 37% a week ago, then look at Rasmussen today and see it at 43%. Does that mean he went up 6% in a week? NO! It means that Rasmussen is biased toward Bush as Ras was 43% a week ago and Gallup was 39% a month ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #39
47. No Harm Done
Actually, i've been working on this type of poll compilation concept, as a consultant, for about 6 years. The trick is applying it to different types of social statistics, from polls like these, to marketing surveys, to customer response polls, to pyschosocial studies. But, if it works with any of them, it appears to be most precise on simple approval polls.

Another poster provided an idea on how i might get these fleshed out and published, by assigning it as a graduate degree project. (Thesis/dissertation work.) That, of course, would require a complete validation of the theoretical underpinnings of the "re-randomization" work and the normalization methods. But, as long as i don't have to do it!

The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #39
48. Double Post
Edited on Thu Apr-13-06 01:34 PM by ProfessorGAC
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #8
38. true
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:48 AM
Response to Original message
10. Because this Moussaoui case is bringing back, for those who
forgot :eyes:, all the terror on 9/11, even though Moussaoui was in jail at the time?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Christa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. My thoughts exactly. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #10
16. but you'd think it would remind people about OSAMA what's-his-name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzybeans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
11. Those are different samples. Each sample will have a different
proportion. There is no way to say his poll numbers are going up by looking at these because (and I'm guessing) the differences all fall within the range of the error term.

And the Fox poll is not surprising for how low it is compared to the others. It is surprising that it is so high for Fox.

Do not despair. They are not going back to sleep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chat_noir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
15. Fox poll went down
Previous poll had bush at 39%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IselaB Donating Member (235 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
17. I don't think they're going up
Different polling organizations will come up with different results even when taking the poll at the same time. To identify a trend, it's better to compare polls over time from the same organization.

I'm sure the three-point range there is within the margin of error of all of those polls. The only possible trend I see is that fewer people seem "uncertain."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laura PourMeADrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #17
22. Yes, about the uncertains. Guess they split between approval
and disapproval - But disapprovals are trending up.

It just seems to me that every single week some new, horrible, thing comes out that Assclown did, and that it would reach a critical mass - enough to tip him into the 20's - but he's holding his own, amazingly enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 08:59 AM
Response to Original message
21. In reality and barring the fake world, junior is in the twenties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laura PourMeADrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. That's good news - means only 20 something percent of the
country is stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
26. maybe because his Bushisms are so brilliant---see this thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #26
28.  * neocon & fundie base think he's the 2nd coming, no matter what he does
Edited on Thu Apr-13-06 09:07 AM by wordpix
Luckily, my bro who's big into repug politics in DC says repukes are VERY disorganized. Time to hit them hard before they regroup!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mattclearing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
27. Margin of error. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
30. 1. not statistically different from previous; 2. uneducable 35%
I agree with Professor GAC, that these are not statistically different from the previous.

In addition, I tend to agree with those who believe the bottom 35% or so are extremes in terms of being able to change their mind/opinions (or at least admit it).

As for the determined, uneducable 35%, add to this the (apparent) constant barrage of both the Moussaoui trial and the constant barrage of ads for the Flight 93. BTW, does anyone feel a tug of tinfoil hat, when they hear about the determination of the Flight 93 producers to get this film out and to show the previews in theaters, despite the negative public reaction? Just asking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
32. because for anyone there are 25 to 30 that support no matter what


the other 6 to 9%, are people that are very apolitical and unless the sky is falling or troops are outside their city and they have a job are going to say things are ok, and get off the phone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WiseButAngrySara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
34. These have to be bogus numbers! 86% of about 250,000 voted for
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamison Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
40. Don't worry.
Gas prices are soaring to all-time record highs, so I think his approval rating is going to take another small tumble soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
42. He's not, he is still on a nose dive.
Check it out...

The latest Cook Political Report/RT Strategies poll shows "that the dismal numbers for President Bush and national Republicans have not only jelled, but hardened."

Key findings:

* President Bush's approval rate is now 37%, down three points from the previous month.
* In the generic congressional ballot, Democrats beat Republicans 46% to 36%.
* The approval rate for congressional Republicans is now just 38%.
* In a 2008 presidential matchup, John McCain beats Hillary Clinton, 44% to 39%.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
43. Because most of those polls are bullshit? - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
44. people are beginning to disapprove of disapproval
more than they are of the turd at the top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
45. Those are all different polls with insignificant differences.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
49. well what was the LA Times poll before this one?
that is what you look at. Was it less than 39% or more? They actually all are in the same margin of error.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC