Weird (polling) Science
This really leaves one with an uneasy feeling. The results and a partial abstract of this AP-Ipsos poll are troubling from the first sentence.
But why exclude Alaskans and Hawaiians? Again, I think the short answer is money.
What follows is why quickie polls are inherently flawed. This taken from the above referenced article.
Okay, at least people were given a 'haven't heard enough' option. However, this is a far cry from 'don't know enough.'
And I guess we may never know how much the people in our 49th and 50th states feel about the Miers miasma, the Alito (right-wing) annointing, or the Roberts reassurance.
The Associated Press-Ipsos poll on public attitudes about President Bush's nominee for the Supreme Court, Samuel Alito, is based on telephone interviews with 1,006 adults from all states except Alaska and Hawaii and areas heavily damaged by hurricanes Katrina and Wilma. Because of hurricane damage, Ipsos did not try to interview respondents in Louisiana, southern Mississippi and central and southern Florida.Well, I guess some folks just plain count(no pun intended) for more than others. Of course it has always been so. Okay, I understand not wanting to spend the money in the states affected by the hurricane season - ya know, busy signals, downed lines and the like. Or, it may be that (dons tin-foil blogging hat) Ipsos felt that the people in Lose-yana and the other places most affected by the hurricane-season-that-won't-end might have a less favorable view of anything with Bush's name attached. I cannot fathom as to why.
The interviews in the rest of the country were conducted Oct. 31-Nov. 2 by Ipsos, an international polling firm.
Results were weighted to represent the population by demographic factors such as age, sex, region, race and income.
No more than one time in 20 should chance variations in the sample cause the results to vary by more than 3 percentage points from the answers that would be obtained if all Americans were polled.
There are other sources of potential error in polls, including the wording and order of questions. Results may not total 100 percent because of rounding.
But why exclude Alaskans and Hawaiians? Again, I think the short answer is money.
What follows is why quickie polls are inherently flawed. This taken from the above referenced article.
Sorry about the formatting. But that is how it is displayed.1. As you may know, Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is retiring,
and President Bush has nominated Samuel Alito to replace her. Is your opinion of
Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito favorable, unfavorable, or haven't you heard
enough about Samuel Alito yet to have an opinion?
_Favorable, 20 percent _ Miers-19, Roberts-25
_Unfavorable, 14 percent _ Miers, 13, Roberts 14
_Haven't heard enough to yet have an opinion, 64 percent _ Miers-67, Roberts-59
_Not sure, 2 percent _ Miers-1, Robert-2
2. Do you think the U.S. Senate should or should not vote to confirm Harriet Miers
as a Supreme Court justice? Do you feel strongly or not strongly about that?
Total should vote to confirm _ 38 percent _ Miers-41, Roberts-47
_Feel strongly, 22 percent _ Miers-19, Roberts-36
_Do not feel strongly, 16 percent, Miers-22, Roberts-11
Total should not vote to confirm _ 22 percent, Miers-27, Roberts-24
_Feel strongly, 13 percent _ Miers-13, Roberts-16
_Do not feel strongly, 9 percent _ Miers-14, Roberts-8
Not sure, 40 percent _ Miers-32, Roberts-29
Okay, at least people were given a 'haven't heard enough' option. However, this is a far cry from 'don't know enough.'
And I guess we may never know how much the people in our 49th and 50th states feel about the Miers miasma, the Alito (right-wing) annointing, or the Roberts reassurance.
No comments :
Post a Comment