Journal pudge's Journal: Polls Questions 9
I have a ton to say about polls, but this is one thing that's been happening a lot lately that really annoys me. One typical example happened on Meet the Press this week.
The latest Zogby poll asks, "Do you think President Bush deserves to be re-elected, or do you think it is time for someone new?" When Tim Russert quoted the results on Meet the Press, he said the question was, "Would you vote to re-elect President Bush?"
That is so wrong it's hard to know where to begin. It's not the same thing. In answer to the second question, I would vote to re-elect Bush, without question at this point, because he is going to be the nominee, and I see no Democrat candidates who I would possibly vote for. However, I am very likely to answer the first question saying I would prefer someone new,, because I have never been a fan of Bush, and I can name in short order many people I'd rather have in that office.
And it is not even about my preference, it is about if I think he "deserves" to be re-elected. The question itself is odd. What does "deserve" mean? No one deserves to be re-elected, unless they get enough electoral votes to be re-elected, and if they do, then they deserve it. Isn't that how our system works? What other standard could there be? I suppose you could say he doesn't deserve it if he has committed crimes against the Constitution, but that would be an odd meaning to imply in such a question. So I couldn't even answer the question until I knew the results of the election.
Yes, I am being pedantic. But polls are supposed to be very specific and clear. The only way you can get reasonable polling data is to ask very clear, very brief questions that can only be answered reasonably in a set number of ways. And you can't arbitrarily change the wording of the question so significantly.
In this case, "if he is the GOP nominee, would you vote to re-elect President Bush in the Nov. 2004 election" is a perfectly good question, but it is not what was asked. Frankly, I don't really know what the actual question is supposed to mean; though Russert's replacement question is a fine one, it is not what was actually asked, and it is wrong of him to say that it is.
Russert is not the only one to do this, but he does it somewhat frequently, and I see it happening more and more as the elections start coming around again. And while in this case Zogby is more to blame than Russert, because the original question is so poor, it's not always poor questions that get unreasonably modified by the media.
And I am not going off on Russert just because he ended the show by saying "Go Bills, beat the Patriots." Well, not entirely.
Polls? (Score:2)
Tell that to Cowboy Neal and company.
The only way you can get reasonable polling data is to ask very clear, very brief questions that can only be answered reasonably in a set number of ways. And you can't arbitrarily change the wording of the question so significantly.
This is why a little science and math education is so important in the general population. Otherwise we get folks that believe every poll in every US Ne
Re:Polls? (Score:2)
As to whom I might prefer, Powell is one. There are many congresspeople I'd prefer. Just looking at the list of Senators: Lamar Alexander (not a big fan, but better than Bush IMO), Pete Domenici, Bill Frist, Lindsey Graham, Chuck Hagel, Orrin Hatch, Jim Inhofe, Jon Kyl, Trent Lott, Dick Lugar, Mitch McConnell, Don Nickles. I'll stop there, that's plenty.
Now, I certainly don't think all of those men would make fine Presidents, but I
Re:Polls? (Score:1)
Am I the only one, when seeing the name "Lamar Alexander", thinks things like "Wasn't he Vice President under Martin van Buren?" Every time I see his name, I think it's a historical reference to some 19th century politician, AND I DON'T KNOW WHY.
Re:Polls? (Score:2)
It's just a poll (Score:2)
*done by ficticious Mega Shoeshine Corp.*
Is Acme shoeshine the best?
A> Yes
B> Depends
C> No
They basically split the yes in 2 categories to inflate the "No".
Polls are just marketing gimmicks that typically don't have any real value. aside fomr the occasional one I answer where I have to rate stuff on a 1-10 scale.
Spin doctors and related (Score:1)
The only reason Russert isn't a "certified spin doctor" is becuase he doesn't have a person paying directly to spin their image. He still injects his opinion into everything he
Confusing poll questions, and clear alternatives (Score:2)
Another unambiguous question I've heard before would be "If the e
Re: Polls Questions (Score:2)
pedantic? what the heck does that mean? I'm fairly versed with my vocabulary just because my wife is *very* well versed, however, she's never even heard of that word!
Yes, I should probably just look it up, but asking pudge in a comment on slashdot is much more fun.
But polls are supposed to be very specific and clear
true
But that poll was to be an opinion poll, no? In that case, everyone's opinion of "deserves" is going to vary quite a bit... and it's then obviously not a re
Re: Polls Questions (Score:2)
The methodology of opinion polls requires that you use unambiguous words; else, what would the poll be worth? The results say, "$x percent of people think $y." We know what $x is, but we do not know what $y is, so the question and results are worthless.
And no, I won't tell you what pedantic means.