It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Emails Suggest Axelrod 'Leaned on' Gallup after Unfavorable Poll

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by Indigo5
 



What a bunch of cry babies...explain you methodology!! Kinda important if you want a poll to be taken seriously!


They do... at the bottom of the web page that shows poll results. I think the problem here is that Axelrod didn't like their methodologies and associated results, and they refused to change them.


The aim of Polls is to be as acurate as possible and toward that aim polls look to use a scientific methodology. They include a margin or error to reflect the uncertaintity.

When the aim becomes bias or agenda rather than accuracy...and the methodology is chosen for that aim, the poll is false and misleading.

The GOP needs outlier polls such as Gallup for fundraising purposes, as no one wants to bet on a losing candidate.

Methodology has as much to do with "Like" as math does.

Now on to the fundemental BS of this OP



Here is the sum total of Axelrod comments cited, directly or indirectly, by the Daily Caller article Varney was pushing. Note how "furious" Axelrod appeared to be.

Twitter:
David Axelrod
@davidaxelrod

Smart piece by Ron Brownstein on polling, demographics and why Gallup is saddled with some methodological problems.

LINKK TO ARTICLE DISCUSSING GALLUP METHODOLOGY


The Caller article did not show that Axelrod directly contacted anyone at Gallup at any time. While it alleged that internal Gallup emails show him "attempting to subtly intimidate" the firm,


In Short Browstein pointed out..


only 22 percent of the Gallup survey was non-white, according to figures the organization provided to Emory University political scientist Alan Abramowitz.

in 2008, minorities comprised 26 percent of all voters, according to exit polls;

the Obama campaign, and other analysts, project the minority share of the vote will increase to 28 percent in 2012.

In its survey, Pew, for instance, puts the non-white share at 25 percent.

The division between the white and non-white share of the vote profoundly affects the results because all of the surveys show a racial gap between Obama and Romney that could be at least as large as 2008.


And this last bit seems to defy logic...must we prove murder before charging someone with murder?

Originally posted by Zarniwoop

You seem to have made up your mind based solely on the plaintiff's accusations prior to a jury trial and any defense from Gallup.

The Plaintiffs don't always tell the truth


Gallup has been charged based on documented evidence and testimony on the man who was directly ordered to falsify those documents. If they are innocent, I suggest they prove it...rather than trying to get the justice department to back off by pretending they were intimidated by a "tweet" questioning thier polling methodology.

Gallup appears to be the most unscientific and dishonest polling company out thier at this point. Maybe they should get thier ducks in a row for what appears to be an overwhelmingly valid charge. If they are innocent then they should prove it..

edit on 7-9-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 



And this last bit seems to defy logic...must we prove murder before charging someone with murder?


No. You must prove something happened beyond a reasonable doubt, and allow for a defense before applying a guilty verdict.

Thanks for the tips on how to avoid sitting on a jury



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by Indigo5
 



And this last bit seems to defy logic...must we prove murder before charging someone with murder?


No. You must prove something happened beyond a reasonable doubt, and allow for a defense before applying a guilty verdict.

Thanks for the tips on how to avoid sitting on a jury


That seems a particularly dishonest change of discussion.

You claimed that somehow since the charges were is dispute...what did you say? something like "witnesses can lie"?....that somehow that denial of the charges meant that the charges were invalid in reagrds to "Whistleblower law".

I have not convicted Gallup...it is my strong opinion, more so since their effort to distract from and obfuscate the matter...that they are guilty...but still my opinion all the same.

But for you to either paint me of convicting them for expressing my opinion? Or argue that the charges are invalid...because it is your (seemingly baseless) opinion that the witness might be dishonest? Both false arguments...

They were RIGHTLY charged by the justice department and this case is PRECISELY what the whistleblower law was aimed at combatting....Government contractors defrauding the Government out of our taxpayer dollars.

The rest can be determined in a court of law...but your claim that somehow this didn't qualify for Whistleblower status has been proven false.
edit on 7-9-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke

“Imagine Axel[rod] with Brando’s voice: ‘I’d like you to come over and explain your methodology…You got a nice poll there … would be a shame if anything happened to it… .’”


LOL

If gallup really does de-fraud the government and public then they deserve to get served. The lawsuit isn't anything new.


edit on 6-9-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)


The question is whether or not the lawsuit is being "revived" due to Gallup's non compliance with the Obama administration. Why the time lapse with no action being taken, and then right after this action is taken. You keep saying you are independent, yet you defend Democrats at every turn. Who are you lying to, me? Or yourself?



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


Still doesn't change the fact that they might have de-frauded the government.

It's like getting pulled over for speeding, pissing off the cop, then complaining that you got a ticket. You still broke the law from speeding, so stop complaining about a ticket.


edit on 6-9-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)


No, it's like government blackmail. As long as you play nice we will make the lawsuit go away, step out of line though ....

So yes, Gallup, if guilty, did something wrong. Last I checked blackmail is also illegal. In the interest of being fair you support legal action taken against Axelrod/Obama right?



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 03:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 



You claimed that somehow since the charges were is dispute...what did you say? something like "witnesses can lie"?....that somehow that denial of the charges meant that the charges were invalid in reagrds to "Whistleblower law".


Of course the charges are in dispute. Otherwise Gallup would have settled. I never said they were invalid.


I have not convicted Gallup...it is my strong opinion, more so since their effort to distract from and obfuscate the matter...that they are guilty...but still my opinion all the same.


You kind of did with your analogy.


But for you to either paint me of convicting them for expressing my opinion? Or argue that the charges are invalid...because it is your (seemingly baseless) opinion that the witness might be dishonest? Both false arguments...


I'm not sure what you don't understand about charges. They are just charges. They could be baseless. They could be valid. Your opinion is an opinion. I stated no opinion on the case itself. I like to hear the other side of the story before coming up with an opinion.


They were RIGHTLY charged by the justice department and this case is PRECISELY what the whistleblower law was aimed at combatting....Government contractors defrauding the Government out of our taxpayer dollars.


I'm not sure what a RIGHTLY charges is. They were charged... right or wrong.


The rest can be determined in a court of law...but your claim that somehow this didn't qualify for Whistleblower status has been proven false.


I never claimed that.
edit on 8-9-2012 by Zarniwoop because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join