Artificial Poll Numbers: Complicit Corp.Media

It happened in 2000 & it's happening now: a complicit corporate media is inflating a tool who derives his support from glowing praise being the exclusive 24 hour news cycle eye candy A.D.D. saddled Americans eat up at 6 pm & 11 pm daily.
The "so many like him, it must be true" mislead is a powerful tool, akin to why we follow fashion trends ( as in the 1970's era fashion mistake being thrust upon us now).

Here's a Poll manipulation redux:

"I think those of us who have expressed skepticism about the results of the Time and Newsweek polls can consider ourselves vindicated. The new Gallup poll, conducted entirely after the GOP convention and therefore the first poll that truly measures Bush's bounce [and Gallup tends to skew toward Bush, mind you], shows Bush with a very modest bounce indeed: 2 points, whether you look at RVs or LVs [registered voters or likely voters]. His support among RVs has risen from 47 percent before to 49 percent after the convention, so that
he now leads Kerry by a single point (49-48) rather than trailing by a point.
But that's it. Contrast Bush's 49-48 lead among RVs in this poll to Time's 50-42 Bush lead and, especially, Newsweek's 54-43 Bush lead in the same matchup. Quite
a difference." John Zogby is the President and CEO of Zogby International- an independent polling firm, and writes this column for the Financial Times where it first appeared.

Another highly respected polling group, Rassmussen Reports dispels the myth as well.

More from John Zogby: one of the nation's most respected pollsters, was so mystified by Time and Newsweek polls showing Bush with a sudden 11-point lead, he checked into the methodology. Time wouldn't divulge theirs, but he checked out Newsweek's and found the reason for the "miraculous bounce": "Their sample of registered voters includes 38% Republican, 31% Democrat and 31% Independent voters. If we look at the three last Presidential elections, the spread was 34% Dem, 34% Repub and 33% Ind. (in 1992 with Ross Perot in the race); 39% Dems, 34% Repubs, and 27% Indies in 1996; and 39% Dems, 35% Repubs and 26% Indies in 2000." So add 3% for the "shaved off " Dems, and pare down the inflated Repug representation by 4% and suddenly, Bush's bounce drops to a modest 4 points - which has already faded according to tracking polls.

No scientific assertion is vetted without disclosue of the methodology; I can't fathom a reason, besides the obvious complicity & desire to mislead as to why TIME refuses to disclose their methodology!?

If you feel like flaming ( AND YOU SHOULD), here's the contact information for Newsweek:

Editorial questions and comments: [email protected]
For questions about the website: [email protected]

# Newsweek Domestic Edition
# Letters to the Editor for the U.S. print edition: [email protected]
# Mailing Address:
Newsweek
251 W. 57th St.
New York, NY 10019

Good Post BT

I never put much stock in polls, ever since I took a statistics course at Univeristy

Want to have some fun watching people fight over poll numbers and what they mean? Go here www.abovetopsecret.com...

.
Im worried the suspect polls may be the ones at the voting booths. This may just be a way of softening up people to believe that George Weasel Bush is favored. So when they steal the election no one will be suprised and assume it is a legitimate outcome.

Expatriot American Corporations have a lot invested in George Weasel Bush.
.

John Z is a straight shooter and no pollster has a better track record for accurately predicting elections than him.

As to the sampling discrepancies he uncovered, I'm kind of in shock really.

I knew the time window of the polling was horrible, but to pad that many claimed Republicans is just absurd. Again, IMO that possibly had to do with the timing. Thursday/Friday holiday polling. Conservatives were home (watching the convention) and just picked up the phone more. Time/Newsweek should have known this.

Unless the message was intended to be "it's over" and "apathy now" in which case they did know it.

The Bush Regime does not play games. They are serious and will do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to see their own personal objectives reached, none of which are in the interest of the American people.

On Nov 2....let the carnage begin.

Originally posted by RANT
I knew the time window of the polling was horrible, but to pad that many claimed Republicans is just absurd. Again, IMO that possibly had to do with the timing. Thursday/Friday holiday polling.

RANT are you ranting agains a conservative media now? Are you stealing my campaign line? Cause if you are trying to take the wind out of my "biased liberal media" line that I draw like a gun, you will be in for a fight

But back to the post: statistics are just that statistics. As far a polling methodology, from the historical data presented poll swing in regards to percentage all of the time. Funny, you did not mention the demos for the polls taken after the DNC? Nor the methodology used when Kerry had a huge lead. Were those biased towards Kerry? If they were maybe he never had as much support to begin with?