Monday's USA Today piece by Richard Wolf on congressional and presidential approval ratings had this odd segue:
Although just 30% of those polled give Democrats in Congress good marks, they favor the party by a 53%-40% margin in next year’s elections. That represents a silver lining for Democrats, who achieved only a fraction of their ambitious agenda after taking over Congress.
It’s odd because Wolf doesn't indicate how many of those polled gave Republicans in Congress good marks. It's even odder that the 53%-40% election margin Wolf cited is nowhere to be found in the survey detail. Also, neither the article nor the survey detail have an external link to information relevant to this margin.
But the survey detail does tell us that 26% give Republicans in Congress good marks, only 4 points fewer than the Dems. Wolf "somehow” managed not to mention that.
Did Richard Wolf feel compelled to go out and find a more impressive difference between the parties? 13 points is a lot bigger (better?) than 4.
No bias there, eh?
Included in revised form as part of this post (second item) at BizzyBlog.com.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Polls and assumptions
December 20, 2007 - 10:03 ET by KC MulvilleIf Wolf found the likely electoral ratings in a different poll than the approval ratings, the comparison is illegitimate anyway. You can't combine the results of different polls to draw conclusions about what both/either set of respondents really believe. The results have to come from the same poll. If one poll claims that Obama is ahead by four points, and another poll claims that Hillary is ahead by five, you can't combine them and claim that the polls show Hillary ahead by one.
Since the polls are fluctuating so widely, they can't be taken seriously. Instead, I think reporters point to polls that reflect their own assumptions, and they use the poll simply as evidence to support their pre-existing belief. It's the same tactic as interviewing an "expert" who agrees with you, and then using that expert's testimony to reinforce your assumptions.
It's a copy of the Hillary campaign
December 20, 2007 - 10:08 ET by JayTeePublish National phantom polls to show that the Democrats winning the 2008 Presidential election is inevitable, a foregone conclusion, a done deal......
It's also an attempt to predict the Future. Newspapers trying to emulate a Deity ?
Well, they were wrong about Kerry's Florida exit polls predicting the Future, and it's 2007 and Troops are coming home now, with more to follow in 2008.
And then Congress has mandated Petraeus report on the Iraq War front and center in April......a soon to be Highly Televised Event....which will pull some Polling numbers down, and some up.
So WATCH OUT pollsters, "the first one now will later be last, the times they are a changing" ...Try and keep up, will ya ?
Surprising?
December 20, 2007 - 10:18 ET by Pete WilsonNo. I have heard it said that when Democrats, or in this case, MSM "Journalists" speak, the truth is busy otherwise.