It wasn’t a poll dumbass. It was an interview. Of course being a Libtard I don’t expect you to think deep enough to know the difference.
Guardian on November 19, 2008 at 12:03 AM

The headline for this article:>
“Video: How Obama Got Elected; Update: Zogby confirms poll, denies “push polling””

Reading is fundamental to comprehension of the subject at hand.

Video: How Obama Got Elected; Update: Zogby confirms poll, denies “push polling”

Well….it is a push poll, designed to push the meme that media bias cost McCain/Palin the election.

How so? From what I’ve seen and read, there was nothing in the questions to influence the participants’ positions on media bias while they were taking the poll. Or are you just redefining “push poll”?

There is no experimental design, no null hypothesis, and some questions were illformed, like the question about Palin and Russia which actually has no correct answer.

Actually, there is a correct answer. 5 people (1%) chose to answer “None”.

Well….it is a push poll, designed to push the meme that media bias cost McCain/Palin the election.
There is no experimental design, no null hypothesis, and some questions were illformed, like the question about Palin and Russia which actually has no correct answer.
So the only results that can be drawn are anecdotal.
This is a fine anecdotal documentary effort, but Zogby cannot say anything statistically significant about results, because they didn’t practice statistical polling techniques.
This peer with a Michael Moore documentary….there are no statistical results, only anectdotal ones.

matoko_chan on November 19, 2008 at 9:11 AM

The typical liberal Democrat tactic that we’ve all come to know and love. “You really aren’t seeing what you’re seeing, and the guy who’s showing you what you’re seeing is Satan, or an inbred moron, or someone who longs for AmeriKKKa. Don’t pay any attention, everyone knows we’re the wizards of smart.”

Well….it is a push poll, designed to push the meme that media bias cost McCain/Palin the election.
There is no experimental design, no null hypothesis, and some questions were illformed, like the question about Palin and Russia which actually has no correct answer.
So the only results that can be drawn are anecdotal.
This is a fine anecdotal documentary effort, but Zogby cannot say anything statistically significant about results, because they didn’t practice statistical polling techniques.
This peer with a Michael Moore documentary….there are no statistical results, only anectdotal ones.

matoko_chan on November 19, 2008 at 9:11 AM

Ooooh, you sound so smart, with all those big words, and talk about null hypotheses and what-not.

Problem is, everything you say is either not applicable or downright untrue. It’s NOT a push poll. A “push poll” is one that attempts to change the opinion of the person being polled; this merely asked which candidate each statement applied to. And the statistical results (fully cross-tabulated) are available on Ziegler’s website. As for “experimental design” and “null hypothesis”, the survey was designed to test a narrow hypothesis: “Obama voters were highly aware of even trivial negatives regarding McCain & Palin, but highly unaware of some very important negatives regarding Obama & Biden”. Also, “None” was one of the answers on the “can see Russia” question; and for purposes of grading, either Palin or “None” was accepted as correct.

It would be instructive to compare a similar survey of McCain voters, but you can’t expect conservatives to take on that expense for the benefit of liberals (though I sure wish someone would; I absolutely believe conservatives would SMOKE liberals on this type of test).

Obviously, determination of “important” vs. “trivial” is subjective, and this subjectivity might be considered a weakness in the development of the survey; but unless you are prepared to argue that Sarah Palin’s wardrobe or gossip about her daughter’s love life are more important than whether Obama’s policies will make new coal-burning plants financial unfeasible, or cause energy prices to skyrocket — then I’d suggest finding another line of attack. ‘Course I’d really be interested to know how Palin’s soon-arriving granddaughter is more important to voters than Obama’s promise to make energy prices skyrocket, if you DO have some rationale for that veiwpoint.

I suppose one could also claim that some other factor influenced Obama voters’ poor performance; but it seems to me there are really only two explanations: poor exposure to info, or poor ability to process and store it. Perhaps I *am* just overly charitable to them, but I really think they’re capable of understanding these things if they hear them. Do you disagree? Do you have some third rational explanation for how it is that Obama voters don’t know that he got his primary opponents thrown off the ballot on technical grounds in his first race? I’d be interested in your theory. Maybe global warming made them forget. “It got hot, people forgot.” That’s the ticket! Move along, nothing to see here…

As for comparison with Michael Moore’s documentaries… To be comparable, Ziegler would have to pair questions with answers to different questions, and interview dozens of people and keep only the worst of the worst. The video *is* significantly more damning than the much more credible survey (though the survey is still VERY alarming), and probably should be disclaimed as such; but it is not the total hatchet-job on truth that Michael Moore has repeatedly produced.

Or to put it in “left-ese”, so you can understand it:

“ha ha too bad your guy svcks and our guy rocks”***

- RegularJoe
___________________________________________

*** For some reason I just can’t figure out how to spell badly enough to pass for a leftist (“svcks” was to get past any filter HA may have). It seems like it’d be easy, but I just can’t pull it off.

Forgot to mention: that joyless, toneless “OH BAMA” dirge chant makes me want to tear my ear drums out.

baldilocks on November 18, 2008 at 1:06 PM

I still can’t get that out of my head and it’s driving me insane!