NYT/CBS poll has its thumbs on the scale … again

posted at 12:21 pm on April 7, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The only consistent quality about the New York Times/CBS polling is its ridiculous sampling on party identification.  Once again, the NYT/CBS poll tries to paint Democrats as unassailably popular and Republicans as losing ground, and once again they have to wildly oversample Democrats to make the argument.  Their latest poll has a sixteen-point gap between the parties:

Americans have grown more optimistic about the economy and the direction of the country in the 11 weeks since President Obama was inaugurated, suggesting that he is enjoying some success in his critical task of rebuilding the nation’s confidence, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

These sometimes turbulent weeks — marked by new initiatives by Mr. Obama, attacks by Republicans and more than a few missteps by the White House — do not appear to have hurt the president. Americans said they approved of Mr. Obama’s handling of the economy, foreign policy, Iraq and Afghanistan; fully two-thirds said they approved of his overall job performance.

By contrast, just 31 percent of respondents said they had a favorable view of the Republican Party, the lowest in the 25 years the question has been asked in New York Times/CBS News polls.

It is not unusual for new presidents to enjoy a period of public support. Still, the durability of Mr. Obama’s support contrasts with that of some of his predecessors at the same point in their terms. It is also striking at a time when anxiety has gripped households across the country and Mr. Obama has alternately sought to rally Americans’ spirits and warn against economic collapse as he seeks Congressional support for his programs.

It’s not unusual for the Gray Lady to cook the numbers, either, to make sure their poll shows that support.  This is the breakout in their demographics on page 23:

  • Democrats – 39%
  • Republicans – 23%
  • Independents – 30%

In February, just a month earlier, they had Democrats at 36% and Republicans at 26% — still too low for the GOP, but only a ten-point gap.  Now they want to argue that Democrats have pushed the partisan gap to 16 points in a single month?  Not hardly, says Rasmussen:

In March, the number of Democrats in the nation fell two percentage points while the number of Republicans fell by half-a-point. Democrats continue to have a sizable advantage in terms of partisan identification, but the advantage is smaller than it’s been since December 2007.

Currently, 38.7% of Americans say they are Democrats. That’s down from 40.8% a month ago. It’s also the first time the Democratic total has slipped below the 40% mark since the Republican convention bounce last September. … In March, 33.2% of American adults say they are Republicans. That’s down from 33.6% a month ago. Over the past year, the number of Republicans has ranged from a low of 31.4% in April to a high of 34.4% in September.

In other words, the percentage has never been as low as 23%.  Republicans lost the national election, but if they had dropped to 23% nationwide, Democrats would likely control over 300 seats in Congress and 70 seats in the Senate.  Any poll using a 16-point gap between the parties is worthless.

Unfortunately, they’re not the only news agencies using ridiculous sampling to bolster their contentions of wild popularity for Barack Obama.  Newsweek used a 19-point gap in its latest polling.  CNN thus far has neglected to publish the internals of its poll.  It’s just another round of dishonesty from the media.

Rasmussen has Obama’s polling at a more rational 58%, but then again, they don’t have an investment in Obama, Inc, as the media does.

Update: Jim Geraghty reminds us that in a highly successful electoral cycle, Democrats had an affiliation edge of …. seven percent.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Well slap my ass and call me happy/

Knucklehead on April 7, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Well slap my ass and call me happy/

Knucklehead on April 7, 2009 at 12:23 PM

*slap*
HEY HAPPY!

blatantblue on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

The Obama bubble will burst soon and he will be as popular as a chewed wad of gum on the bottom of your shoe.

Unqualified, dimwitted people promoted far, far beyond their abilities rarely succeed.

Plus this guy is backed up by world class scum.

NoDonkey on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

* Democrats – 39%
* Republicans – 23%
* Independents – 30%

8% of people are, what, space aliens?

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Next you’re gonna tell me they only poll in California and New York. Wouldn’t suprise me…

Meric1837 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

8% of people are, what, space aliens?
lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Nope.

Lizard People.

Slublog on April 7, 2009 at 12:26 PM

* Democrats – 39%
* Republicans – 23%
* Independents – 30%
* Illegal Aliens – 8%

8% of people are, what, space aliens?

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Close. Fixed it above.

WashJeff on April 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM

We’re coming for you freaks. Just a matter of time. We’ll see how these numbers work for ya in 2010.

marklmail on April 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM

8% of people are, what, space aliens?

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

The remaining 8% are “Lizard People”, who were running against Al Franken and Norm Coleman in the Minnesota Senate race.

teke184 on April 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM

8% of people are, what, space aliens?
lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Lizard People.

Lizard Man 2012!

Bishop on April 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM

I am really looking forward to the poll we will all participate in, come the fall of 2010.

fogw on April 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Ok….that was creepy.

Bishop on April 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM

8% of people are, what, space aliens?

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Dead people. It’s the Chicago way.

Knucklehead on April 7, 2009 at 12:28 PM

That’s what they do, isn’t it?

Christian Conservative on April 7, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Lizard People.

Slublog on April 7, 2009 at 12:26 PM

We are having elections in Illinois today. I got to write in Lizard People. I hope they do a good job on the school board.

WashJeff on April 7, 2009 at 12:28 PM

8% of people are, what, space aliens?

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Close. Illegal aliens.

strictnein on April 7, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Ok….that was creepy.
Bishop on April 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Yeah, it kind of was.

I blame the Lizard People.

Slublog on April 7, 2009 at 12:28 PM

I wonder what the sampling of their polls looks like for the last 6 mos to year? Could be interesting to see the trend line there.

todler on April 7, 2009 at 12:28 PM

WashJeff on April 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM

great minds, etc etc

strictnein on April 7, 2009 at 12:29 PM

Ed, marvelous job breaking this spoll down…

RepubChica on April 7, 2009 at 12:29 PM

OT: Pics from Barack the Barbarian – a new comic book. Chicago-based Devil’s Due Publishing will publish the comic in June, featuring Obama as the muscle-bound, loincloth-wearing president of ‘Kickassistan’.

Be sure to click over to next pics to view more.

Conservative_SAHM on April 7, 2009 at 12:29 PM

The NYT sampling numbers for Repubilcans is on the lower end, but it’s not unreasonable given the outcome of the 2008 election either. Here’s some data from Gallup back in November, 2006:

In the Nov. 9-12, 2006 Gallup Poll, 35% of Americans identified as Democrats, 24% as Republicans, and 40% as independents. That compares with 34% Democratic, 31% Republican, and 32% independent identification in Gallup’s final pre-election poll. Thus, following the election, there was a significant increase in the percentage of Americans calling themselves independent (from 32% to 40%), a significant drop in the percentage of Republican identifiers (31% to 24%), and no meaningful change in the percentage of Democrats (34% to 35%).

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:29 PM

* Democrats – 39%
* Republicans – 23%
* Independents – 30%
8% of people are, what, space aliens?

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Not space aliens, Lo…Chupacabras.

Mike D. on April 7, 2009 at 12:30 PM

And again, keep in mind that polling firms get more bang for their telephony buck calling large metropolitan areas than they do more representative swaths of the country—but one of the big political divides is rural/urban, so calling a whole lot of people in Metropolitan Austin is not going to be all that representative of the political leanings of that area of Texas.

Sekhmet on April 7, 2009 at 12:30 PM

Well, the NYT prints something less than honest. Surprise, surprise, surprise!! If you believe anything they print, I have some waterfront property in Arizona to sell you.

If the Republican party would get their act together and start hammering away at all the boneheadedness coming from the Obama Administration, even the NYT couldn’t claim this kind of overblown support for them. It’s just a hamhanded tactic to make conservatives feel discouraged so that we won’t fight the Socialist propaganda machine. This just makes me want to fight all that much harder.

See you on Tea Party Day!

College Prof on April 7, 2009 at 12:30 PM

ED, the indie number was 38%

battleoflepanto1571 on April 7, 2009 at 12:30 PM

It’s a great trick, Inflate Obama’s approval ratings so the un-educated rabble will question how they could be so wrong in their dis-approval. If the majority thinks he’s doing such a great job, I better also.Don’t want to be “different.”

sandee on April 7, 2009 at 12:30 PM

Rasmussen has Obama’s polling at a more rational 58%, but then again, they don’t have an investment in Obama, Inc, as the media does.

No, Rasmussen has an investment in Republican politics! Good grief, you might have picked a less obviously partisan polling outfit, Ed.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

CNN thus far has neglected to publish the internals of its poll. It’s just another round of dishonesty from the media.

A couple of years ago, CNN gave their longtime polling partner Gallup the bum’s rush. They replaced Gallup with a polling firm owned by a longtime Clinton suckup.

Del Dolemonte on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

They should really try harder to hide their demographics/liberal bent. This display is just embarrassing.

ladyingray on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

SeeBS

rockmom on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

it’s not unreasonable given the outcome of the 2008 election

eh, i think it is.

think of all the conservatives that sat out 2008…. and the dems won handily. so in “reality”, the D-R numbers should be pretty close (because of all the Rs that stayed home– i bet not 5 dems in america sat out 2008).

battleoflepanto1571 on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Ed,

What about those internals that discuss popular opinion from the Internet perspective. Select a series of news stories and see how the same story is covered by the likes of Huffington, Kos, Hot Air and Lileks. Then, see how many responses each site gets.

Of course, there would be more to a survey than that.

But the response would be fun.

SeniorD on April 7, 2009 at 12:32 PM

Blatant partisanship on the part of media outlets. And then they wonder why no one is buying what they’re peddling.

NebCon on April 7, 2009 at 12:32 PM

8% of people are, what, space aliens?

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

“Obama friends and family”

LibTired on April 7, 2009 at 12:32 PM

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:29 PM

Party like it’s 2006

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:32 PM

No, Rasmussen has an investment in Republican politics! Good grief, you might have picked a less obviously partisan polling outfit, Ed.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

What sort of “investment” does Rasmussen have in Republican politics? Seems to me that if that was the case, they would themselves over-sample Republicans.

Del Dolemonte on April 7, 2009 at 12:33 PM

battleoflepanto1571, sure there were some who sat out instead of voting Republican, but it’s the overall trend towards the Democrats over the past two election cycles that stands out and is being reflected in what political party people identify with.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:34 PM

What else would you expect? This dinosaur helped get jerk-face into the oval office. They can’t go telling people NOW how wrong and irrelevant they really are, can they?

These people manipulate “news” every day. They can just as easily manipulate polls.

ErinF on April 7, 2009 at 12:34 PM

Once again – Rasmussen hit the Election EXACTLY. He now has Obama at 58%. Not high.

marklmail on April 7, 2009 at 12:34 PM

No, Rasmussen has an investment in Republican politics! Good grief, you might have picked a less obviously partisan polling outfit, Ed.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Links/etc of any type to show how his polling is partisan would be great to see. Until then… have a nice day.

strictnein on April 7, 2009 at 12:35 PM

I am going to assume this is the same poll:

Poll: Obama Approval Hits New High – 66%
CBS/NY Times Survey Finds Most Believe World Leaders Respect President, Though They Maintain U.S. Is Not Respected Overall

This what they did to fudge with the numbers.

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_Obama_040609.pdf

UNWEIGHTED WEIGHTED
Total Respondents 998
Total Republicans 264 230
Total Democrats 349 391
Total Independents 385 377
Half Sample A 485 483
Half Sample B 513 515

It was a 26,4% republican and 34.9% Democrat sample, they just decided to weighed in the Democrats more in their numbers. The went from a 8% difference between the parties to a over 16% after THEY decided to weigh the data.

Oh notice how in the NYT data on this poll they left out that fact?

JeffinSac on April 7, 2009 at 12:35 PM

It’s just another round of dishonesty from the media.

Indeed it is. And it’s why Obama will try to bail out his failing newspapers.

petefrt on April 7, 2009 at 12:35 PM

I think Rush should start his own newspaper and TV network. He’d put dinosaurs like CBS into extinction where they belong.

ErinF on April 7, 2009 at 12:36 PM

I just did my own poll, called a couple people up. Relax, Obamas new poll numbers are at 5% approval.

MDWNJ on April 7, 2009 at 12:36 PM

8% of people are, what, space aliens?

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Little Green Party men perhaps?

Count to 10 on April 7, 2009 at 12:36 PM

From the company that brought you Dan Rather and Dubya’s Air National Guard story…we present the most popular President evah! Nothing adjusts a survey in your direction like slanting the sample the way you want it to turn out.

kingsjester on April 7, 2009 at 12:37 PM

Perception/Deception Campaign!

That seems to never end!

canopfor on April 7, 2009 at 12:38 PM

What sort of “investment” does Rasmussen have in Republican politics?

He used to work for WorldNetDaily. ‘Nuff said.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:39 PM

I heard,on the top of the news hour,on AM radio,
that Obama’s approval rating,in the US was 66
percent,

somebody,has figured out a way to smoke Kool-Aid,
me thinks!!

canopfor on April 7, 2009 at 12:40 PM

No, Rasmussen has an investment in Republican politics! Good grief, you might have picked a less obviously partisan polling outfit, Ed.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Nice try…wait, I take that back, typical attempt.
Now how about some facts…

right2bright on April 7, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Links/etc of any type to show how his polling is partisan would be great to see.

you’re welcome.

sesquipedalian on April 7, 2009 at 12:41 PM

He used to work for WorldNetDaily. ‘Nuff said.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:39 PM

Umm, and if he shows that his sampling is not skewed like NYT/CBS is, you discount it because of who he previously worked for. Brilliant!

MDWNJ on April 7, 2009 at 12:41 PM

The NYT sampling numbers for Repubilcans is on the lower end, but it’s not unreasonable given the outcome of the 2008 election either. Here’s some data from Gallup back in November, 2006.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:29 PM

No, Rasmussen has an investment in Republican politics! Good grief, you might have picked a less obviously partisan polling outfit, Ed.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Most Accurate Pollsters in 2008

1T. Rasmussen (11/1-3)**
1T. Pew (10/29-11/1)**
3. YouGov/Polimetrix (10/18-11/1)
4. Harris Interactive (10/20-27)
5. GWU (Lake/Tarrance) (11/2-3)*

6T. Diageo/Hotline (10/31-11/2)*
6T. ARG (10/25-27)*
8T. CNN (10/30-11/1)
8T. Ipsos/McClatchy (10/30-11/1)
10. DailyKos.com (D)/Research 2000 (11/1-3)

11. AP/Yahoo/KN (10/17-27)
12. Democracy Corps (D) (10/30-11/2)
13. FOX (11/1-2)
14. Economist/YouGov (10/25-27)
15. IBD/TIPP (11/1-3)

16. NBC/WSJ (11/1-2)
17. ABC/Post (10/30-11/2)
18. Marist College (11/3)
19. CBS (10/31-11/2)
20. Gallup (10/31-11/2)

21. Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby (10/31-11/3)
22. CBS/Times (10/25-29)
23. Newsweek (10/22-23)

http://blogs.chron.com/txpotomac/2008/11/the_list_which_presidential_po.html

Ponz on April 7, 2009 at 12:42 PM

The lefties won’t think a poll is accurate until there is a 40% spread.

Speedwagon82 on April 7, 2009 at 12:43 PM

I wouldn’t take this poll seriously. They only sampled 948 people by phone and don’t give the sample population they used so I would from experience in advertising say it was skewed. They could very well be Obamageddon supporters.

xler8bmw on April 7, 2009 at 12:43 PM

After reading the NYT article again I noticed this link off the main article

How the Poll Was Conducted

The combined results have been weighted to adjust for variation in the sample relating to geographic region, sex, race, Hispanic origin, marital status, age and education.

But of course failed to mention how much the NYT and CBS were fudging with the numbers. At least CBS was honest enough to include this with their data.

JeffinSac on April 7, 2009 at 12:43 PM

Propaganda comes in many forms…when does the NYT go away.

d1carter on April 7, 2009 at 12:43 PM

I think the reason the democrat numbers are down is that the usual people they call during the day to poll them are out spending their stimulus money on crack.

workingforpigs on April 7, 2009 at 12:44 PM

BREAKING NEWS: People Who Like Obama Tend to Have Favorable Opinion of Obama

Jim Treacher on April 7, 2009 at 12:46 PM

MDWNJ, when you work for WorldNetDaily, you know what the partisan slant is going to be. Always.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:47 PM

He used to work for WorldNetDaily. ‘Nuff said.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:39 PM

Ross G. Douthat and Bill Kristol writes for the NYT, that makes them liberal as the NYT…’Nuff said.
We are asking for facts…many pollsters write many articles published in a variety of outlets.
Rasmussen, by the way, has written for the NYT, LAT, SF Chron…’Nuff said.

right2bright on April 7, 2009 at 12:47 PM

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Just like when you have a poll done by CBS/NYT, you know it will be dishonestly slanted toward the Democratic Party.

kingsjester on April 7, 2009 at 12:48 PM

An independent study of 20 pollsters found the following:

Most accurate: Rasmussen

17th place out of 20: Gallup
19th place out of 20: CBS/NY Times
Last place: Newsweek

Any poll done by Gallup, CBS/NY Times and Newsweek are worthless.

Norwegian on April 7, 2009 at 12:50 PM

When the Daily Kos polls more accurately than CBS and Gallup, you’ve gotta wonder!

Maybe the people out at the Tea Parties didn’t answer the phone when the pollster called…

Steve Z on April 7, 2009 at 12:51 PM

I move that the following be the new CBS logo here at HotAir. Anybody with me?

LibTired on April 7, 2009 at 12:51 PM

WASHINGTON — A federal judge dismissed the corruption conviction of former Sen. Ted Stevens on Tuesday and took the rare and serious step of opening a criminal investigation into prosecutors who mishandled the case.

“In nearly 25 years on the bench, I’ve never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I’ve seen in this case,” U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/07/judge-expected-toss-stevens-conviction/

The NYT can’t die soon enough for me. Now that their beloved Governor has taken action to force the rich out of New York, and the future of New York is that of Michigan, the death of this propaganda machine will come sooner rather than later.

Will the NYT have anything to say about this story? Don’t answer, as we all know the answer.

Keemo on April 7, 2009 at 12:51 PM

No one who has been paying attention should be surprised by this. The MSM enthusiastically promoted Obama, covered for his missteps, sidestepped all the issues about his character and fitness for the office, and mocked, ridiculed and disparaged McCain (and especially Palin) at every opportunity.

Having put the unqualified Obama into the White House, the MSM will do whatever is necessary now, including outright lying, to ensure that he is perceived favorably. As Chrissy Matthews told us, it’s their job to make sure that Obama is viewed as a successful president.

AZCoyote on April 7, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Pew has the Republican/Dem ID split at 27/36 as of last month.

But more to the point, Ed, you insinuate that the NYTimes is purposefully oversampling Dems. But, they poll people at random and only find out the breakdown of party affiliation after the poll is taken. Given that Dems are widening the gap in party affiliation, it’s not surprising to see a widening gap in party affiliation of those polled.

It’s also important to note that of the people surveyed, 23% described themselves as liberal, 31% described themselves as conservative and 39% described themselves as moderate.

Ed, your claim that the NYTimes is “cooking up numbers” is complete BS.

Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

He’s too big to fail for these clowns. A year from now when there’s double-digit unemployment they’ll still produce crock of shit polls like this. It’s annoying, but just get used to it.

gsherin on April 7, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Quick — somebody tell the troops that The New York Times is just lying!

benny shakar on April 7, 2009 at 12:55 PM

benny shakar on April 7, 2009 at 12:55 PM

Don’t you know the troops HATE Obama because they didn’t give him a standing ovation when he entered a mess hall in Hawaii?

Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:56 PM

8% of people are, what, space aliens?

lorien1973 on April 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Nope, frakking Cylons!

Traffic Cop Timmy on April 7, 2009 at 12:56 PM

I live in CA and before I’d say the middle of February wherever I went work, parties, functions, whatever there were more than enough of my Lib Dem friends who not only wnated to talk about the Big Zero but they actaully gushed about him. Then I started to notice he wasn’t coming up in conversation as much but I was okay with that. Now I get calls from family and friends saying, “don’t talk about O today at such and such function, no one wants to get into that uncomfortable topic” So the mood is changing and now I’m being told by family and friends not to say I told you so! The biggest blackout on O is from my black Christian friends though… You can bet I’m going to hit up all these people to support conservative candidates in 2010 and 2012! Maybe we can still save this country.

CCRWM on April 7, 2009 at 12:57 PM

Ponz on April 7, 2009 at 12:42 PM

Beat me to it…good job. Reputation of pollster is everything these days.

RepubChica on April 7, 2009 at 12:59 PM

Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

And all of this proves that there are more uninformed idiots than informed thinkers in the country. Ever listen to “man on the street” interviews. People are stupid and happy being same.

Traffic Cop Timmy on April 7, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Ross G. Douthat and Bill Kristol writes for the NYT, that makes them liberal as the NYT…’Nuff said.

Hey dude, let me know when Paul Krugman writes for the WorldNetDaily, ‘kay?

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Ed, your claim that the NYTimes is “cooking up numbers” is complete BS.

Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Explain to us, then, why the poll adjusted the sample to increase democrat weight and decrease republican weight?

Vashta.Nerada on April 7, 2009 at 1:02 PM

NYT and CBS should turn over their polling to an idependent organization, like ACORN.

Star20 on April 7, 2009 at 1:02 PM

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Rasmussen = Most accurate pollster in 2008. Nuff said!

MDWNJ on April 7, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Ed, your claim that the NYTimes is “cooking up numbers” is complete BS.

Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Hey Tom:

Anything coming out of your brain is “cooked” and complete BS.

Fixed that for ya…

Keemo on April 7, 2009 at 1:05 PM

No one who has been paying attention should be surprised by this. The MSM enthusiastically promoted Obama, covered for his missteps, sidestepped all the issues about his character and fitness for the office, and mocked, ridiculed and disparaged McCain (and especially Palin) at every opportunity.

Having put the unqualified Obama into the White House, the MSM will do whatever is necessary now, including outright lying, to ensure that he is perceived favorably. As Chrissy Matthews told us, it’s their job to make sure that Obama is viewed as a successful president.

AZCoyote on April 7, 2009 at 12:51 PM

I lend my copy of Media Malpractice to as many Dems as I can(they won’t buy it) so that they can be aware of the lies told about McCain Palin and how the MSM kept the ignorant masses completely ignorant of so many damging facts about the Big Zero. If we all (talking conservatives)do this and volunteer we can stop the madness.

CCRWM on April 7, 2009 at 1:07 PM

Update: Jim Geraghty reminds us that in a highly successful electoral cycle, Democrats had an affiliation edge of …. seven percent.

Shucks..you mean it’s not 16 points? Heart-ache….

RepubChica on April 7, 2009 at 1:08 PM

Most liberals think they are “independents” as well.

faraway on April 7, 2009 at 1:09 PM

Teh NYT/CBS poll is a joke and the respondents are their comrades in arms. Try reading the comments at the CBS website its’ moonbat city. Nothing that the media says can be trusted they have lost all credibility.

Tobias2012 on April 7, 2009 at 1:12 PM

The NYT sampling numbers for Repubilcans is on the lower end, but it’s not unreasonable given the outcome of the 2008 election either. Here’s some data from Gallup back in November, 2006:

In the Nov. 9-12, 2006 Gallup Poll, 35% of Americans identified as Democrats, 24% as Republicans, and 40% as independents. That compares with 34% Democratic, 31% Republican, and 32% independent identification in Gallup’s final pre-election poll. Thus, following the election, there was a significant increase in the percentage of Americans calling themselves independent (from 32% to 40%), a significant drop in the percentage of Republican identifiers (31% to 24%), and no meaningful change in the percentage of Democrats (34% to 35%).
starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:29 PM

The fact is that the latest CBS/NYT job approval poll is an outlier by about plus six points compared to other recent polls. And not just Rasmussen. That should tell you something right there.

If party ID is skewed towards the democrats as much as the CBS poll shows (and it’s not, CBS cooked the books for their own purposes, no other polling outfit is using a similar split), why would the generic congressional vote polls be tightening in recent weeks? National Public Radio has it at EVEN. Is NPR a Republican outfit too?

In the end most of these polls are using a phone sample which adds an inherent bias right there (time-of-day, no land lines, etc.).

Also I think that pollsters are now hip to the idea that a lot of people are just looking at averages of multiple polls as an indicator. I think there is a little bit of thought as to “who cares if the sample is skewed, people aren’t looking at the individual polls as much anymore, but it will at least pull the average of all polls a little bit in my direction”.

Dreadnought on April 7, 2009 at 1:13 PM

Ed, your claim that the NYTimes is “cooking up numbers” is complete BS.

Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

They’re claiming that this poll represents popular opinion among American voters while using an obviously skewed poll. That’s dishonest, and yet it does mean that they’re cooking up numbers. They’re getting skewed samples in order to deliver results they like. And they get away it because their apologists don’t demand honest polling — including you.

Ed Morrissey on April 7, 2009 at 1:14 PM

But it must be true…the official source for all things true, to the left, is the Times….even when they make it up.

JIMV on April 7, 2009 at 1:16 PM

The problem starts with the poll-taking itself: If someone wanted to sample the political opinions of Central Texas, there’s a lot more in Central Texas than Austin, but Austin/Round Rock/Buda/Cedar Park/Manor’s where you’re more likely to get someone to pick up a phone and answer. A representational sample size of a small community for a poll of Central Texans may be as few as five people—and three of them are probably not home when the pollsters call.

But a tenured student at UT is gonna vote a lot differently from a guy at the Blue Bell plant in Brenham, who may vote differently from a farmer in Liberty Hill.

Sekhmet on April 7, 2009 at 1:20 PM

They’re claiming that this poll represents popular opinion among American voters while using an obviously skewed poll.

But it’s not “obviously skewed” when you also look at what others, including Gallup, have polled with regard to party identification numbers. The GOP has consistently been in the range of 24% to 28% recently, so the NYT’s figure isn’t unreasonable in that regard. Your allegation of the NYT somehow cooking the books here simply isn’t true, Ed.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 1:20 PM

He used to work for WorldNetDaily. ‘Nuff said.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:39 PM

LOL! “used to work for”? According to wiki, he started his polling firm in 1995. It makes no mention of him ever having worked for anyone else. He wrote 19 pieces for WND in 2000 and 2001. That’s it. He was never in their emply so to speak.

In any event, as I mentioned earlier, the new CNN pollster has been a regular campaign donor to the Clintons, and John Zogby has admitted doing his polls on certain days of the week to favor Democrats. Either one of these is far more serious than Scott’s having written some op-ed pieces almost a decade ago for a conservative website.

Del Dolemonte on April 7, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Pew has the Republican/Dem ID split at 27/36 as of last month.

Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Gee, there’s a reliable source. /sarc/

Del Dolemonte on April 7, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Del D., you’ll get no argument from me about Zogby’s reliability sucking eggs!

Rassumssen on the other hand has been asking questions in some very slanted ways that skew GOP. Thankfully we have plenty of pollsters to choose from that are more reliable, including even the NYT/CBS poll, believe it or not.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 1:24 PM

…they poll people at random and only find out the breakdown of party affiliation after the poll is taken.
Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Do you really believe this?

Traffic Cop Timmy on April 7, 2009 at 1:25 PM

Ed, your claim that the NYTimes is “cooking up numbers” is complete BS.

Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Just go read my post how they actually came up with those numbers. The ACTUAL numbers were 26.4% Republican, 34.9% Democrat and 38.5% Independent.

The NYT and CBS changed these to 23% Rep, 39% Dem and 30% Ind AFTER they decided to “weighed” the numbers and that is why there is 8% missing in their math.

JeffinSac on April 7, 2009 at 1:25 PM

They’re getting skewed samples in order to deliver results they like. And they get away it because their apologists don’t demand honest polling — including you.

See, Ed, this is why you’d never make it as a reporter. You can’t just make stuff up and say it’s fact.

You have NO — as in zero, zilch — evidence that the NYTimes purposefully sought a sample with a larger amount of democrats than republicans so they could provide positive numbers for Obama. And the evidence — a larger amount of people IDing themselves as Dems across the nation; the fact that more of the people polled IDed themselves as conservative rather than liberal — points to a random sampling of people, more of which ID themselves as democrats. This isn’t a random poll of Republicans and Democrats, but a random poll of Americans.

You make the charge that the NYTimes is purposefully polling more Dems with zero evidence to support it — and despite evidence to the contrary. Yet, you get away with it because partisans like HotAir readers so willing gulp down the BS you peddle.

Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 1:25 PM

…they poll people at random and only find out the breakdown of party affiliation after the poll is taken.
Tom_Shipley on April 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Do you really believe this?

Traffic Cop Timmy on April 7, 2009 at 1:28 PM

No, Rasmussen has an investment in Republican politics! Good grief, you might have picked a less obviously partisan polling outfit, Ed.

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Hey dude, let me know when Paul Krugman writes for the WorldNetDaily, ‘kay?

starfleet_dude on April 7, 2009 at 1:01 PM

OK, Rasmussen wrote for WND. Rasmussen also came closest to accurately predicting the results of the election. Far closer, in fact, then did CBS/NYT.

Interesting logic trap you are working out for yourself there, but hey, its your hill, if you want to die on it.

A Balrog of Morgoth on April 7, 2009 at 1:28 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3