WaPo/ABC poll uses skewed sample to show public-option support
posted at 10:55 am on October 20, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
My first clue that the new WaPo/ABC poll had big problems in its sampling came from question 38 of the raw data released by ABC last night, the generic Congressional ballot. Most polls have that within the margin of error; both Rasmussen and Pew have it at a dead heat. The WaPo/ABC survey has Democrats winning that matchup by twelve points, 51%/39%.
That tends to discredit much of what the Post reports this morning:
A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that support for a government-run health-care plan to compete with private insurers has rebounded from its summertime lows and wins clear majority support from the public.
Americans remain sharply divided about the overall packages moving closer to votes in Congress and President Obama’s leadership on the issue, reflecting the partisan battle that has raged for months over the administration’s top legislative priority. But sizable majorities back two key and controversial provisions: both the so-called public option and a new mandate that would require all Americans to carry health insurance.
Independents and senior citizens, two groups crucial to the debate, have warmed to the idea of a public option, and are particularly supportive if it would be administered by the states and limited to those without access to affordable private coverage.
But in a sign of the fragile coalition politics that influence the negotiations in Congress, Obama’s approval ratings on health-care reform are slipping among his fellow Democrats even as they are solidifying among independents and seniors. Among Democrats, strong approval of his handling of the issue has dropped 15 percentage points since mid-September.
The sampling comprises 33% Democrats, as opposed to only 20% Republicans. That thirteen-point spread is two points larger than their September polling, at 32%/21%. More tellingly, it’s significantly larger than their Election Day sample, which included 35% Democrats to 26% Republicans for a gap of nine points, about a third smaller than the gap in this poll. Of course, that’s when they were more concerned about accuracy over political points of view.
Remember when I wrote that poll watchers need to remember the recent Gallup poll on party affiliation? Gallup polled 5,000 adults and found that the gap between Democrats and Republicans had closed to the smallest margin since 2005, six points, and had been reduced more than half since the beginning of the year. For the WaPo/ABC poll, though, their sample gap has increased almost 50% during that time.
Given that skew, it’s hardly surprising that they find a 57% approval rating for Obama, up three points since last month, almost the entirety of the gap increase since the last poll. His 48% tie on health care should be a significant disapproval instead, and the 45%/51% slide on the deficit has probably expanded at the same rate as the deficit in a survey with a realistic sample.
However, even that support seems rather … murky. In question 6, “Overall, given what you know about them, would you say you support or oppose the proposed changes to the health care system being developed by (Congress) and (the Obama administration)?”, only 45% said they approved, while 48% said they disapproved. The public-option question gets asked in this manner:
8. Would you support or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans?
I’d call that more than a little biased. The “compete with private insurance” is a political claim by ObamaCare advocates. The private insurance industry competes within itself, just as all markets do. The government plan would not compete, but would undercut prices while getting subsidized on losses, while the same government imposes “fees” and new taxes on insurers. It’s no more “competition” than it would be to have Wal-Mart run the retail business and assess fees on its “competitors” for the privilege of existence.
On that question, the public option gets the exact same numbers as Obama’s approval ratings. Consider the implications of that in regards to this skewed survey.










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 4 Next »
WaPo still swallowing the hopenchange that Gibbsy is dishing out on a daily basis.
ted c on October 20, 2009 at 10:58 AM
Wow. At this rate, they are going to be discounting Republican opinion entirely by the end of next year.
Red Cloud on October 20, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Liars.
But Mr. Taranto thinks it would be awful if they went under.
Screw him and the agenda driven media.
artist on October 20, 2009 at 11:00 AM
This is border line fraud.
donkichi on October 20, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Retarded.
JAM on October 20, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Also check out Rasmussen’s Daily Tracking Poll today…
mikeyboss on October 20, 2009 at 11:01 AM
try to silence our voices…
try to discredit our values
attempt to riducle our opinions…
decline to poll us regarding major policy initiatives…
what’s next?
FEMA camps….
ted c on October 20, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Just following their leaders in DC.
lorien1973 on October 20, 2009 at 11:02 AM
At this rate in 2012 the polling will be 75% Dem 10% Republican 15% Indy.
cobrakai99 on October 20, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Wow, the media being duplicitous? There’s a stunner.
JammieWearingFool on October 20, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Sorry, should have given link: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
mikeyboss on October 20, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Corrected myself.
donkichi on October 20, 2009 at 11:02 AM
WaPo results summary:
“We’ll tell you what to think just ask us.”
ted c on October 20, 2009 at 11:03 AM
What I don’t understand is why the Dems are so adamant about not reporting the truth, and having accurate polls.
What do they have to gain by lying to the public?
I have to ponder about that for awhile…why would the dems lie about their plan, if their plan is so good…hmmmmm, let me think….
right2bright on October 20, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Hey, maybe WaPo is keeping their message in line w/what the administration wants b/c they don’t want to be targeted like FoxNews. Much to their delight, they know that secretly the WSJ is next on Axelhole’s hitlist. Can’t have the #1 paper in circulation challenging the administration. Next up, “the WSJ is not a legitimate newspaper.” – David Axelrod.
JAM on October 20, 2009 at 11:04 AM
mikeyboss, you should use the link function.
JammieWearingFool on October 20, 2009 at 11:04 AM
mikey notes that The One is at -12 today.
Drudge is headlining that Gates pushing Obama to come to troop decision. I guess Gates didn’t get the memo that Bill Ayers holds the key to what Obama is going to do. Increase troop levels, and Bill spills the beans on the book. Fail to increase troop levels, lose the war.
Decisions.
*tick*tock*
ted c on October 20, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Skewed but accurate.
LibTired on October 20, 2009 at 11:05 AM
From another thread….
Got to add this
right2bright on October 20, 2009 at 11:05 AM
I’m sure that the WaPo & ABC also admire Mao, and Anita Dunn is on their board.
PatriotRider on October 20, 2009 at 11:05 AM
I think I read somewhere that the WaPo & ABC did the vote count in Iran
PatriotRider on October 20, 2009 at 11:07 AM
The Washington Post is nothing more than a member of the emperor’s court and one of his most trusted propaganda elements. These polls are mathematical garbage and their purpose is to influence not inform. Lies, deceit and deception are virtues of fascism and are all part of this left wing rag’s master plan to indoctrinate and control the confused masses.
rplat on October 20, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Why bother asking Republicans at all? It’s not like they’re a legitimate voter block.
CookeyD on October 20, 2009 at 11:09 AM
They’ve been acting like we don’t exist for years. Now they are adjusting the polls to reflect that view.
MarkTheGreat on October 20, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Drudge is headlining Gibbsy showing Obama “Michael Jordan” pic to reporters with the catch phrase “Gates says Afghan decision can’t wait”
message: It’ll wait until after the Boss gets done with his hoops.
ted c on October 20, 2009 at 11:11 AM
who all see the leprechaun say ‘yeah’
100% see the leprechaun. . . it’s a scientific poll of course.
ThackerAgency on October 20, 2009 at 11:12 AM
“Rick, I am, shocked, SHOCKED, to find gambling going on in this establishment!”….
Bruno Strozek on October 20, 2009 at 11:12 AM
It was the ref’s fault! We woulda won it if it weren’t for the stinkin’ refs!
Blaming the sample is the last refuge of a loser.
Bleeds Blue on October 20, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Bleeds Blue on October 20, 2009 at 11:12 AM
yeah, we’ll all lose if the government passes a public option. It won’t be us, but our kids and their kids who will lose.
If you have grandkids, you will have to justify this burden to their lives one day if it passes.
ThackerAgency on October 20, 2009 at 11:16 AM
LibTired on October 20, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Classical ‘grey’ propaganda.
Wrapping a a [very] big lie around a [very] slender truth.
Psyops 201.
CPT. Charles on October 20, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Bleeds Blue
Then why do you come here to read Ed and Allah, if by pointing this out, that makes them losers? What if WaPO just goes balls out and only samples Dems and then say that the public option has 80% support! Yay! That would make it accurate in your wittle, blue mind then? Next. Loser.
JAM on October 20, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Oh please . . . the “sample” is critical. If it is not representative of the population then the conclusion and its statistics are unreliable and invalid. Or in the common vernacular . . . the result is mathematical garbage.
rplat on October 20, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Isn’t this what they do in communist countries?
Communist democrats
Communist media
darwin on October 20, 2009 at 11:20 AM
OK … then you won’t mind a poll that’s skewed 33% Republicans vs 20% democrats next time.
darwin on October 20, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Maybe there just aren’t any Republicans anymore.
Hasn’t the Republican Party turned off most of its membership with a RINO presidential candidate and support for RINOs all across the Country, including Christie over Lonegan in New Jersey? How about the Republican Party’s refusal to do anything about Snowe’s votes for the stimulus and for the health care bill? How about the fact that Specter was never ejected from the Republican Party; he had to leave on his own ON HIS TERMS.
I abandoned the Republican Party because of the RINOs. I would assume that almost everybody else, including HotAir posters, have also done this.
The Republica Party is dead to me. I dn’t want them to be included in surveys by WaPo or by anybody else.
jay12 on October 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM
That first Stat 101 course is going to be difficult for him.
a capella on October 20, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Isn’t this what they do in communist countries?
Communist democrats
Communist media
darwin on October 20, 2009 at 11:20 AM
Why yes.
Manipulate the public.
Mislead and lie to them, keep them ignorant.
This is dangerous and it’s feeding anger.
artist on October 20, 2009 at 11:23 AM
I am so sick of the mainstream media today! I honestly do not believe a word the say or print anymore. What a shame.
indy8 on October 20, 2009 at 11:23 AM
So if the ref spots one team 2 touchdowns at the beginning of the game, that’s ok with you? WaPo/ABC blatantly stacked the deck in favor of the Dems to get the poll result they wanted. If you deny that, you’re either blinded by ideology or an idiot.
Doughboy on October 20, 2009 at 11:25 AM
Who out there has the balls to tell the masses that even the media are lying to them. We’ve known this for long time but there is a giant group of people who are oblivious to this and they must be informed. Not only must we hold this administration and other elected leaders accountable, but we must also hold the media accountable for telling the damn truth for a change! Arrgh!!
glennbo on October 20, 2009 at 11:26 AM
Umm….they’ve pretty much done this already.
Texas74 on October 20, 2009 at 11:26 AM
… While still on their knees.
TXUS on October 20, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Bleeds Blue – you don’t get it, running skewed polls like this is how the media “work the refs.” The Post has been doing the same thing trying to get Creigh Deeds elected Governor of Virginia. That paper isn’t even trying to hide its bias anymore, it’s gone all-in for Obama.
rockmom on October 20, 2009 at 11:29 AM
LOL
lorien1973 on October 20, 2009 at 11:29 AM
20% Republican? Too high
/
NYT
nyx on October 20, 2009 at 11:31 AM
I know that this is like trying to rationalize with one that it inherently irrational, but here goes. It’s simple. If support for this beast were truly where some of these skewed samples suggest, then the Dems (and a fair number of Repubs) would be tripping over themselves to vote for it so as to claim credit. That’s simply not happening (and won’t). So, the polls must not reflect what WaPO et al say they do. Indict the ones crying foul all you want, but the President and Congress look at their internals and they’re not good on this issue, period. If they were it would be law by now – it’s not, so WaPo and the other minions from the MSM are out there touting a crappy poll to prop this up. Again, if the public really wanted this, it would be completed already with the number of Dems seats held and Obama as POTUS.
volnation on October 20, 2009 at 11:31 AM
I can’t listen to the MSM these days, or read any of their propaganda masquerading as legitimate news. Not only does it elevate my blood pressure, but I can’t make myself believe anything they allege.
hachiban on October 20, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Every picture tells a story:
Recent Trends in Party Identification
Given only 22% of respondents back in April, 2009 responded they identified as Republicans, and that the trend has been downward for years, 20% is a reasonable estimate for pollsters to use.
starfleet_dude on October 20, 2009 at 11:33 AM
You never know, he might do very well at it like me. Pretty soon you figure out that you can skew the sample enough to get any outcome you want…which is how I scored an A on my final project.
Youngs98 on October 20, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Almost every “mainstream” poll that comes out has a gross oversampling of Democrats vs. Republicans.
CP on October 20, 2009 at 11:33 AM
…And I’ll say it again; pay little or no serious attention to polls of any kind. As this post so accurately points out (and people like Bleeds Blue totally fail to accept) is the final numbers always favor the guy who writes the check.
Yes or No answer, please. “Are you still beating your wife?”
If you answer yes, it means you USED to beat her but now you’ve stopped. If you answer no, well….you get the idea.
That’s exactly how these polling questions are tricked up.
GoldenEagle4444 on October 20, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Listen, it is real hard to get an adequate number of Republicans for these polls, what with them working all the time.
al sends
afterdarknesslight on October 20, 2009 at 11:34 AM
discredit, discredit, discredit. why can’t all polls be like rasmussen? IT’S NOT FAIR!
sesquipedalian on October 20, 2009 at 11:35 AM
NYT’s Poll: 98% of people support dissolving the Constitution and Bill of Rights!
* (poll data: Former KGB and Berkley residents 99% Republican 0.5%)
darwin on October 20, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Those few who only look to the WaPo for news will end up being shocked after 2010.
The majority of Americans won’t.
Revenant on October 20, 2009 at 11:36 AM
LOL!
starfleet_dude on October 20, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Big shockere there…
/
OmahaConservative on October 20, 2009 at 11:36 AM
This is news, but Fox is not?
rjoco1 on October 20, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Big
shockereshocker there…OmahaConservative on October 20, 2009 at 11:37 AM
That’s just stupid. It’s obviously a skewed poll.
darwin on October 20, 2009 at 11:37 AM
There is more truth in that statement than one might imagine . . . ask yourself, who do you find at home in the middle of the day when the pollster calls.
rplat on October 20, 2009 at 11:37 AM
What was that cry as Paul Revere rode though towns? Two arms, two arms.
Zelsdorf Ragshaft on October 20, 2009 at 11:37 AM
That about right – the only polls that are any good are the big ones on election day and the internals commissioned by politicians who need to know which way the wind is blowing. Most of the rest are worthless for the reasons put forth by GoldenEagle.
volnation on October 20, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Ignoring clear indications of flawed polling is typical for those who support the filthy lying coward in the White House. I’ve already seen several articles that point out the problems with the WP poll. Go to the Washington Examiner site if your cognitive ability goes beyond posting your usual inane stupidity.
highhopes on October 20, 2009 at 11:38 AM
Hah! I knew it! I heard that putz Charles Gibson spouting that nonsense as I was dashing for the remote (to change to FNC). However, I was off on the oversampling – I called it much closer.
Lyin’ bastids.
coppertop on October 20, 2009 at 11:38 AM
The government sanctioned media will bring it’s own ultimate downfall. Not even the socialist-democrats can save them from this incestuous relationship. Bag-em and Tag-em!
joe btfsplk on October 20, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Well, look who did the comment. Of course it was gonna be stupid.
All we need is crr6 to chime in with “success!” and the troll circle is completed.
lorien1973 on October 20, 2009 at 11:39 AM
discredit, discredit, discredit. why can’t all polls be like rasmussen? IT’S NOT FAIR!
LOL!
starfleet_dude on October 20, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Guess who was #1 in 08?
LOL
Joke’s on you.
artist on October 20, 2009 at 11:41 AM
You know what’s funny, the Leftists think that if healthScare passes, it’ll be good for them at the real polls next year. Hahahahaha….bring it.
Youngs98 on October 20, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Every time a poll comes out that you don’t like, you go into all this highfalutin’ sounding nonsense about the sample. It doesn’t matter what the organization or the poll, if it doesn’t comport with your own blinkered sample, it’s “flawed.” I’ll vet three days before the election you were saying “how can they give Obama a six-point lead? This poll is biased!”
It’s whining and, I’ll wager, the pollster spends a lot more time worrying about his sample than you do.
Burden? The 20 grand and climbing my employer already pays for my insurance is a burden. The $700/month we’d have to shell out if my wife’s company covered us would be a burden. The 17% margin and overhead my insurance company skims off is a burden. The $2.4 trillion American companies trying to compete internationally pay in health care costs is a burden. The public option? Not so much.
Yes, I’ll have to justify why we couldn’t get my grandkids a decent single-payer system like the rest of the civilized world. And, if the Republicans win on this one, I’ll have to explain to my son why he can;t get insurance because he has a pre-existing condition.
Bleeds Blue on October 20, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Occam’s Razor
Perhaps there are just fewer people identifying themselves as “Republican”?
This does not mean they have become democrats, more likely since the number has grown, Independents.
I can certainly see where a growing number of Libertarians who previously identified as Republican might call themselves independents today, especially now the Presidential election cycle is over.
I would guess “Conservative” is a much larger pool than Republican, perhaps even twice as much.
NextGen on October 20, 2009 at 11:42 AM
mccain will win.
sesquipedalian on October 20, 2009 at 11:42 AM
why is wapo/abc poll showing a 13 point gap where national gap is 6 or less ? or are you saying the gap of 13 is correct?
runner on October 20, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Always arguing from flawed premises…
To the extent that our healthcare system is flawed, Government is the REASON, not the ANSWER.
Youngs98 on October 20, 2009 at 11:45 AM
you can always move to Cuba – their gov run system is superb, I hear. don’t try to make Cuba here
runner on October 20, 2009 at 11:45 AM
Here’s a link to a graph showing the U.S. political party identification trend again, in hopes that some will at least consider reality when it comes to party identification:
Recent Trends in Party Identification
starfleet_dude on October 20, 2009 at 11:45 AM
The media hanging on tight to Obama’s thingie, the nation be scroomed.
Schadenfreude on October 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Can I get this dramatically read to me next time?
lorien1973 on October 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM
I understand. I made a pretty good living for a lot of years running clinical trials and in the real world, sampling quality and integrity keeps you from getting fired when field use results don’t match up with trial results…unless, of course, one belongs to the media or the democratic party and there is no gold standard to compare.
a capella on October 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM
this was the poll joe and mika were proudly touting this am…
_________
we only report good polls for dear leader/you decide
cmsinaz on October 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Yes, a 13 point gap is a reasonable estimate. See my previous comment and click on the link.
starfleet_dude on October 20, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Why don’t you explain how higher costs were caused by the government to begin with … and how the government had every opportunity to lower costs and expand service simply by cutting the regulation that’s forcing the high costs to begin with?
Why don’t you explain that government programs like MediCare and Mediaid are raising the cost of medical care for everyone?
Why don’t you explain that millions of illegal aliens have skyrocketed the cost of health care?
Why don’t you start dealing in the truth instead of your fantasy communist world?
darwin on October 20, 2009 at 11:48 AM
That’s nice, but WaPo shows different numbers for party identification from just a month or so ago. Given that they are the ones who are, you know, doing the poll, it should – you know – conform to the numbers they’ve generated in the past.
Plus, you are also assuming they actually used any sort of trending, instead of just pulling numbers out of their butts (more likely).
Also the questions are skewed, to guide the person to the correct answer. Read the highlighted 8 above, it’s designed to produce an answer.
Maybe Obama has a point. Democrats -are- retarded.
lorien1973 on October 20, 2009 at 11:49 AM
I wasn’t aware Medicaid turned down applicants due to pre-existing conditions.
a capella on October 20, 2009 at 11:49 AM
Awesome. In the midst of this discussion on health care reform where the public option is the key focus in the debate, the Post runs a poll with a 13% sampling bias toward Obama voters then proclaims it’s a hit!
John on October 20, 2009 at 11:50 AM
“Civilized”
- rights for women in Afghanistan, the Middle East and elsewhere?
- Mao adherents?
- Marxists in the admin…all over…
- Honduras?
- Sudan?
- Somalia just gave a first prize for knowing most of the Koran…yeah…an AK47, fully loaded and a belt
- U.N. sings kumbaya, along with Europe, Asia (not China) and etc.
- Sharia taking over Europe
You may keep your high-faluting “civilization”, elitist impersonator. When your mouths match your idealism, I’ll begin to pay attention. There is nothing truly liberal or progressive about any of you lefties, nothing.
Schadenfreude on October 20, 2009 at 11:52 AM
ED:
Better metaphor for the “public option”:
It’s like having the referee suit up to play for one of the teams on the field.
Worse, this referee can change the rules any time he likes. If his team is losing, he just finds a new way to penalize the other team.
jeanneb on October 20, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Two things wrong here moron.
First, those in those single-payer systems in the rest of the “civilized world” come here for care because they can’t get it back home. Your grandkids will be receiving substandard care compared to what your pathetic arse gets now.
Second. This has nothing to do with a Republican win. Your corrupt party and radical politicians have control of Congress and the White House. What’s stopping you, you rat bastard traitor? Your beef is with the filthy lying coward in the White House and Reid/Pelosi- The GOP is completely sidelined here.
highhopes on October 20, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Wouldn’t a more accurate name for the MSM be the WHAM (White House Approved Media)?
miles on October 20, 2009 at 11:54 AM
It doesn’t matter what the polls say anymore. They’re going to cram it down our throats regardless.
Missy on October 20, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Bleeds Blue, when you begin to celebrate the 20 years anniversary of the fall of communism…I’ll also begin to look up…until then…hot air…
Schadenfreude on October 20, 2009 at 11:55 AM
sounds good
cmsinaz on October 20, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Not to mention imposing “visiting team ball servicing fees” to finance the whole game.
highhopes on October 20, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Your son can get insurance, it’s just more expensive. Same with getting car insurance after you’ve had multiple accidents.
The bottom line is he’s your son. He’s your responsibility. You help him. Quit laying your and his reponsibility on the backs of others.
darwin on October 20, 2009 at 11:57 AM
Personally, I prefer SSM for State Sponsored Media or State Supported Media. It so much more accurately depicts the way ABC/WaPo/et. al. have become nothing more than a propaganda arm of the DNC and the radical socialist despot infesting the White House.
highhopes on October 20, 2009 at 11:57 AM
France, maybe. Though the subjunctive continues to give me fits.
Cuba, it should be noted, has the best doctors and medical care in the Caribbean. It may be the only thing they do right. In fact, one of the ways they “paid” for their Venezuelan oil was by lending doctors to Chavez.
Not that they’re not a brutal repressive dictatorship who would jail a loudmouth like me in minutes.
This post is 100% fact-free.
1) I think parsing samples is, to some extent, always a loser’s game given the nature of polling and the general professionalism of pollsters. You’re rarely if ever going to find a significant purposeful bias in sample selection because it’s bad for business, but there are always going to be variations from the “true” distribution.
2) I’m with the earlier poster who suggests that this poll classifies people as independents (given their massive plurality) who, in other polls would be assigned a party label.
3) Given a series of polls by the same pollster for the same organization, what interests me — and what should trouble y’all — is the trend, which is positive for the public option.
Bleeds Blue on October 20, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »