Posts Tagged ‘polls’

Problem: That “Tiny Minority” Of Muslim Extremists Isn’t

Thursday, January 8th, 2015

In the wake of the Charlie Hebdo shootings, the MSM has trotted out the usual talking points that such extremists views and actions are “not about Islam” and represent “only a tiny percentage” of all Muslims.

There’s just one tiny problem with this theory: It isn’t true.

Polls show that something like 20% of Muslim populations worldwide agree with terrorists, and far more agree with their aims as far as the imposition of Sharia law. Other findings from Pew (which is rarely accused of a right-wing bias):

  • Muslim support for stoning as a punishment for adultery is more than 20% in all countries surveyed.
  • Support for the death penalty for apostasy ranges from 4% of Muslims in Kazakhstan to 86% in Egypt.
  • Fully 99% of Afghan Muslims want Sharia law, which makes it hard to regard our long-term intervention there as anything but a failure.
  • In the UK, in another poll from 2006, 20% of surveyed Muslims supported the 2005 7/7 suicide attacks, and 40% supported the imposition of Sharia law.

    So: Not a “small minority.” And, as Brigitte Gabriel notes in the video below, so what if “most” Muslims are peaceful? The “mostly peaceful” citizens of Germany, Japan, China and the Soviet Union didn’t prevent those who controlled their governments from murdering millions:

    One of the first steps toward dealing with the problem of radical Islam is to stop repeating comforting lies about it.

    Will Colorado Crapweasel John Hickenlooper Get Booted From the Governor’s Mansion?

    Wednesday, September 24th, 2014

    A new Quinnipiac poll shows Colorado’s incumbent Democratic governor John Hickenlooper down ten points to Republican challenger Bob Beauprez.

    Michelle Malkin explains why:

    It was Hickenlooper who caved to East Coast gun-control zealots and partisan White House lobbying. As Democratic state legislators rigged the hearing process, snubbed Colorado constituents and insulted Second Amendment-supporting women during hearings last year, Hickenlooper was chumming it up on the phone with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Vice President Joe Biden.

    You may remember how well ramming through gun control initiatives worked out for Colorado Democrats: Two Democratic state senators got recalled and a third resigned rather than face a recall election.

    Hickenlooper was a key player in getting those unpopular measures passed, and this year he may pay the price for it, despite his incredulity at the issue being held against him. (“”What the f—? I apologized!”)

    For all the talk of Colorado turning blue, keep in mind that Obama only won 51.5% of the vote in 2012. And if Hickenlooper loses, that will leave exactly one Democratic governor “left standing between California and Missouri.”

    Even a Washington Post piece that poo-poos the Quinnipiac poll notes that Hickenlooper has “refused to make clear his position.” They were talking about his position on the Keystone pipeline, but the description applies just as well to a number of other issues Hickenlooper has refused to take a stand on. Long-time political observers know exactly what such reticence indicates: A liberal politician unwilling to let voters know exactly how far-left and out of touch his core convictions are compared to theirs.

    One of those issues is flip-flopping on whether to allow the execution of a convicted murderer:

    Last month, Bob Crowell — father of 19-year-old murder victim Sylvia Crowell — blasted Hickenlooper for indefinitely delaying the execution of mass murderer Nathan Dunlap. When Hickenlooper confided in CNN that he might grant Dunlap clemency if he loses in November, Crowell didn’t mince words. “I think that’s the coward’s way out, and I view John Hickenlooper as a coward.”

    After the recall, I wrote “Bottom line: If you’re a politician, and you choose to listen to Nurse Bloomberg rather than your constituents, you will be replaced.” I suspect that John Hickenlooper is about to learn that, good and hard.

    Wendy Davis Getting Slaughtered…Among Female Voters

    Tuesday, April 15th, 2014

    Well, this can’t be good news for Team Wendy:

    Texas women prefer Republican gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott to self-styled feminist Democratic hopeful Wendy Davis, according to a new survey from a left-leaning polling firm.

    According to a new Public Policy Polling survey, Davis’ favorability rating is upside down with women, while Abbott is right side up.

    Thirty-two percent of women view Davis favorably, while 46 percent view her unfavorably, and 22 percent were not sure. But 35 percent of women viewed Abbott favorably, and only 27 percent said they viewed him unfavorably. Thirty-eight percent weren’t sure.

    Abbott also took 49 percent of the female vote in a head-to-head matchup, compared to 41 percent for Davis, with 11 percent unsure.

    Also this:

    “Women get exhausted with women candidates who say they are pro-woman and then run on issues that real women don’t say are most important to them,” Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway told The Daily Caller.

    She added that this is another indication that the Democrats’ “war on women” narrative has run its course.

    Let’s hope so.

    Poor Wendy. She didn’t start out alienating her supposed base, but she got there as fast as possible…

    Public Not So Hot on Unlimited Surveillance State

    Wednesday, June 12th, 2013

    Or so says a CBS poll on the vast NSA/FISA/PRISM monitoring program. Republicans and Independents were pretty strongly against the government reading their emails and seizing their phone records. Democrats, on the other hand, were evenly split; evidently half of them do want Big Brother monitoring their every move…at least when the person in the White House has a (D) after their name.

    A less granular Pew poll show more support for the NSA being able to “monitor everyone’s email. Like any poll (much less a Pew poll), I’d take it with a large grain of salt, especially given how ridiculously over-weighted with Democrats this poll is:

    The New York Times Really Does Think You’re a Moron

    Wednesday, September 26th, 2012

    Right after I talked about how the mainstream media thinks you’re stupid enough to swallow badly skewed polls, Jim Geraghty reports that the New York Times is proving my point all over again by publishing a poll with more Democrats and fewer Republicans in the sample than in 2008 exit polls.

    Ohio 2008 exits: 39% Democrat, 31% Republican, 30% Independent.

    Ohio New York Times/Quinnipiac 2012 sample: 35% Democrat, 26% Republican, 35% Independent.

    In this sample, the partisan split is D+9 compared to D+8 four years ago, and the GOP is five percentage points smaller than in 2008.

    Pennsylvania 2008 exits: 44% Democrat, 37% Republican, 18% Independent.

    Pennsylvania New York Times/Quinnipiac 2012 sample: 39% Democrat, 28% Republican, 27% Independent.

    Somehow a D+7 split has turned into D+11 split, and Republicans’ share of the electorate is nine percentage points less than they were four years ago.

    Florida 2008 exits: 37% Democrat, 34% Republican, 29% Independent.

    Florida New York Times/Quinnipiac 2012 sample: 36% Democrat, 27% Republican, 33% Independent.

    Each party’s share only shifts a few percentage points, but the overall split goes from D+3 to D+9.

    One again, the New York Times thinks Republicans are too stupid to figure out the con. If they’re going to be that absurdly biased, why not just cut out the middleman and poll Obama for America staffers directly?

    Remember: The business model of The New York Times is to envelop liberals in a soft, warm, comforting cocoon of reassurance that their ideas and leaders are popular. You saw this in 2010, when it dangerously blinded them to the coming Republican wave until too late. The same patterns is repeating itself this year.

    A Bit on Polling (or, Why the Media Thinks You’re a Moron)

    Tuesday, September 25th, 2012

    Remember how how incredibly tight the 1980 election was? How Ronald Reagan managed to edge Jimmy Carter at the last minute despite losing Texas and New York?

    Probably not, mainly because that didn’t happen. But as Jeffrey Lord’s story makes clear, that was the narrative the New York Times was pushing most of the fall, and they had “polls” to back it up.

    In the pantheon of lies, damn lies, and statistics, polls aren’t even as valid as statistics. At this point, polls by the usual MSM suspects (NYT, PPP, CBS, MS/NBC, Time, Newsweek, NPR, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times, just to name a few) aren’t designed to gauge the race, they’re designed to encourage Democrats and discourage Republicans. They are, as Lord notes and Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee admitted to Ed Rollins, offering up “in kind contributions” to the Democrats.

    So let’s take a brief look at the many ways in which the MSM is distorting polls for the benefit of Obama and the Democrats.

  • Dick Morris (who knows a thing or two about polling) thinks the idea that an Obama victory is in the offing is bunk. “All of the polling out there uses some variant of the 2008 election turnout as its model for weighting respondents and this overstates the Democratic vote by a huge margin.” He also notes that even the skewed polls show Obama at less than 50%, and “the undecided vote always goes against the incumbent.”
  • By one analysis, pollsters are oversampling Democrats by an average of 6.1%.
  • More evidence that the media is oversampling Democrats.
  • A technical analysis of how that dynamic applies to Pennsylvania.
  • Jay Cost notes that “polls that do a poor job of differentiating enthusiastic non-voters from enthusiastic voters are going to overestimate Obama’s margin.”
  • Every week you see the media going to bat for Obama, and every week we see more evidence of lack of enthusiasm on the part of Democrats compared to 2008. 2010 did happen, no matter how much the media would like to pretend it didn’t. The Tea Party hasn’t gone away, nor suddenly decided that they like Obama’s free-spending ways after all. The fundamentals of our ailing economy and staggering unemployment haven’t gone away either. And remember: Republicans now outnumber Democrats in party identification.

    There’s a lot better chance that this election’s results will look like 1980 than that they will look like 2008.

    Polling in Perspective (or: Chill)

    Monday, September 10th, 2012

    This is the time of year when the political world is awash in polls. Some otherwise sensible Republicans take a look at those polls and go “Oh my God! Obama is up by 2! Or 5! He got a big convention bounce!”

    I could wade into the murky swamps of different polling companies, different methodologies, different biases, the problem with cell phone vs. landline samples, partisan weighting screens, the comparison between citizens, registered voters and likely voters, or a dozen other variables. But I’m not going to.

    Instead, one piece of advice, and one explanation.

    The advice: Chill.

    The explanation: Barack Obama was elected in 2008 with 52.9% of the popular vote to 45.7% for John McCain, the best popular vote margin of any Democratic Presidential contender since Lyndon Baines Johnson captured 61.1% of the vote in 1964. (People forget that Bill Clinton, for all his retrospective popularity, never broke 50% of the popular vote; Al Gore got 48.4% of the vote while losing in the electoral college in 2000.) Ignoring (for now) the electoral college and minor changes in the composition of voters, that means only 4% of the people who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 need to switch their vote for Mitt Romney to win.

    Do you think Obama might be 4% less popular than he was four years ago? Perhaps among those who have lost their jobs? There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that Obama is less popular than he was four years ago, his inability to fill campaign events the way he used to being one, and numerous elected Democrats in tough reelection fights avoiding the DNC being another. So who are you going to believe: MSM polls or your lying eyes?

    The media is desperately trying to pretend that 2010 never happened, or that it was an aberration.

    The polls are part of the media trying desperately to maintain what Instapundit Glenn Reynolds calls “preference falsification,” a willingness on the part of the political and media establishment to manufacture a false consensus that (in this case) liberal policies and politicians are popular. When it comes to the current election, the question might be most crassly boiled down to “Do you support Obama, or are you a racist?” In 2010 and now we’re finally seeing a “preference cascade” of people unwilling to buy that liberal narrative. The walls are finally coming down.

    Which is not to say the election is in the bag for Romney. There’s still a lot of hard work to be done, and a lot of work to make sure Republicans and anti-Obama independents get to the polls, especially in swing states. But there’s no reason to get worked up over each and every little poll. Time is not on Obama’s side.

    Final PPP Poll Has Cruz Up by 10 Points

    Monday, July 30th, 2012

    “PPP’s final poll of the Republican Senate runoff in Texas finds Ted Cruz opening up a 52-42 lead, an increase from our survey two weeks ago that found him ahead 49-44.”

    Further:

    Cruz’s victory is driven by 4 things: the Tea Party, the enthusiasm of his supporters, a generational divide within the Texas Republican ranks, and the lack of regard the party base currently holds for Rick Perry.

    The first three I believe; the fourth I have been resistant to, both because I thought Perry was the least flawed of the Republican Presidential candidates before he self-destructed in the debates, and because it fits far too neatly into the liberal media’s hatred of Perry and desire to see him fail. However, looking at the events of the last few months, I must admit that the possibility even Texas Republicans have soured on Perry does, in fact, fit the facts. (And several candidates that Perry endorsed in close, down-ballot races lost.)

    More:

    Cruz is ahead by a whooping 75-22 margin with Tea Party voters, more than making up for a 56-39 deficit to Dewhurst with voters who don’t consider themselves members of that movement. There has been too much of a tendency to ascribe any Republican primary upset over the last few years to Tea Party voters, but this is one case where it’s well justified.

    Cruz has a 63-33 advantage with voters who describe themselves as ‘very excited’ about voting in Tuesday’s runoff election. He also has a 49-45 advantage with those describing themselves as ‘somewhat excited.’ The only reason this race is even remotely competitive is Dewhurst’s 59-31 lead with voter who say they’re ‘not that excited’ about voting. It’s an open question whether those folks will really show up and if they don’t it’s possible Cruz could end up winning by closer t0 20 points.

    The greater excitement among Cruz voters can also be measured by their eagerness to get out and cast their ballots during the early voting period. Cruz leads 55-40 among those who say they’ve already voted, so Dewhurst will likely need a huge advantage among election day voters to overcome the deficit. But Cruz has a 49-44 lead with those who have yet to vote too.

    Cruz’s likely victory Tuesday is also indicative of a generational gap within the Texas Republican ranks. Dewhurst leads handily with seniors, 56-39. But he’s getting destroyed with younger voters, trailing 60-33 with those between 18 and 45 and 59-35 with those in the 46-65 age range.

    And finally:

    Runoffs are unpredictable and it still seems possible that Dewhurst could win on Tuesday, but for now it looks like all the momentum since the primary has gone in Ted Cruz’s direction.

    It’s late, so I haven’t dug into the crosstabs yet, but this analysis corresponds closely with my tracking of the race. As long as ted Cruz’s team can continue to execute in these last 36 hours, I believe that Ted Cruz will be the next United States Senator from Texas.

    Full results here.

    New PPP Poll: Cruz 49%, Dewhurst 44%

    Thursday, July 12th, 2012

    “PPP’s first poll of the Texas Senate runoff finds Ted Cruz with a surprising 49-44 lead and a much more enthusiastic cadre of supporters than former front runner David Dewhurst.”

    Surprising, that is, unless you’ve paid close attention to the race. The Cruz campaign is better organized, better focused, has a winning message, and hasn’t been caught lying the way the Dewhurst campaign has.

    That’s the second poll today showing Cruz leading Dewhurst. I’m pretty sure they’re hitting the panic button over at Dewhurst headquarters.

    Full poll results here.

    Cruz Tops Dewhurst 47% to 38% in New Poll

    Thursday, July 12th, 2012

    Wenzel Strategies, the polling company that accurately called Dick Lugar’s defeat and Deb Fischer’s victory has Ted Cruz at 47% leading David Dewhurst at 38%.

    This is the first real (not internal) poll released since the primary, and confirms that all the momentum on the race is on the Cruz side. The Cruz team seems to be working harder and generating more buzz than Dewhurst. I’ll let you know more when I have a chance to review the full poll numbers, methodology, etc.

    Meanwhile, an internal Dewhurst poll shows Dewhurst at 50%. You know, the same poll that had Dewhurst winning outright and Leppert coming in second earlier in the race. If anything, the mere 50% makes me more inclined to believe Cruz has pulled ahead, as it makes me think they had to fiddle with screening criteria just to get a bare majority.

    However, Dewhurst is still rich, and it’s still just under three weeks until the election. A lot can happen.