67% support for Presidents plan from those who watched speech

[GuitarDaddy]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...bama.speech/index.html

Not only does 67% percent of those who watched the speach support the presidents plan, but 1 in 7 changed their mind after watching the speech

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...bama.speech/index.html

Not only does 67% percent of those who watched the speach support the presidents plan, but 1 in 7 changed their mind after watching the speach

All too easy!

"The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican."

From the very link you provided, at the bottom there, chief.

Shock and awe! Democrats approve of a Democrat president's plan!

:laugh:

Partisan hackery at its finest, both from CNN and the OP. Talk about skewed and worthless polling...

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...bama.speech/index.html

Not only does 67% percent of those who watched the speach support the presidents plan, but 1 in 7 changed their mind after watching the speach

All too easy!

"The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican."

From the very link you provided, at the bottom there, chief.

Shock and awe! Democrats approve of a Democrat president's plan!

:laugh:

Partisan hackery at its finest, both from CNN and the OP. Talk about skewed and worthless polling...

You guys quote right wing Rassmussen polls constantly, I,m just representing the other side And you guys like to forget who won the only poll that counts

 

[UglyCasanova]

I have nothing to add other than speech does not have an 'a'.

 

[Genx87]

I read this piece this morning and wondered what the point of it was except to fill space. Shocker 67% of people who watched the speech who happen to be half Democrat support Obama.

I have heard of inane points but this article is approaching epic levels.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

All too easy!

"The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican."

From the very link you provided, at the bottom there, chief.

:laugh:

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I read this piece this morning and wondered what the point of it was except to fill space. Shocker 67% of people who watched the speech who happen to be half Democrat support Obama.

I have heard of inane points but this article is approaching epic levels.

That was not the important part of the poll, and CNN's analysis of it specifically mentions this. The raw percentage doesn't mean much as the spread doesn't match the current partisan composition of America.

What IS interesting is the change in support from before and after the speech, as that change is significant regardless of the makeup.

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...bama.speech/index.html

Not only does 67% percent of those who watched the speach support the presidents plan, but 1 in 7 changed their mind after watching the speach

All too easy!

"The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican."

From the very link you provided, at the bottom there, chief.

Shock and awe! Democrats approve of a Democrat president's plan!

:laugh:

Partisan hackery at its finest, both from CNN and the OP. Talk about skewed and worthless polling...

Looks like they acknowledged that pretty early in the article:

The audience for the speech appears to be more Democratic than the U.S. population as a whole. Because of this, the results may favor Obama simply because more Democrats than Republicans tuned into the speech. The poll surveyed the opinions of people who watched Wednesday night's speech, and does not reflect the views of all Americans.

You can't poll people about the effectiveness of a speech if they didn't actually watch it.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Balt

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...bama.speech/index.html

Not only does 67% percent of those who watched the speach support the presidents plan, but 1 in 7 changed their mind after watching the speach

All too easy!

"The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican."

From the very link you provided, at the bottom there, chief.

Shock and awe! Democrats approve of a Democrat president's plan!

:laugh:

Partisan hackery at its finest, both from CNN and the OP. Talk about skewed and worthless polling...

Looks like they acknowledged that pretty early in the article:

The audience for the speech appears to be more Democratic than the U.S. population as a whole. Because of this, the results may favor Obama simply because more Democrats than Republicans tuned into the speech. The poll surveyed the opinions of people who watched Wednesday night's speech, and does not reflect the views of all Americans.

You can't poll people about the effectiveness of a speech if they didn't actually watch it.

Poor RPS, he just can't win lately.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Balt

Looks like they acknowledged that pretty early in the article:

Who cares if they acknowledged it? They know very well that people will go around quoting the poll without mentioning that, like the OP above.

Drudge called them out on it, so they look pretty bad right now. :laugh:

 

[rudder]

How many were like me who knew obama would spout of the same crap about his healthcare "reform" and did not want to watch the speech?

My guess is they were no included in the polling.

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Balt

Looks like they acknowledged that pretty early in the article:

Who cares if they acknowledged it? They know very well that people will go around quoting the poll without mentioning that, like the OP above.

Drudge called them out on it, so they look pretty bad right now. :laugh:

They look pretty bad to people who can't bother to actually read articles rather than just headlines, correct.

 

[OrByte]

frankly, I am pleased to see support amongst democrats growing.

given that...it makes the need for bipartisanship all the more unnecessary.

this can still be passed without republican support.

Still, I would like to see polling done with representative groups...

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Balt

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...bama.speech/index.html

Not only does 67% percent of those who watched the speach support the presidents plan, but 1 in 7 changed their mind after watching the speach

All too easy!

"The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican."

From the very link you provided, at the bottom there, chief.

Shock and awe! Democrats approve of a Democrat president's plan!

:laugh:

Partisan hackery at its finest, both from CNN and the OP. Talk about skewed and worthless polling...

Looks like they acknowledged that pretty early in the article:

The audience for the speech appears to be more Democratic than the U.S. population as a whole. Because of this, the results may favor Obama simply because more Democrats than Republicans tuned into the speech. The poll surveyed the opinions of people who watched Wednesday night's speech, and does not reflect the views of all Americans.

You can't poll people about the effectiveness of a speech if they didn't actually watch it.

Poor RPS, he just can't win lately.

Let me spell it out for you all simple-like, since you're too busy insulting instead of actually reading.

1. OP makes a post using the poll to show that "67% support the President's plan", and that people changed their mind based solely on the speech.

2. The poll was hugely biased, in that a vast majority of the people polled were Democrats. What a surprise...Democrats support a Democrat president! Shock! A Democrat president was able to persuade Democrats to support him!

Here, let me make it simpler for you. The OP and CNN present the poll in a manner that says "the majority of the people support the President's plan and people changed their mind based on the speech!", when the poll was done in a hugely biased manner that does not represent the majority of people at all, but mostly Democrats. It is misrepresentation and skewing biased poll results to fit an agenda at its finest.

Seriously, when the facts slap you in the face, you resort to true form: petty insults. Because that's all you have.

/yawn

 

[Pens1566]

Care to address the 14% swing from previous version then? I'm guessing no ...

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Balt

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Balt

Looks like they acknowledged that pretty early in the article:

Who cares if they acknowledged it? They know very well that people will go around quoting the poll without mentioning that, like the OP above.

Drudge called them out on it, so they look pretty bad right now. :laugh:

They look pretty bad to people who can't bother to actually read articles rather than just headlines, correct.

More likely scenario at the water-cooler at work?


"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!"

or

"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!. Of course, the polling was heavily skewed towards Democrats."

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Balt

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...bama.speech/index.html

Not only does 67% percent of those who watched the speach support the presidents plan, but 1 in 7 changed their mind after watching the speach

All too easy!

"The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican."

From the very link you provided, at the bottom there, chief.

Shock and awe! Democrats approve of a Democrat president's plan!

:laugh:

Partisan hackery at its finest, both from CNN and the OP. Talk about skewed and worthless polling...

Looks like they acknowledged that pretty early in the article:

The audience for the speech appears to be more Democratic than the U.S. population as a whole. Because of this, the results may favor Obama simply because more Democrats than Republicans tuned into the speech. The poll surveyed the opinions of people who watched Wednesday night's speech, and does not reflect the views of all Americans.

You can't poll people about the effectiveness of a speech if they didn't actually watch it.

Poor RPS, he just can't win lately.

Let me spell it out for you all simple-like, since you're too busy insulting instead of actually reading.

1. OP makes a post using the poll to show that "67% support the President's plan", and that people changed their mind based solely on the speech.

2. The poll was hugely biased, in that a vast majority of the people polled were Democrats. What a surprise...Democrats support a Democrat president! Shock! A Democrat president was able to persuade Democrats to support him!

Here, let me make it simpler for you. The OP and CNN present the poll in a manner that says "the majority of the people support the President's plan and people changed their mind based on the speech!", when the poll was done in a hugely biased manner that does not represent the majority of people at all, but mostly Democrats. It is misrepresentation and skewing biased poll results to fit an agenda at its finest.

Seriously, when the facts slap you in the face, you resort to true form: petty insults. Because that's all you have.

/yawn

/facepalm

If you actually read CNN's writeup on that poll there is no way you could come to that conclusion. Are you having reading comprehension problems again?

It specifically mentions in both the bullet points by the headline and in the second paragraph that it is not representative, and it gives you the best estimate available as to the degree of the oversampling. That's the exact opposite of pushing an agenda, because they are giving you all the information. The actual numbers of support are not important, but that people's opinions were changed most certainly is.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: OCguy

More likely scenario at the water-cooler at work?


"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!"

or

"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!. Of course, the polling was heavily skewed towards Democrats."

CNN was hugely up front with the shortcomings of its poll, mentioning them in the bolded bullet points next to the headline, and multiple times througout the piece. They don't look bad in any way, shape, or form. How can someone 'call you out' on something that you were up front with from the beginning?

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: OCguy

More likely scenario at the water-cooler at work?


"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!"

or

"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!. Of course, the polling was heavily skewed towards Democrats."

CNN was hugely up front with the shortcomings of its poll, mentioning them in the bolded bullet points next to the headline, and multiple times througout the piece. They don't look bad in any way, shape, or form. How can someone 'call you out' on something that you were up front with from the beginning?

You question was answered in my quote and by the OP who posted the thread without acknowledging the slant of this worthless poll.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: OCguy

More likely scenario at the water-cooler at work?


"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!"

or

"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!. Of course, the polling was heavily skewed towards Democrats."

CNN was hugely up front with the shortcomings of its poll, mentioning them in the bolded bullet points next to the headline, and multiple times througout the piece. They don't look bad in any way, shape, or form. How can someone 'call you out' on something that you were up front with from the beginning?

You question was answered in my quote and by the OP who posted the thread without acknowledging the slant of this worthless poll.

If you understand statistics you will understand that it's not a worthless poll.

News organizations don't have to (nor will they ever) conform to your magical invented requirements. Shockingly enough, information that you don't agree with is part of a media conspiracy once again.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
/facepalm

If you actually read CNN's writeup on that poll there is no way you could come to that conclusion. Are you having reading comprehension problems again?

It specifically mentions in both the bullet points by the headline and in the second paragraph that it is not representative, and it gives you the best estimate available as to the degree of the oversampling. That's the exact opposite of pushing an agenda, because they are giving you all the information. The actual numbers of support are not important, but that people's opinions were changed most certainly is.

Bottom bullet point in the list, third paragraph in the actual content (not the second like you insist).

You're reaching here. Nowhere is the sample representation presented in the headline or the first introductory paragraph, which are the two items the vast majority of people will read and discuss. It's like all the fine print when you sign up for satellite TV. Yes, the text is there, but the majority of people won't read it because it's not in the place most people will read for details.

Where did I ever say this sample information was not provided? Please, show me where I said that. OCguy has explained the problem with this "poll" and the article quite well, and it's common sense that it is disingenuous, at best. Most people are going to read the headline, maybe the first paragraph, and just say, "Oh look! The majority of people who watched approve of the plan!". Do you truly believe the average person is going to scour the article for the sampling method? Come on now.

What are people more than likely to discuss around the water cooler? The eye-catching headline or the details of the third paragraph? This is creative writing and hiding the details at its finest. It's called "Hiding the details in plain sight".

Of course, if it fits your agenda, you don't see it.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: eskimospy
/facepalm

If you actually read CNN's writeup on that poll there is no way you could come to that conclusion. Are you having reading comprehension problems again?

It specifically mentions in both the bullet points by the headline and in the second paragraph that it is not representative, and it gives you the best estimate available as to the degree of the oversampling. That's the exact opposite of pushing an agenda, because they are giving you all the information. The actual numbers of support are not important, but that people's opinions were changed most certainly is.

Bottom bullet point in the list, third paragraph in the actual content (not the second like you insist).

You're reaching here. Nowhere is the sample representation presented in the headline or the first introductory paragraph, which are the two items the vast majority of people will read and discuss. It's like all the fine print when you sign up for satellite TV. Yes, the text is there, but the majority of people won't read it because it's not in the place most people will read for details.

Where did I ever say this sample information was not provided? Please, show me where I said that. OCguy has explained the problem with this "poll" and the article quite well, and it's common sense that it is disingenuous, at best.

What are people more than likely to discuss around the water cooler? The eye-catching headline or the details of the third paragraph? This is creative writing and hiding the details at its finest.

Of course, it fits your agenda, so you don't see it.

Ahhh, so where should it have ranked on the 'bullet points' in order to be acceptable to you?

It is not at all like the fine print of a contract when you sign up for TV. The text is the entire purpose of your attention, not a correlary like a contract. The poll, by definition, cannot be disingenuous if it specifically alerts you to its shortcomings and potential sample bias.

 

[rudder]

Because the people being polled are not concerned with the truth.

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Balt

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Balt

Looks like they acknowledged that pretty early in the article:

Who cares if they acknowledged it? They know very well that people will go around quoting the poll without mentioning that, like the OP above.

Drudge called them out on it, so they look pretty bad right now. :laugh:

They look pretty bad to people who can't bother to actually read articles rather than just headlines, correct.

More likely scenario at the water-cooler at work?


"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!"

or

"Hey, did you see that CNN poll? 67% of people now support Obama's plan!. Of course, the polling was heavily skewed towards Democrats."

You can't really hold news organizations accountable every time some dope at a water cooler misinterprets and repeats something. The information is in the article, plain as day, and anyone who bothers to read it can see the caveats. Anyone who gets their news only from headlines isn't someone you want to get your news from.

Imagine if our view of the world was shaped only by Drudge Report headlines. We'd all be living in concrete bunkers at this point.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Balt

You can't really hold news organizations accountable every time some dope at a water cooler misinterprets and repeats something. The information is in the article, plain as day, and anyone who bothers to read it can see the caveats. Anyone who gets their news only from headlines isn't someone you want to get your news from.

Imagine if our view of the world was shaped only by Drudge Report headlines. We'd all be living in concrete bunkers at this point.

That's actually a really good point, if you want to talk about misleading headlines you probably shouldn't mention Drudge in the same post. He's the worst offender of them all.