From here:
The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters
Thanks to electoral-vote.com for pointing it out.
Thoughts?
You can add this quote from the Christian Science Monitor:
Yeah, I thought that was interesting as well.
For those who might be willing to participate, I’d really like to focus on the section of the poll that talks about misunderstanding the candidate’s position. If at all possible, let’s leave the Iraq and WMD stuff for the pit thread.
Can we say cognitive dissonance, folks?
To be fair, I wonder what percentage of TV coverage of the campaign was of the candidates actual positions on non-sexy issues, and what was about Swift Boats, jacket bulges, and who is dissing who? I don’t know, getting my news from the New York Times and my comedy from the Daily Show,
It just matches what I’ve observed. Anyone who finds fault is a traitor or a Commie who should get out, any newspaper that questions becomes a Commie rag, ad nauseum. Is it misunderstanding, or deliberate and intentional ignorance?
Hell you could replace Bush and put Kerrys name in there. I mean it really goes both ways with these two dolts. You can’t deny it!
Sure you can. Unless, like the OP , you provide a valid cite.
Hell, forget what a majority of Bush supporters believe regarding his policy positions. They also seem to live in a universe where the facts are different:
47% believe that immediately before the war, Iraq had WMD and an additional 25% believe he had a major program for developing them.
56% believe that experts mostly agree that just before the war Iraq had WMD and another 18% believe that the experts are evenly divided on this. (For Kerry supporters, th respective numbers are 19% and 23%.
And, here’s the story on Iraq and al Qaeda links:
As the webmaster of electoral-vote.com speculated, perhaps the laws of physics are different in the universe of the majority of Bush supporters too!
Actually, if you look at p. 12 of that report that the OP linked to, there is only one of the 8 issues that the polled on where a lower percentage of Kerry supporters correctly knew his position than Bush supporters knew his position. And, on that one the numbers are pretty close whereas on many of the others, it is a blowout.
If the majority of the Bush supporters are wrong on Bush’s stance on 6 out of 8 of the issues – and they want him to be President – and he and Kerry disagree on these issues, then a majority of the Bush supporters agree with Kerry on 75% of these issues. He’s their man and they don’t even know it.
I could just scream.
I wouldn’t blame Bushites for thinking there were WMD BEFORE the war… but afterwards its sad.
In fairness, there are probably a lot of people on both sides who just assume the facts to be whatever makes their preferred candidate look better. The Bush voters said there were WMD in Iraq because they no that’s the pro-Bush answer. And a lot of the Kerry voters probably only said there weren’t WMD in Iraq because they know that’s the pro-Kerry answer. Heck, close to a fifth of them said there were WMD. I’m a Kerry supporter, but I don’t believe for a minute that all Kerry voters are intelligent and well-informed. This survey asked a lot of questions where the correct answer is the same as the pro-Kerry answer.
I just wish that the people who don’t care enough to follow the news or pay attention to the issues also didn’t care enough to vote.
But the upsetting part is how Bush supporters need to ignore what their candidate is saying and doing in order to make him look better.
I guess in defense, what I was trying to say was that the OP’s cite is merely a poll and really doesn’t mean anything. And to debate on this topic using that cite as a hard truth, when it is simply a poll of 2,725 people, is kind of odd. I’m sorry, but 2,725 people just doesn’t represent “The American Public on International Issues”. The poll is clearly in support of Kerry, and I feel it is slanted. I do not feel that most Bush supporters currently think that there were WMD and links between Iraq and Al Queida. There are some out there, sure, but we can’t save them all!
Saying that, it would be just as easy to target that many people and conduct a poll that shows Kerry supporters are not in touch with Kerrys views and actions on international issues. And FTR, I’m not saying I’m pro Bush or Kerry, although Kerry is looking more attractive these days (well, not attractive) and is someone whom I think represents my beliefs more then Bush. Not completely, but more than Bush. I just feel too many people take these polls as truths and I like to look at it from a 3rd person point of view. Sorry if I don’t have a cite for that. I’m debating the cite that was introduced to the thread. Why do I need a cite to argue against it? Really doesn’t sound much like a debate if all anyone does it post link after link, post after post to small number opinion polls. Or should I find a pro Bush poll, post and say, “see!”. It’s much harder on this site to say that a pro Kerry poll is BS though because most here I think lean towards the left and would never say that anything on the right is good. I like to take both sides into consideration. As I’m sure many of you read the link and said to yourself, “yeah, most Bush supporters are idiots!”. Well damn I feel sorry for you.
Parental, I agree with most of what you said. A poll is just a poll and cannot be relied upon to accurately gauge much of anything, but I must disagree with your assertion (the bolded section) about the poll being in support of Kerry.
The only way to bias the poll is either to not release the results if they go against Kerry (not likely) or to find the dumbest, droolingest people that will say they support the president (also not likely). I’m hoping that I misunderstood your post, but if I didn’t, please provide proof of the polls bias.
ParentalAdvisory, I’m not sure I have your position clear, here. It seems to me that your objection could be either one of two positions:
-
2,725 people, chosen at random from registered voters, are not capable of indicating the views of the rest of the voters. Statistical sampling is invalid and misleading.
-
Statistical sampling when properly done may be OK, but this particular poll was carefully arranged, with the responses not chosen at random, to make Bush supporters appear uninformed.
Which option is actually your position?
Your apologies are not necessary. Judging by the sample size of many other nationwide polls this seems to be an adequate sample size. Could you please provide the info you used to determine that this was not an adequate sample size?
Oh, this is one of those touchy-feely argument. It’s sweet that you have feelings and are willing to share them in a public forum.
If you “target” people you render your sample useless. The sample must be randomly selected to have any value.
One certainly could make case without further citation if you could show how the sample size was inadequate or that there were other inadequacies in the polling method. That you have feelings doesn’t have any bearing on the issue.
This is true. Citations should be used to make a case, not be the case.
It would be helpful if you were to have some sort of something to make your case with rather than your just feelings. You, after all, are the final arbiter of what your feelings actually are. Not much room for debate there.
If you did bring in another poll, then the merits of the poll could be discussed.
We could then go to MPSIMS (or The Pit) and discuss how the poll made us feel.
Ftr, I’m a conservative and a GOP Team Leader. Unlike some of the pivotal players in Team Bush, I’m part of the “reality based community” and a Realist like Kissinger and Powell.
If you would demonstrate the methodological flaws of the survey, you’d have a great shot at saying “a pro Kerry poll is BS.” As it is you just seem to merely be complaining about your feelings.
Taking both sides of issue into acount is a great thing when both sides are equally valid. However, in this case one side is merely your feelings. Until you makie on hell of a case otherwise, your feelings aren’t worthy of equal consideration with this poll.
As others have hinted at but I’ll just say flat out: 2,725 is a plenty good sample size…Good enough to get results to within a few percent statistically. People sometimes seem to have the strange notion that if the size of the total population that you want to sample is large, you need a larger sample size…even some reasonable fraction of that population. This notion is simply incorrect as a statistical fact as long as you are sampling the population randomly.
Now, there could be methodological problems with the poll involving how they got their sample…And, there has been lots of discussion about this in regards to the various polls during this Presidential campaign. But, that has nothing to do with the sample size. They could use 2.7 million people and still have the same methodological flaws.
At any rate, the results from this poll are so dramatic that I do not think they could be explained away by methodological problems (at least in the choice of sample…One might have other complaints about the choice of questions and so forth).
hehe… now people are doubting polls again ?
For christ sake… polls are never perfect… but its better than guesswork and its better than asking every darn single voter.
Thanks for addressing the point I was trying to look at rjung, jshore, and zoe.
Okay, well, I’ll try one more time. Leaving out the questions about Iraq and WMDs which, in my opinion at least, cannot be factually stated. Here’s what I find most interesting:
Which 68% said they [also] support.
Which 66% said they [also] support.
Which 54% said they [also] support.
But the number of Bush supporters knowledgable of his position still did not increase to a majority, even after he said he didn’t support it.
Kerry’s supporters not only better understood his positions on the issues, they were, in general, more likely to be aligned with him on the same side of that issue.
I tend to think that Voyager may have nailed it. Bush’s position on non-war, non-Iraq, non-terror issues simply isn’t covered. The only ones I can think of are same-sex marriage and stem-cell research. And according to Time Magazine, on at least one of these issues (stem-cell) research, something like 69% of Americans are in favor of it either with existing lines or support the development of new lines.
Oh, as to methodology, it’s all in the report: