I just did a public opinion poll and it was an interesting mish mash of various political issues. I did not feel the questions were biased or weird or anything, and they even allowed open-ended answers until…
(paraphrased)
I had her repeat it just to make sure that’s what the question actually was. It actually managed to be biased in both directions at once, which is impressive!
That’s what push polling is: The mass-response version of “Heads I win, tails you lose”. Note how both of those options are pro-GOP: Either the GOP is Worried About The Common Man or the GOP Has A Better Plan. Neither of those options paint the GOP as being more worried about big business than the workers, and neither of those options accuse the GOP of mere obstructionism and being the Party Of No.
You know how Cantor’s polling predicted that Cantor would easily win the primary in his district? Yeah. I’m not saying that was push polling, but it’s the same basic concept: Polls that tell the people who paid for them what they want to hear and/or use in future political ads. The problem is that reality isn’t politically correct, it is merely factually correct, and it has a tendency to not go away when you try to ignore it or spin it. Doing the math that makes you feel better isn’t going to win elections.
You get the results you pay for. With a poll like this, the Republicans will be able to say something “87% said “Republicans in Congress have better ideas for how to accomplish these things” in a poll of unaffiliated voters.” And if the results go the other way, you have “76% said they believe Republicans are trying to protect small businesses and the middle class in a poll of unaffiliated voters.” You just give people a choice between two positive statements and then run with whichever one gets better-looking results.
I thought push polling was when you tried to spread rumors about an opposing politician under the guise of conducting a poll. It would be conducting a poll with a question like: “If it became public knowledge that Barack Obama was having an extramarital affair and planned on divorcing the First Lady once his term ended, would that affect how you thought of his character?”
Now you’ll notice that the question didn’t technically say Obama was having an affair. I just presented it as a hypothetical possibility. But you’ve placed the issue in people’s minds and they’re going to wonder if it’s true.
It didn’t really strike me as push polling. And yes, I noticed the slant, which is why I commented on it. But the phrasing of the question was also slanted.
I didn’t answer it, by the way. I laughed after she read both and said I was not going to answer it.
The whole poll was quite long and detailed and this was the only one that wasn’t pretty objectively written.
Maybe I don’t read so good, but I can’t tell what “these things” refers to.
Without seeing the actual question I’d guess it’s how to get more money into the hands of the employees without the government forcing the employers (by raising minimum wage or forcing equal pay for women).
So
A)Republicans won’t raise minimum wage.
or
B)Republicans won’t raise minimum wage.
I got a poll like this from Jack Kingston (who’s a republic in a primary runoff against David Perdue) a couple of weeks ago.
Ok, it claimed to be from some independent firm, but the questions were so bias for Kingston and so biased against Perdue it was obvious that Kingston was paying for it.
It featured questions like “Did you know that Kingston is a loving family man? Does that make you more or less likely to vote for him” and “David Perdue once took stimulus dollars for his company, but said he would cut spending as Senator. Does that hypocrisy make you more or less likely to vote for him”.
I had been planning to vote Kingston, but that poll probably had the opposite effect Kingston wanted.
It’s any polling where the intent is to spread a narrative rather than accurately measure opinions. I once had a poll that asked questions like.
“Candidate Smith has a plan to lower taxes, bring businesses back into the region and get Americans working again. Do you support or oppose this plan?”
That’s not trying to find out an answer, that’s them trying to get me to think that Candidate Smith is a great guy who should be in office.
Sometimes what they want to do is try out various appeals and see how they work on various types of people. That way when the opponent says the candidate is against the mininum wage, they know whether to counter with “I oppose the minimum wage because it hurts businesses and the middle class” or "I oppose the minimum wage and advocate these policies to help the poor and women:.
I’m sure both are true. The Kingston campaign was paying for the poll but the company that was actually conducting it was independent. They would have been just as happy to work for the Perdue campaign.
It’s true that candidates use polls to seek out information about what the voters care about. But when they do this, they make sure the polls contain a negative option. You don’t ask “Which is better: opposing the minimum wage to support business and the middle class or opposing the minimum wage to support the poor and women?” You ask “Which is better: Opposing the minimum wage or supporting the minimum wage?”
Another vote for push polling - it is possible the entire rest of the poll was just straw to couch this one message in favor of the Republican position.
I say that based on an experience I had in the past. When I was younger, I would attend free advance movie screenings at a theater that was for that purpose. They would usually show a TV pilot, a few commercials, and a movie. A few times I was pullout out for a focus group to provide my response to a commercial. Eventually, I met someone who worked there and they explained that the whole evening of entertainment was just there to get us to see, and respond to, one commercial. (Similar to TV).
So, I could see the same model used in polling. Ask 100 question where 98 are fairly neutral, but 2 are push polling in order to promote a message.
It is totally possible this is part of a “legitimate” poll.
Remember stories like “85% of republicans are against obamacare, but when asked if the support the affordable care act 42% said yes”
A push poll, IMHO - would be more subtle than that - but maybe they are very blatant.
However - if this was at the “end” of the poll - I would guess the other questions are being used for one or more purposes - at least one of which being getting demographics for that specific question. Soon who ever did the poll will send a report to someone on high - and then you will see the folling depending on what the poll said.
Chris Matthews: “Governor, is isn’t it true that the minimum wage hasn’t kept up with inflation and why shouldn’t we at least listen to what the president’s commission had to say on this matter?”
Mike Huckabee: “Chris, the bottom line is Republicans in Congress have better ideas how to accomplish these things.”
Jon Stewart: “Now Senator McCain, this was a fascinating book on how you feel America has changed. Aren’t we at a historic low for minimum wage? Why shouldn’t we do what Nancy Pelosi suggests?”
John McCain: “Jon, if history has shown us anything it is Republicans in Congress have better ideas how to accomplish these things.”
Whoopi Goldberg: “Governor Palin, you have kids - wouldn’t you want them to be able to ear a living wage. I think most Americans would support the democratic bill - it would help our economy and foster economic growth don’t you agree?”
Sarah Palin: “Not at all Whoopi, Republicans in Congress have better ideas how to accomplish these things.”
IMHO - this was a poll designed to figure out which talking point to use first. They probably will use both, but if they get more people agreeing with one or the other - that will be the one they use first - sort of along the line the stuff Frank Luntz does.
Fitting article: Push Polls, Defined - The New York Times
It looks like “hurting small business and the middle class.” which might not be what they intended.
> As you may or may not know, Republicans in Congress … do not support passage > of a bill that would ensure equal pay for women.
Equal pay for equal work has been the law since 1963. So what’s the point in trying to pass a bill that already passed over 50 years ago? Are there really Democrats in Congress wasting their time trying to pass this?
Because there are an awful lot of people (mainly liberals) who do not know how to interpret statistics, and therefore claim that women get paid less than men (77%, or some such figure).
As someone who used to work for a company that did this sort of polling, another possibility is that they’re testing out two possible ways of wording their message to see which version people like better. Then they’ll break out the winner as a talking point in the near future.
The first time I heard of fracking was during a public opinion poll. One question went something like this, IIRC:
Should we continue to have fracking, even though it causes pollution, earthquakes, and disease, or should be ban fracking, because it causes pollution, earthquakes, and disease?