Reading Tea Leaves
Here's a funny thing. Tonight, I received a call from the Rasmussen "Robopoll". A robot asked me a number of political questions, some specific to the state I live in, many on national issues. There were questions on the president, candidates for governor, national issues - pretty much the works. All delivered in a pleasant, female robotic voice. I punched my keys and gave my answers. It only took a few minutes. We'll come back to that.
I just read EJ Dionne's column on what he terms a "Republican Retreat" on Iraq. He makes quite a lot out of a poll that shows slipping support for the war in Iraq. Then he cites a number of Republicans who have "distanced" themselves from the president and Iraq policy. All are in tight races.
That poll finding, from a New York Times-CBS News survey, came to life on the campaign trail when Rep. Chris Shays (R-Conn.), one of the most articulate supporters of the war, announced last Thursday that he favored a time frame for withdrawing troops.
Shays is in a tough race for reelection against Democrat Diane Farrell, who has made opposition to the war a central issue. After his 14th trip to Iraq, Shays announced that "the only way we are able to encourage some political will on the part of Iraqis is to have a timeline for troop withdrawal."
In July Rep. Gil Gutknecht (R-Minn.) returned from Iraq with an equally grim view. Americans, he said, lacked "strategic control" of the streets of Baghdad, and he called for a "limited troop withdrawal — to send the Iraqis a message." Just the month before, Gutknecht had told his fellow House members that "now is not the time to go wobbly" on Iraq.
Nearly as significant as the new support for troop withdrawals is the effort of many Republicans to criticize President Bush without taking a firm stand on when the troops should come home.
Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), facing a challenge from Democrat Patrick Murphy, an Iraq war veteran, took a page from former president Bill Clinton's playbook by triangulating between Murphy and the president. A Fitzpatrick mailing sent earlier this month said that Fitzpatrick favored a "better, smarter plan in Iraq" that "says NO to both extremes: No to President Bush's 'stay the course' strategy . . . and no to Patrick Murphy's 'cut and run' approach."
Notice: A Republican is suggesting that Bush's Iraq policy is extreme. That would not have happened in 2004.
Now, I know Dionne has been around more than long enough on the political scene to know that candidates for office often try to snuggle up to or shy away from various policies and issues depending on what may help them get elected. He's also been around long enough to know this is a time honored tradition in every political party in any given year. The tighter the race, the more likely the candidate is to try to defuse the other candidate's issues by either getting closer or farther away, depending on a lot of different circumstances.
In other words, Dionne knows darn well he is drawing conclusions based on what amounts to nothing more than business as usual. His waving the poll around as proof is particularly useless as a justification. Getting back to that Rasmussen poll I mentioned. I dutifully listened to each question and the instructions on each one. Then I punched the keys of the phone to answer.
And I lied on every single answer - across the board. Every. Single. One.
Sure you want to trust polls?
By syn, Tuesday, 29 August , 2006 @ 4:16 am
I don’t trust these type of polls any more than I trust Republican politicians who conveniently lose thier spine just to keep their power. I do trust that the average American citizen is wise enough to rise above the fray, the maniopulation, the lies and support what is right.
Everytime I hear ’support slipping’ I go to anysoldier.com and send out three more packages in addition to the weekly packages I already send.
By v, Tuesday, 29 August , 2006 @ 7:00 am
Don’t worry syn. Let Blue Crab keep encouraging his fellow wingnuts to make Congress keep supporting our President. Works for me.
By Martin Morgan, Tuesday, 29 August , 2006 @ 8:10 am
Actually they account for liars-as you were a Repub lying to sound like a Dem, there was surely a Dem lying to sound like a Repub-so the poll is still accurate.
By TC@LeatherPenguin, Tuesday, 29 August , 2006 @ 9:51 am
Whenever I get called I use what I call the “North/South” method of response. I lie when answering the first actual survey question (after the demographic crap)–no matter what the question is–then answer the next question in a way diametrically opposite the first, and so on through the rest of the survey, whipsawing my way from moonbat lefty to wingnut righty as each question is put forward.
Wife just doesn’t understand why I love answering those survey calls, even though we’re supposedly on that useless “Don’t Call” list and curse a blue streak when any other telemarketing type dials our number.
By Gaius, Tuesday, 29 August , 2006 @ 10:05 am
Yeah - I saw “Rasmussen” on the caller ID and about broke a record picking it up.
And Martin, there is some attempt to correct for that, but if too many lie, the poll is hosed. Big time. I did enough design of experiment work to know that is a pollster’s worst nightmare.
By TC@LeatherPenguin, Tuesday, 29 August , 2006 @ 10:47 am
What’s really funny, and is the biggest reason I would be hardpressed to pay attention to any poll, is that every single person I know also admits to lying through their teeth when they get a pollster on the phone. No matter the subject, they refuse to answer honestly even if it’s about something as trivial as their favorite brand of beer of flavor of ice cream.
By Gaius, Tuesday, 29 August , 2006 @ 10:50 am
And yet we keep hearing whining when the results of any given election don’t match the exit polls or pre-election polls.
The fact is, people are lying to pollsters. That is one of the reasons I do not generally trust polls except for looking at trending (and evene that I tend to not trust 100%).