The good old days

Whether nostalgia or bad memory or politicians, you may be wrong about "the good old days," crime, climate, income gaps, etc.

"According to a YouGov poll last year, between 21 percent and 45 percent of respondents across the Western world thought that climate change “likely” or “quite likely” will make the human race extinct. At the same time, both the absolute numbers and the proportion of people dying from natural catastrophes like storms, floods, droughts, or wildfires has plummeted over the last century – and that includes all kinds of natural disasters (such as earthquakes and tsunamis) not just the ones that climate change may have worsened."

https://www.humanprogress.org/nothing-is-more-responsible-for-the-good-old-days-than-a-bad-memory/?

A few years ago I recall a report that asked people what percent of the population was homosexual, and many guessed 20-25%. The correct answer was a little over 2%. But it was the topics and characters of films, books and TV programs that caused them to make that wrong estimate. There are some people who think 50% of people who get Covid19 die (99.75% recover).  I think 24/7 news and social media are worsening our memories.

Do Americans trust the media? The polls?

It’s not hard to see why distrust in the legacy media is ever-rising.

“Americans blame shutdown on Trump over Democrats by wide margin, poll finds” blares USA Today. Wide margin? The poll actually shows that:

When asked, “Who do you think is mainly responsible for this situation?” 53 percent of Americans told pollsters they blamed Trump and congressional Republicans.

Three points is a “wide” margin? Moreover, the story’s kicker admits that “The poll of 788 Americans was conducted Jan. 8-11 with a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percent.” When the spread is less than the margin of error, that’s usually called a “split” or “close” race.

What more, this important fact isn’t revealed until the third paragraph. Given the fact that as many as 25 percent of American adults get their news from Facebook, and given that too many people never read past the headline, this is especially egregious. “Fake news”? No, but “Wrong” news? Absolutely.

PJMedia, January 13, 2019

Ten, twenty, thirty and forty years of presidential popularity polls

An interesting look back through the polls. 10 years ago, Americans were clearly disenchanted with the Iraq War (supported by both parties originally) and GW Bush's approval was at 49%; 20 years ago, Americans were unhappy that Hillary had tried to take over healthcare, and President Clinton with approval ratings close to Obama's now signed the toughest anti-crime bill which probably accounts in part for a 20 year drop in gun violence; 30 years ago the U.S. was recovering from a recession and unemployment was still a major concern, and Reagan's approval rating was recovering at 55% but had been as low as 35%; 40 years ago Nixon resigned because of a cover up of a scandal (just one!) and his approval rating had been as low as 24%, which was still higher than Harry Truman's in the early 1950s. (Gallup.com June 6, 2014)

Who opposes Obamacare? Most Americans.

I went to the polls directly to see what was said. The story that accompanies the USA Today-Pew Poll blames the Republicans for a misinformed public and that of the 19% without insurance, only about 40% know they are mandated to get insurance. This does not surprise me; they are young, or poor or non-political--millions could have had insurance either through Medicaid or their employer, but just didn't sign on. This was completely unnecessary legislation.

Obama and the polls

President Obama bases his gun control efforts on poll results that claim we the people want more restrictions on access to guns (he doesn't like the Constitution, especially those pesky amendments).

"The notion that Congress would defy the overwhelming instinct of the American people after what we saw happen in Newtown, I think, is unimaginable." NBC Today show

When has he ever listened to what we the people want about lower taxes, fewer regulations killing the economy, his take over of the health care industry, his drones killing innocent civilians, his reluctance for a thorough Benghazi investigation, or even something as simple as sending a high ranking official to Margaret Thatcher's funeral? He manipulates the wording of the gun polls to suit his campaign to win back the House for Democrats

President Obama claims that polls show the overwhelming majority of Americans want to make it tougher for criminals and the mentally ill to own guns. Then he proposes legislation that will restrict only non-criminals and non-mentally ill.  At least, my definition of a criminal is someone who doesn’t obey the laws.

People of little or no faith more likely to vote for Obama

Religious/faith people voted for Romney if they were white evangelicals, but not enough voted, period. It's one of the flaws of being a conservative. Let someone else do it. Or, God will take care of it. Black Christians overwhelmingly voted for Obama, even with all his failures and inattention to them these last 4 years.  (Unemployment in October was 14.3% for blacks.)  "Other" and "unaffiliated" voted overwhelmingly for Obama.

And now the finger waggers are saying the Republicans (remember the ones who didn't boo God?) are too religious. I'd say the weren't religious enough if they didn't vote their values. Cafeteria Catholics went for Obama.

Pew Forum on Religion

Obama is driving away Democrats

“In 2008, 54% of likely voters identified as Democrat or lean Democrat. 42% of likely voters identified as GOP or lean GOP. In other words, the electorate, including independents who lean towards a particular party, was D+12. This year, however, the Democrat advantage has disappeared. 49% of likely voters today identify as GOP or lean GOP. Just 46% of likely voters are or lean towards the Democrats. This is a 15-point swing towards the GOP from 2008 to an outright +3 advantage for the GOP. By comparison, in 2004, when Bush won reelection, the electorate was evenly split, with each party getting support from 48% of likely voters.”

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158399/2012-electorate-looks-like-2008.aspx

And that youth vote Obama got in 2008?  Well, it seems they grew up and had to get jobs.  Let’s hope they look around and figure out they can’t chase his father’s socialist and anti-colonialist dreams another four years.  The current youth vote (born 18-20 years ago) are still stumbling in the dark and trying to lose their virginity vote.

Most Americans still pro-life

"By a 24 percent margin, 61-37 percent, Americans take the pro-life view that abortions should either be legal under no circumstances or legal only under a few circumstances. Although Gallup doesn’t specify those “few” circumstances, polling data has consistently shown that, when asked about cases such as rape, incest, or the life of the mother, a majority of Americans want all or almost all abortions made illegal — leaving only life of the mother or rape and incest as the exceptions.

“Americans are rather conservative in their stance on abortion, with 61% now preferring that abortion be legal in only a few circumstances or no circumstances. By contrast, 37% want abortion legal in all or most circumstances,” Gallup analyst Lydia Saad writes. “Over the past two decades, Americans have consistently leaned toward believing abortion should be legal in only a few or no circumstances, although less so in the mid-1990s than since about 1997, when combined support for these has averaged close to 60%.”

In fact, Gallup polling shows that, since 1994, a majority of Americans have held a pro-life view wanting all or almost all abortions made illegal — and that pro-life view has strengthened with an average of 60 percent of Americans saying that over the years." Gallup Poll

The 37% who want abortion legal in all cases (like President Obama whose views are the most extreme of any American politician extending to a born alive infant who was intended for death) may be your health insurance company or that of an organization you are supporting. Ask. Demand a change.

Fair, balanced, and better looking

"A Public Policy Polling nationwide survey of 1,151 registered voters Jan. 18-19 found that 49 percent of Americans trusted Fox News, 10 percentage points more than any other network.

Thirty-seven percent said they didn’t trust Fox, also the lowest level of distrust that any of the networks recorded.

There was a strong partisan split among those who said they trusted Fox — with 74 percent of Republicans saying they trusted the network, while only 30 percent of Democrats said they did.

Read more at Politico.

Seven months ago

I didn't buy into The Obama Deception movie conspiracy theories, which was also extremely hostile toward Bush. But here's what I said on April Fools day this year, and that hasn't changed. His poll numbers are plummeting here in Ohio, both for job, economy and the war, so others are catching on to what many knew even in 2007. This misnamed "health care reform" [it's health care take-over], the clap and trade bill, the bowing and butt kissing to foreign enemies and banana republic dictators, the sneering at our history and accomplishments--it's all taking a toll in the polls.

Someone said on the film, forgotten who, that if they cataloged all his lies, the film would never end, because they continue. Yes, I'd agree with that charge, too. It is truly amazing that a man who worked as a "community organizer" for nearly a decade, and never became a tenured law professor or wrote a law article or even practiced law, but wrote 2 autobiographical books, got hired by Illinois to represent a district for which he did nothing and which is still poor, and then got elected President on the basis of his looks and ability to speechify and talk black (something he had to learn as a foreign language as an adult). Call it a conspiracy against the American people if you wish, but really, Obama simply makes us look like a bunch of vacuous fools. . .if we're so great and wonderful and good, why would we let this happen?

89% of Americans are satisfied with their health care

That was the findings of a study done by ABC News/USA Today/Kaiser Family Foundation poll in September 2006. Obama assured Americans that if they liked their health insurance, they could keep it, and as we've watched these huge, multiple bills overwhelm the legislators and the public's ability to understand, we've learned that there's no way that can happen. Either we'll be taxed more if the plan we like is better or covers more than someone else's, or our employer will drop our plan because something cheaper is available from the government. The latest ploy from Reid is for states to "opt out" of the public option. Oh yes, calling it something other than public option is also a plan (Pelosi).

Let's take another look at that 2006 poll, and ponder why health care "reform" became number one on Obama's agenda, so important that he even had to put our troops in danger in a war that he said was more important than Iraq (during his campaign). Why was it so urgent when 89% of the people were happy with their health care, and even 70% of the uninsured were satisfied with their health care and nothing would happen for four years?

A survey conducted jointly by the Kaiser Family Foundation, ABC News and USA Today, released in October 2006, found that 89 percent of Americans were satisfied with their own personal medical care, but only 44 percent were satisfied with the overall quality of the American medical system. . . .

Those with recent serious health problems, possibly the people with the best knowledge of how health care is working, were generally the most satisfied. Ninety-three percent of insured Americans who had recently suffered a serious illness were satisfied with their health care. So were 95 percent of those who suffered from chronic illness. . . .

70 percent of the uninsured who indicated their level of satisfaction said they were either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their health care, and only 17.5 percent said they were "very dissatisfied." . . .

"It is a common finding in public opinion research," Henry Aaron, a senior fellow for economic studies at the Brookings Institution, told FOXNews.com. "People are satisfied in the small, but dissatisfied in the large. People are satisfied with their child's teachers or school, but dissatisfied with schools generally.... They are satisfied with their doctor or their last visit to the hospital, but they are dissatisfied with what they perceive is happening with medical care as a whole. This finding is just one additional example." . . .

A majority of the uninsured are not desperately poor; about 60 percent of them have personal incomes over $50,000 per year and pay out of their own pockets when necessary, rather than paying for insurance. Others manage to obtain care at highly discounted rates as charity cases.

But there are two other reasons why most uninsured are satisfied: About 14 million of the "uninsured" qualify for Medicaid, and pre-existing conditions do not exclude people from joining the government program. As a result, many who are eligible for Medicaid wait until they need care to register, so they are effectively insured at all times even when they are not formally enrolled in the program.

In addition, once those who are already effectively covered by Medicaid are excluded, nearly 70 percent of the remaining uninsured are without insurance for less than four months. The large majority may be uninsured for such short periods of time that being uninsured is never relevant for their ability to get health care. Summary here.

His reasons for "reforming" the health care that most of us are happy with, even the uninsured, are his own.

1) He wants, needs and craves, a signature event for his first year--a bauble for his first Christmas in the White House.

2) It's a critical step in taking all other freedoms away from the American people, particularly the massive computerization of records that he wants. It will make the Patriot Act look like a drop in the ocean.

3) It's a huge industry--something like 1/6th of the economy, $2.2 trillion in 2007. It will only temporarily satisfy his voracious quest for power, however.

4) Socialized medicine is the hallmark of all socialist countries--he can't drag us kicking and screaming in that direction without that notch on his belt and he can't be a global leader/czar/dictator without proof he's up to the challenge.

Polls and disinformation

Polls from National Public Radio, Wall Street Journal/NBC News, The Washington Post, Gallup, and Pew all show that the American people do not support President Barack Obama’s health care plan . . . Linda Douglass complains about "disinformation." (That's journalism-speak for lies).

"Americans deserve an honest debate about health care. President Obama, Barney Frank, and Jan Schakowsky cannot all be right. Either the President is wrong when he says his plan will not lead to government run health care, or Frank and Schakowsky are spreading disinformation when they tell their single payer advocate base that it will." Heritage Foundation, Morning Bell, Wed. Aug 5, 2009

Is the SCOTUS nominee “outside the mainstream” on abortion?

A new Gallup Poll, conducted May 7-10, finds 51% of Americans calling themselves pro-life on the issue of abortion and 42% pro-choice. This is the first time a majority of U.S. adults have identified themselves as pro-life since Gallup began asking this question in 1995. According to US News and World Report, this development will keep the Republican Party marginalized. Also, DFLA are interested by another finding of this poll to note that for the first time in a decade, more men are against abortion than women, 54% of men to 49% of women. Democrats for Life

I'm not sure why this poll marginalizes Republicans as reported in US News. It just means Democrats don't vote their conscience when it comes to abortion.

IBD/TIPP Tracking Poll: Day Twenty-One

Now it shows a 2.1 point spread?
Posted: Sunday, November 02, 2008. 46.7 to 44.6 with 8.7 undecided. It's hard to imagine anyone being undecided at this point, you can only hope they are pro-life coal miners.

"The race tightened again Sunday as independents who'd been leaning to Obama shifted to McCain to leave that key group a toss-up. McCain also pulled even in the Midwest, moved back into the lead with men, padded his gains among Protestants and Catholics, and is favored for the first time by high school graduates."

Sounds like some Christians just might be realizing that if we got 40+ million abortions with Roe v. Wade and pro-life presidents, how many more will there be when we have the one who has the most leftist record ever in the history of the nation on abortion.

Although I listen to conservative radio in the morning, the news breaks are all CNN. Today Tammy Bruce (no relation, lesbian, former president of NOW, former lefty now a conservative) was subbing for Laura Ingraham who has laryngitis. So it was a bi-polar moment when the news came on--it was all rah, rah Obama, McCain doesn't have a chance after hearing Tammy trying to rally the troops for McCain-Palin.

Update, final poll: Final IBD/TIPP Tracking Poll Shows Obama Leading McCain 51.5% to 44.3%.

Older, male and Protestants lean toward McCain

Jews (78%), other (71%) and no religion (61%) are going for Obama big time. People over 45 are going 45% for McCain, with only 32% in the 65+ age group for Obama. Protestants are 53% for McCain. Males about 50% and single women are all ga-ga over Obama, 62% to 25%.

The one that really puzzles me is investors in a dead heat, 45% and 45%, with 11% undecided. Someone really doesn't understand economics or how we got this melt down. Or how the Democrats tried to block for the last year and a half (since they came into power) any investigation of the GSE's roll role in the subprime housing mess. See IBD poll as of yesterday.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/Polls.aspx?id=308947386648301

From the fraud we see in Ohio perpetrated by the Obama campaign, I doubt this poll will mean much.

Polling the pollsters

I asked Google if Pew Research Center was liberal or conservative, because I've been reading Pew research since the late 80s and have always seen it tracking a bit to the left--not horribly, but certainly there. While I was looking for some evidence (haven't found it yet) I turned up this:

Good Morning America on Wednesday reported on a new Quinnipiac poll that highlighted leads for Barack Obama in Florida and Ohio, but completely skipped the network's own national poll that found a tight race. A September 30 ABC News/Washington Post survey concluded that Obama leads Senator McCain by four points -- 50 to 46 percent. In contrast, GMA last week trumpeted an ABC News/Washington Post poll that showed Obama with a nine point lead. On September 24, former Democratic aide-turned journalist George Stephanopoulos touted the larger lead and asserted, "...You have to go back to 1948 for the last time when a candidate having this kind of a lead, in late September, lost." He mentioned that on the issue of the economy, the Illinois Senator is "blowing away John McCain." An onscreen graphic proclaimed: "Obama Surges Ahead." But, just a week later, GMA not only ignored findings suggesting a closer national race, the morning show highlighted a rival poll's state numbers. CyberAlert (which tracks liberal media)

The search developed because I had been listening to an NPR program which interviewed a Pew Research person who reported that confidence in the media was as low as it had been since 1973, and people didn't believe what they were being told about the bailout. But he said the media were misleading us about the bailout--at least I think that's what he said, and that calls and e-mails to Congresses were politically driven. Only the most vocal and political contacted their Congressional representative. Imagine! Wouldn't that be true of bloggers and the foot soldiers in the campaigns, too? On what basis should the electorate be contacting their representatives?

I didn't spend much time looking through the results, because Pew has set the rules for polling and it's difficult to accurately assess your own bias. But I did rediscover (used to know this) that the U.S. has the lowest voting turnout of functioning democracies. 2004 numbers were higher (60%), but usually it's about 50% (The Psychology of Media and Politics By George A. Comstock, 2005).

Everyone who says she doesn't pay attention to polls, including me, is always happy to see her own team go up in the polls.

Change you can xerox

Here's an interesting story from a Canadian blogger. Says Obama's been borrowing phrases again.

Taranto looks into community organizing

"As a "community organizer," Obama toiled within a subculture of such abject dependency that even home repairs were "social services," provided by government (or, in Obama's Chicago, not provided). It was an utterly bizarre intersection between the cultural elite and the underclass. By Judis's account, Obama's Columbia degree was useless. He would have been more helpful if he'd gone to vocational school instead." Story here.

PUMA not happy with "surrogate" headline

"Obama to Dispatch Female Surrogates, the NYT validated Obama’s claim to having executive experience, I guess Obama didn’t like that, so he put in word, and then, presto, the New York Times turned it into something about the Obama CAMP , that faceless entity that makes decisions for the Lord Obama. . ." PUMA Who knew the NYT would take orders from Obama?

Who ya gonna call, Ohio?

"The latest numbers also show that overall, McCain is trusted more than Obama by a 54% to 41% margin. In addition, the plurality of voters (42%) say they would not be comfortable at all with Obama as president. Just 25% say that about McCain. If voters were faced with the toughest decision of their lives, 54% say they would rather ask McCain for advice, while 38% would choose Obama." Rassmussen poll, Sept 9

What Sarah's got that her savagers don't

"In short, Sarah Palin is the emblem of what feminism was supposed to be all about: an unafraid, independent, audacious woman, who soared on her own merits without the aid of a patriarchal jumpstart, high-brow matrimonial tutelage and capital, and old-boy liaisons and networking." Victor Davis Hanson

Absentee and recounts

It could get messy. If the election is close, if there are recounts, there will be howls, protests, and conspiracy theories, to say nothing of sex, lies and video tape and the main stream media pushing for their guy. Here's how a U. of I. professor of political science, Brian Gaines, sees it:

The extremely tight 2000 election, and resulting dispute over the Florida recount, raised some uncomfortable questions about the U.S. voting system. Have we adequately addressed those concerns? Are there other potential issues or controversies waiting in the wings in the event of another close contest?

"Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a fool-proof electoral system. Blunders and fraud can creep into many different stages, from ballot design, to eligibility screening, to tabulation. Recounts often reveal serious problems. New Mexico's handling of the 2000 presidential election was a shambles, but the state was spared scrutiny because all eyes were on Florida. Washington state had an orderly, uncontroversial recount in its U.S. Senate race that year. The secretary of state crowed that his state managed recounts properly, so watching them was "like watching grass grow." Four years later, his successor oversaw a tumultuous triple recount in which new, previously overlooked ballots emerged late in the process, reversing the outcome. I'll hope for a controversy-free election, but if it is as close as I expect, there will probably be serious problems somewhere. Personally, I worry about the huge growth of absentee voting. Hardly anyone ever points out that absentee ballots defy modern practice by not being secret. Secret ballots emerged in the 19th century as the main device to prevent vote buying and intimidation of voters. We've quietly rolled back that reform in the interest of boosting turnout, on the assumption that decentralized, non-secret ballots are secure. I'm not confident that's right, and I expect a blow up over systematic abuse of absentee ballots by some campaign one of these days."

Then add all the motor-voter, convict voting rights (Democrats want these votes) and soldiers stationed abroad (Republicans want these included), the elder vote who wants to vote at home, all the questioned residency of college students voting for the first time, and we may not know for months who the next president is. These folks don't necessarily turn up in the polls we are reading day to day. The fact that these aren't "secret" will probably be an issue to keep lawyers employed for months, if one party or the other makes an issue. Also, we can expect to see dead people voting again in certain large blue cities as well as large turnouts of confused voters who can't read or figure out the ballots and so someone will demand a recount. Not the whole state, but just certain precincts or counties with identifiable blocks of voters. When it rains or gets cold in Ohio in November (that's a lot, folks), or when the lines are long and the polls close, or if certain people feel intimidated because of the neighborhood or the church where they vote, of if the community organizers from ACORN messed up, or the media talking heads guess it wrong too early, it will be the Republicans fault. About that, I have little doubt.

What media bias?

Did you see the front page poll in the WSJ today, story by Suzanne Something? Shocking, shocking. 21% of the respondents to the NBC/WSJ poll were strongly against voting for a Mormon, and 20% were strongly against an Evangelical (i.e. a Southern Baptist minister). The story, of course, was all about anti-Mormonism, because then she could bash Christians, but not about anti-Evangelicalism, because then she'd have to bash liberals. Somehow, she found a pastor of a huge congregation of 35 people to quote. This woman digs so deep she needs to drain the swamp to climb out.

But more ridiculous was the anti-Hillary and anti-Obama figures. I think for Obama the poll only found 4% wouldn't vote for a black. We've come a long way baby, but not in my wildest dreams of what wonderful unbiased folk singing kumbaya we are, will I buy that figure. I've heard "Obama's a Moslem" 10 times more than I've heard Romney's a Mormon in my white, well-heeled, Republican suburb (with a very noisy Progressive/liberal element).

Nobody's going to admit to a pollster, especially one from, not one but two liberal media, that they won't vote for Hillary because she's a woman or Obama because he's black. There are millions and millions of registered voters whose only exposure to African Americans is watching Hippity-Hops grabbing their junk and flashing their bling on YouTube and TV, calling women Ho's and their buddies nigger. Sure, they'll buy their music, but that's also the image they'll take with them to the voting booth.

In Ohio if the election were tomorrow

Given the margin of error and the undecideds, Huckabee could beat Clinton in Cincinnati, Ohio, and does better than Rudy and Mitt. If it were Obama, he definitely would. However, in Cincinnati, McCain does the best against Clinton. This poll was taken in Cincinnati by SurveyUSA.