• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Pessimism assures that nothing of any importance will change.

Marge, god is saying you’re stupid.

Humiliatingly small and eclipsed by the derision of millions.

At some point, the ability to learn is a factor of character, not IQ.

Lick the third rail, it tastes like chocolate!

Disappointing to see gov. newsom with his finger to the wind.

Trumpflation is an intolerable hardship for every American, and it’s Trump’s fault.

The only way through is to slog through the muck one step at at time.

I would try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

There is no compromise when it comes to body autonomy. You either have it or you do not.

Every reporter and pundit should have to declare if they ever vacationed with a billionaire.

A tremendous foreign policy asset… to all of our adversaries.

Perhaps you mistook them for somebody who gives a damn.

They are lying in pursuit of an agenda.

Dear media: perhaps we ought to let Donald Trump speak for himself!

Everybody saw this coming.

Giving in to doom is how we fail to fight for ourselves & one another.

There are a lot more evil idiots than evil geniuses.

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

If you’re gonna whine, it’s time to resign!

Historically it was a little unusual for the president to be an incoherent babbling moron.

Republicans do not trust women.

This country desperately needs a functioning fourth estate.

“I was told there would be no fact checking.”

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Media / Strange Rasmussen polls

Strange Rasmussen polls

by DougJ|  February 10, 20098:24 am| 18 Comments

This post is in: Media

FacebookTweetEmail

Over the past few weeks, the media has flogged the living hell out of a series of Rasmussen polls which purport to show that the support for stimulus pacakge has gone from +11 (meaning 11 percent more Americans support the package than oppose it) to minus 6 (meaning 6 percent more oppose it than support it). On the other hand, Gallup polls show that support hasn’t changed much at all, and that the public still supports the stimulus package:

The differences in the polls can probably be attributed to different wordings in the questions (I won’t bore you with this but you can see it by following the links I provided).

Now, Rasmussen has an excellent track record with polling political races, certainly stronger than Gallup’s. But Scott Rasmussen also has a history of conservative activism, having consulted with the RNC In 2003-2004, self-published a book about privatizing Social Security, and been involved in a law suit opposing same sex unions (you can see all of this here).

There are other examples where Rasmussen public opinion polls are out of whack with other polls — for example, his polls on global warming have 44% of Americans saying they believe it’s caused by “planetary trends” while the percentage who say they believe this (with slightly different wording) in other polls is typically closer to 20% (here; here). Moreover, his article on the global warming polls begins:

Al Gore’s side may be coming to power in Washington, but they appear to be losing the battle on the idea that humans are to blame for global warming.

An analysis of the debate over the stimulus package at times has a similarly partisan bent:

It remains a mystery why the president was not more involved in selling the rescue package from the beginning. Letting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid take the lead early on gave the Republican opposition time to emphasize the large amount of new government spending Democrats have packed into the legislation.

[….]

The big unknown is how congressional Democrats will play out their hand. It is possible that their positioning on the topic of more government spending could cancel out any benefits from Obama’s sales effort.

This is not meant to sound all OMG RASMUSSEN IS TEH BIASED. And I still believe that Rasmussen election polls are excellent. But it’s pretty clear to me that Scott Rasmussen opposes the stimulus package and the notion that human activities cause global warming, and that he’s rigged polls to make it look like most Americans have the same position. Reporters ought to take his findings on these topics with a big grain of salt.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « It’s an isolated Village
Next Post: The Geithner Plan »

Reader Interactions

18Comments

  1. 1.

    lutton

    February 10, 2009 at 8:30 am

    paging Nate Silver…

  2. 2.

    John S.

    February 10, 2009 at 8:34 am

    Scott Rasmussen:

    A) Is a conservative ideologue
    B) Conducts reliable election polls
    C) Conducts unreliable policy polls
    D) Is guilty of pollster bias at times
    E) All of the above

    If you answered E, then I think you agree with both Doug and myself. Just as none of these statements are mutually exclusive, neither should item B be mutually inclusive of any notion that Rasmussen is always right.

  3. 3.

    Conservatively Liberal

    February 10, 2009 at 8:36 am

    I think any ‘media organ’, be it pollsters, bloggers, TV & cable news, newspapers, magazines or whatever, are invariably slanted in whatever direction they lean. My rule of thumb is the more ‘mainstream’ or in the public eye something is, the more likely that it is possible that whatever I consume (read, listen) is going to be biased (or an outright lie/shading of the truth).

    We have taught our daughter to question everything;why is this outlet reporting it, what is their track record on accuracy, who are the sources, what are the questions and so on. My rule of thumb with both politicians and media is to not trust them for anything that I can’t independently verify in some way.

    Polls are open to influence in their construction, deployment and interpretation, thus polls are only as good as the questions asked and who they are asked of. Same with the intentions of the pollster and it is pretty clear that Rasmussen leans one way here.

  4. 4.

    media browski

    February 10, 2009 at 8:37 am

    Brick Oven Bill is gonna blow another circuit. Although this may be his big chyance to pass a turing test.

  5. 5.

    sgwhiteinfla

    February 10, 2009 at 8:39 am

    In all reality it SHOULD be OMG Rasmussen is teh biased. Don’t forget that the Rasmussen guy was all over Faux Nooz during the campaign season AND they changed their polling categories to make it seem like McCain was a lot closer to President Obama than he actually was. Every poll Rasmussen has done this year has pretty much been the opposite of other polls on the same subject. From the stimulus bill to prosecuting Bush to global warming. I would bet that Rasmussen had more siren’s next to his poll on Drudge than any other pollster and I bet in the next few days he will come out with a poll that is opposite of the one Gallup just came out with about support for President Obama on the bill. Notice Rasmussen’s polls also have President Obama’s approval numbers going down like one point a day. Nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade and the Rasmussen polls are teh suspect!

  6. 6.

    Napoleon

    February 10, 2009 at 8:39 am

    But, but, but, just yesterday Brick Oven Bob said that Rasmussen has no discernible political agenda, or some such.

  7. 7.

    DougJ

    February 10, 2009 at 8:47 am

    I would bet that Rasmussen had more siren’s next to his poll on Drudge than any other pollster

    True.

  8. 8.

    MattF

    February 10, 2009 at 8:47 am

    Is "no discernible political agenda" anything like "no visible leather underwear?"

  9. 9.

    Peter J

    February 10, 2009 at 9:33 am

    And I still believe that Rasmussen election polls are excellent. But it’s pretty clear to me that Scott Rasmussen opposes the stimulus package and the notion that human activities cause global warming, and that he’s rigged polls to make it look like most Americans have the same position.

    The Rasmussen election polls will in the end be judged and compared to the results on election night.
    Polls on the stimulus or global warming will only be compared to other polls, so they can get away with rigging them and then using the reputation they got for the election polls to shield themselves from any attacks on the other polls.

  10. 10.

    bootlegger

    February 10, 2009 at 9:36 am

    The wording doesn’t seem that much different. Gallop’s question has a lead in that describes what is taking place, but doesn’t appear to lead the respondent.
    The big differences are in the "not sure" 20% Rasmussen, and "no opinion" 10% of Gallup, and 3% missing from Rasmussen (it only totals 97%). Gallup appears to pushing harder for a choice one way or the other, or admit to having no opinion at all, while Rasmussen let’s fence sitters avoid answering the question or counts them as missing data.

    The sample sizes are similar as are the 95% confidence intervals or "margin of error". I also don’t see Rasmussen’s sampling technique, Gallop called both land lines and wireless phones.

    Interestingly, Rasmussen claims "These latest survey results are very similar to a recent Gallup survey which found that only 38% now support the recovery plan." However this refers to a completely different question from the one Rasmussen asks.

    Personally, I think Ramussen’s stacking the deck.

  11. 11.

    HyperIon

    February 10, 2009 at 9:38 am

    media has

    media HAVE

  12. 12.

    bootlegger

    February 10, 2009 at 9:42 am

    Some interesting polls cited at Pollster.com:

    Pew Research (n=1303)
    [If ‘A lot’ or ‘A little’] From what you’ve read and heard, do you think this plan is a good idea or a bad idea?

    51% Good idea
    34% Bad idea

    What do you think will do more right now to stimulate the economy and create jobs

    48% Tax cuts to individual businesses
    39% Spending on programs and infrastructure projects

    CNN (n=806)
    As you may know, the U.S. Senate is expected to vote on a bill that would attempt to stimulate the economy by increasing federal government spending and cutting taxes at a total cost to the government of about eight hundred billion dollars. Based on what you have read or heard about this, do you favor or oppose the bill that the Senate is expected to vote on?

    54% Favor
    45% Oppose
    Thinking about both the tax cuts and new government programs in the Senate bill, do you think that bill will result in the government spending too much money, not enough money, or about the right amount of money?

    55% Too much money
    13% Not enough money
    30% About the right money
    4% Both equally

  13. 13.

    thomas

    February 10, 2009 at 9:47 am

    what PeterJ said @ 9.
    Rasmussen has to play the elections straight. Doing opinion polls on social, environmental etc issues allows a free hand for manipulation. Obviously he has an agenda and can’t be trusted.

  14. 14.

    Jay

    February 10, 2009 at 9:48 am

    I don’t think it takes a rocket surgeon to know that if you shill the conservative agenda most of the time in your polls you will be rightfully seen as the pollster version of Hannity/Limbaugh and therefore summarily dismissed by the majority of the population. (Which would make you Frank Luntz).

    But if you were to only take one or two more controversial issues and skew them only, your efforts would seem more legit and mainstream, and be more effective.

  15. 15.

    JGabriel

    February 10, 2009 at 12:47 pm

    DougJ:

    Now, Rasmussen has an excellent track record with polling political races, certainly stronger than Gallup’s.

    Only in the final couple of days before elections. Prior to closing in on elections, Rasmussen’s results are typically slanted, sometimes heavily, towards Republican biases. They do this through a combination of wording, and sample bias.

    So. During the final week, maybe 10 days, before an election, it’s good to keep an eye on Ras’s polling. Scott Rasmussen knows it’s the only metric most people are going to judge him by, and he makes sure to do his best on it.

    Other than than, Scottie is a Republican shill, and his polls reflect his biases.

    Update: Which you go on to explain. Shoulda read the whole post before commenting. O’course, if I did that, I might not have anything left to say…

    .

  16. 16.

    JGabriel

    February 10, 2009 at 12:57 pm

    MattF:

    Is "no discernible political agenda" anything like "no visible leather underwear?"

    VLU (Visible Leather Underwear) is obviously not a problem for today’s conservatives.

    For example, witness the conservative excessive man-love for "300", despite its off-the-charts VLU rating.

    .

  17. 17.

    ricky

    February 10, 2009 at 1:48 pm

    For example, witness the conservative excessive man-love for "300", despite its off-the-charts VLU rating.

    I am not sure how one measures whether man-love for "300"
    is "somewhat" "just right" or "excessive." However, outside a blogger or two I haven’t found anything but pre teen boys who thought much of it.

  18. 18.

    dmac

    June 8, 2009 at 8:59 pm

    I’ve heard a lot about how Rasmussen wasn’t accurated 10 days out from the election, and only became accurate during the last poll or so before the election. Considering Rasmussen was one of the most consistantly stable polls from September to November, on what basis do you that believe this form your opinion? And Rasmussen is consistant on presidential approval polls with other likely voter surveys, like Democracy Corps. (of Jame’s Carville affiliation), amoung others… so unless Mary has converted Jame’s, I would say that gives Scott some pretty good credibility. On the other hand Gallup is highly questionable, so why would anyone use them as a standard? What gives?

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - way2blue - SINALEI, SAMOA—RESPITE EDITION—FEBRUARY 2025.  (second of five) 7
Image by way2blue (7/13/25)

World Central Kitchen

Donate

Recent Comments

  • Another Scott on Boomer Nostalgia Open Thread: Nuclear Terrors (Jul 13, 2025 @ 5:01pm)
  • japa21 on Boomer Nostalgia Open Thread: Nuclear Terrors (Jul 13, 2025 @ 5:00pm)
  • WaterGirl on Darkness Has a Hunger That’s Insatiable and Lightness Has a Call That’s Hard To Hear (Jul 13, 2025 @ 4:59pm)
  • jlowe on Boomer Nostalgia Open Thread: Nuclear Terrors (Jul 13, 2025 @ 4:59pm)
  • rikyrah on Boomer Nostalgia Open Thread: Nuclear Terrors (Jul 13, 2025 @ 4:59pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Feeling Defeated?  If We Give Up, It's Game Over

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!