USA Today / Gallup Poll Rigged

See: http://zennie2005.blogspot.com/2007/08/usa-today-gallup-poll-rigged-to-favor.... - On June 5th 2007, USA Today / Gallup Poll released a poll of the Democratic Presidential race that showed Senator Barack Obama tied with Senator Hillary Clinton. But rather than communcate the results of that poll widely, Frank Newport of USA Today / Gallup, the Gallup Guru, said that they got "the wrong sample size.." Check it out at the link above.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• usa
• today
• gallup
• poll
• democratic
• presidential
• race
• 2008

[greenbean1984]

ok. i accept your challenge.

1. please explain why you 'believe' he is against reproductive rights. if your talking about abortion - he says its up to the states to decide.

2. he has never said prayer should be reinstituted in school. this is 100% false. please re-research.

3. very reactionary? please explain. he's just living by the constitution.

what else does he have going? how about no IRS. how would you like to keep all the money you've earned?

much love,

[onegiantstep4man]

No polls should be trusted. They put this propaganda over the networks to try and influence or sway uncommitted voters. The Gallup poll had Dewey leading over Truman, Truman won. Polls taken during the 1998 governor's race in Minnesota had Jesse Ventura way behind the other candidates, Ventura ended up winning by quite a gap. Right wing big shots like Rupert Murdoch and Scott Rasmussen have their dirty little hands in polls. Murdoch's Wall Street Journal is a sponser of the Quinnipiac polls.

[luvdomus]

@Mistertbones That's because well-conducted polls are sometimes wrong, but not usually.

[Mistertbones]

Pollsters said that Chris Gibson was 17 points behind Scott Murphy. But Gibson won by 10 points!

[luvdomus]

Obama won the Presidency by a sizable margin-- was the election rigged too? By what means were pre-election polls rigged? Don't pollsters have an interest in accuracy since their reputations depend upon predictions which will surely be proved right or wrong in the near future?

[raney150]

It may be her body the fetus is in, but its the fetus that is getting killed. Mothers are supposed to act for their children that cant act for themselves, not against the child. It is MURDER!!! You are hurting a living creature, or at least killing it, not allowing it to live like you have. How selfish is that?

[raney150]

Whoopie if they get wrong sometimes. When they get off by a lot its not bias, its bad statistics. How you take the poll makes all the difference.

[raney150]

And the big difference may have been figured from the bell curve, and the difference may have been 3 standard deviations away from the normal and that is very off the mean. When you get that its possible but not probable.

[raney150]

You cant get people to answer Obama or Clinton. They probably needed to get a bigger sample size. I almost bet that He said that Obama caught up from how behind he was. Even if the number doesnt sound big, statistically it could be gigantic becaus thats how statistics works. Obama and Hilary were close and Obama barelly beat her out and she was in the lead for a while, really the gallup poll was accurate. The gallup poll has a great team of statisticians.

[warmicestorm]

onegiantstep4man;

I agree. I was contacted for the Gallup poll once and asked for a couple things I liked about Clinton and a couple negatives for Bush. You can see how those results would be reported.

Also, was contacted for another poll, and the questions were cut short when the answers were all conservative.

Don't trust the polls.