Pollster.com

February 14, 2010 - February 20, 2010

 

Stranger and Stranger

Topics: David Johnson , Strategic Vision , Vicki McKenna , Wisconsin

The strange saga of Strategic Vision, LLC and the continuing promises of its CEO David Johnson to produce data or new surveys continues. The latest installment: Johnson appeared on conservative talk radio show in Wisconsin promising a new survey there in a few weeks.

The relevant background: Back in September, following a censure from American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) and accusations of fraudulent data from blogger Nate Silver, Johnson threatened to sue everyone in sight to clear his name and promised to release cross-tabular data that reporters had requested. Five months later, as far as I know, no one has been sued, and no crosstabs have been released.

Last month, Johnson surfaced long enough to inform a columnist from the Savannah Morning News that he planned to conduct a Georgia survey during January. As of this afternoon, and no new poll results from any state have been posted to strategicvision.biz since September 2009.

Yesterday, our own Charles Franklin recorded Johnson giving an interview to conservative talk-radio host Vicki McKenna on Madison station WIBA-1310 WISN-1130 and promising yet another new survey.

McKenna: You're going back into the field here in Wisconsin in a couple of weeks, aren't you?

Johnson: Yes we are.

McKenna: Awesome. Um, yea, we need to find out just how soft Russ Feingold is. You have got a target rich environment here in Wisconsin when you start making those phone calls, David. But you have been polling elsewhere, and I guess my question to you is just a very broad question: Does the polling suck for Republicans anywhere?

Johnson: No it doesn't, we're looking at a real Tsunami...

For those interested, I have also uploaded the complete interview, which covers the full spectrum of politics from the Right but includes no further discussion of Strategic Vision or its polling.

As I wrote in December, if and when Strategic Vision resumes "making phone calls" or otherwise reporting results, absent significantly better methodological disclosure from Johnson, we will no longer include their numbers in our charts or publish them as "poll updates."

P.S. You can't make this up:  Johnson apparently also appeared on camera on ESPN earlier today discussing the subject of "Tiger Woods and crisis communications."


US: Terrorism, Iran (CNN 2/12-15)

Topics: poll

CNN / Opinion Research Corporation
2/12-15/10; 1,023 adults, 3% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(CNN release)

National

As you know, a man has been charged with attempting to use an explosive device on Christmas Day to blow up a plane that was flying to Detroit. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama has responded to that incident?
45% Approve, 47% Disapprove

If you had to choose, would you rather see the man who has been charged in that incident brought to trial in a criminal court run by the civilian judicial system, or would you rather see him tried by a military court run by the U.S. armed forces?
40% Criminal court, 59% Military court

Half sample: As you know, after the man in that incident was turned over to the FBI, agents read him the statement of his rights, including the right to remain silent, that is read to all people who are arrested by the police or the FBI in this country. Do you think the FBI should or should not have done that?
65% Should, 33% Should not

Half sample: As you know, the police and FBI agents always inform suspects of their constitutional right to remain silent and to have a lawyer present during any questioning. Do you think law enforcement officials should or should not follow this practice for people who are suspected of attempting to commit an act of terrorism?
56% Should, 43% Should not

What do you think the United States should do to get Iran to shut down its nuclear program - take military action against Iran now, use economic and diplomatic efforts but not take military action right now, or take no action against Iran at this time?
23% Take military action now, 63% Economic and diplomatic efforts only, 12% No action


US: National Survey (Kos 2/15-18)

Topics: poll

DailyKos.com (D) / Research 2000
2/15-18/10; 2,400 adults, 2% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Kos release)

National

Favorable / Unfavorable
Barack Obama: 56 / 40 (chart)
Nancy Pelosi: 39 / 51
Harry Reid: 24 / 66
Mitch McConnell: 18 / 64
John Boehner: 18 / 63
Democratic Party: 39 / 55
Republican Party: 30 / 61

State of the Country
38% Right Direction, 59% Wrong Track (chart)


States: Approval Ratings (SurveyUSA 2/12-14)

Topics: poll

SurveyUSA
2/12-14/10; 600 adults/state, 4% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(links to all results available here)

Job Approval / Disapproval

California
Pres. Obama: 59 / 38
Sen. Feinstein: 50 / 42
Sen. Boxer: 47 / 43
Gov. Schwarzenegger: 19 / 80
(California charts)

Kansas
Pres. Obama: 35 / 62
Sen. Brownback: 56 / 37
Sen. Roberts: 52 / 40
Gov. Parkinson: 47 / 38

Oregon
Pres. Obama: 53 / 43
Sen. Wyden: 50 / 37
Sen. Merkley: 43 / 39
Gov. Kulongoski: 37 / 54

Washington State
Pres. Obama: 49 / 47
Sen. Murray: 43 / 50
Sen. Cantwell: 46 / 45
Gov. Gregoire: 36 / 59


IA: 2010 Gov, Sen (KCCI 2/15-17)

Topics: poll

KCCI / Research 2000
2/15-17/10; 600 likely voters, 4% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(KCCI release)

Iowa

2001 Governor
54% Branstad (R), 38% Culver (D)
41% Culver (D), 38% Vander Plaats (R)
44% Culver (D), 33% Rants (R)
48% Culver (D), 26% Roberts (R)

2010 Senate
56% Grassley (R), 35% Conlin (D)


Canadian Bacon 'Outliers'

Topics: Outliers Feature

John Sides shows that the economy drives approval of "virtually every aspect of government."

Nate Silver asks whether we can trust those FireDogLake polls.

OFA produces a video version of the job loss chart (via Sargent).

Alex Lundry posts the graphs the Republicans should have used.

The Kirk camp rebuts the Giannoulias poll.

Pew data shows Democrats losing their edge among millennials.

The Census blog explains the need for advance letters.

Flowing Data reviews the WSJ Guide to Information Graphics.

A purveyor of bacon products releases a poll showing Canadians prefer bacon to sex.


WI: 2010 Sen (Rasmussen 2/17)

Topics: poll

Rasmussen
2/17/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

Wisconsin

2010 Senate (trends)
48% Thompson (R), 43% Feingold (D)
47% Feingold (D), 37% Westlake (R)
47% Feingold (D), 39% Wall (R)

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 47 / 52 (chart)
Gov. Doyle: 40 / 60 (chart)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Tommy Thompson: 63 / 34
Russ Feingold: 50 / 48 (chart)
Terrence Wall: 34 / 35
Dave Westlake: 33 / 31


NC: 2010 Sen Primaries (PPP 2/12-15)

Topics: poll

Public Policy Polling (D)
2/12-15/10; 400 likely Democratic primary voters, 4.9% margin of error
646 likely Republican primary voters, 3.9% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(PPP release)

North Carolina

2010 Senate: Democratic Primary
Marshall 29%, Cunningham 12%, Lewis 5%, Williams 2%

2010 Senate: Republican Primary
Burr 55%, Jones 10%, Burks 3%

2012 President: Republican Primary
33% Huckabee, 27% Palin, 25% Romney


US: 2012 Pres (PPP 2/13-15)

Topics: poll

Public Policy Polling (D)
2/13-15/10; 743 registered voters, 3.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(PPP release)

National

2012 President
46% Obama, 43% Huckabee
50% Obama, 43% Palin
46% Obama, 28% Thune
45% Obama, 43% Romney

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 48 / 47 (chart)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Mike Huckabee: 35 / 26 (chart)
Sarah Palin: 39 / 49 (chart)
John Thune: 5 / 11
Mitt Romney: 37 / 28 (chart)

Do you think ____ is too conservative, too liberal, or about right?
Huckabee: 24% Too conservative, 8% too liberal, 37% About right
Palin: 34% Too convervative, 10% Too liberal, 39% About right
Romney: 22% Too conservative, 8% Too liberal, 43% About right

Do you think Sarah Palin is or is not qualified to serve as President?
30% Qualified, 59% Not qualified


KY: 2010 Sen (Mongiardo 2/2-4)

Topics: poll

Garin-Hart-Yang for Dan Mongiardo (D)
2/2-4/10; 655 likely Democratic primary voters, 3.9% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Hotline on Call post)

Kentucky

2010 Senate: Democratic Primary
43% Mongiardo, 25% Conway, 2% Price, 1% Sweeney


IN: 2010 Sen (Rasmussen 2/16-17)

Topics: poll

Rasmussen
2/16-17/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

Indiana

2010 Senate
48% Coats (R). 32% Hill (D)
49% Hostettler (R), 31% Hill (D)
41% Stutzman (R), 33% Hill (D)
46% Coats (R), 32% Ellsworth (D)
46% Hostettler (R), 27% Ellsworth (D)
40% Stutzman (R), 30% Ellsworth (D)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Dan Coats: 54 / 27
Baron Hill: 39 / 35
Marlin Stutzman: 35 / 25
John Hostettler: 48 / 22
Brad Ellsworth: 35 / 29

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 44 / 54
Gov. Daniels: 70 / 27


US: Economy, Dalai Lama (CNN 2/12-15)

Topics: poll

CNN / Opinion Research Corporation
2/12-15/10; 1,023 adults, 3% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(CNN: Dalai Lama, Economy)

National

How would you rate the economic conditions in the country today?
17% Very/Somewhat Good, 83% Very/Somewhat Poor

Do you think Congress has done enough to help create jobs, or don't you think so?
14% Done enough, 84% Don't think so

Favorable / Unfavorable
Dalai Lama: 56 / 18
Pope Benedict: 59 / 17
Billy Graham: 57 / 22
Pat Robertson: 25 / 44

Which is more important -- for the U.S. to take a strong stand on human rights in China, or for the U.S. to maintain good relations with China?
53% Strong stand on human rights
44% Good relations with China

Which is more important -- for the U.S. to take a strong stand so that China does not take over Taiwan by force, or for the U.S. to maintain good relations with China?
51% Strong stand on Taiwan
45% Good relations with China

Which is more important -- for the U.S. to take a strong stand on the status of Tibet, or for the U.S. to maintain good relations with China?
41% Strong stand on Tibet
53% Good relations with China

Based on what you have read or heard, do you think Tibet should be an independent country, or do you think Tibet should be a part of China?
73% Independent, 19% Part of China


VT: 2010 Gov (WCAX 2/14-16)

Topics: poll

WCAX / Research 2000
2/14-16/10; 400 likely voters. 5% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(WCAX release)

Vermont

2010 Governor
Markowitz (D) 43%, Dubie (R) 41%
Dubie (R) 43%, Racine (D) 38%
Dubie (R) 45%, Shumlin (D) 35%
Dubie (R) 44%, Dunne (D) 36%
Dubie (R) 48%, Bartlett (D) 30%


Same Data, Two Charts, Two Implications


jobs_graph_large_feb10.gif
This chart from Organizing for American drew a lot of comment today. On its face, it is a striking and strong contrast between the Bush and Obama records on jobs.  From a purely graphical perspective it is very effective in contrasting the rate of job loss in the past two years, and from a perspective of political rhetoric it is a strong claim that Obama has done better. And it has proven very attention getting, so it has served that political purpose as well.

But let's plot the same data in an equally relevant but strikingly different way visually. Let's look at total jobs lost over the past two years. This is simply the data above, but summed to show how many jobs the economy has shed and therefore how deep the hole is we still have to climb out of.

JobsPlots-2.png
The OfA chart gives the impression that we have "returned" to where we were in January 2008. The sharp rise since February 2009 gives the impression that what was lost in red has now been regained in blue.  But of course, that isn't right. The rate of loss has indeed slowed tremendously in the first year of the Obama administration, something the White House has every right to crow about. But that doesn't mean we've returned to previous employment levels. In fact, we've continued to sink lower throughout the last year, just at a slower and slower rate.

This second chart makes that perspective on the data more clear. It is visually clear, if less dramatic than for OfA's chart, that the rate of job loss has slowed. But my version of the chart drives home the point that we have continued to lose jobs and now stand at over 8 million jobs lost since December of 2007. That is the other "deficit" the administration must worry about. The recovery, which GDP data show has started and at 5.7% growth in the 4th quarter is quite strong, will take a very long time to regain these lost jobs.  This fact is made clear in my chart, while it is obscured in the OfA presentation.

Interestingly, my chart is also subtly deceptive. More jobs were lost in the last Bush year than were lost in the first Obama year. But the red lines look shorter and smaller than the blue Obama lines. That makes the graph appear to show that things are worse for Obama, even though his job losses are actually about 3 million compared to Bush's 5 million. 

One can think of these two charts as data displays that reveal different aspects of data, but 
also as graphical political rhetoric. The different aspects of data are the sharp reduction in the rate of job loss shown so well in the OfA chart and the terrible cumulative loss to employment in the country that has not yet started to rebound that is shown in my chart. Both of those are "true facts" about the jobs data. They use exactly the same data, so differences are entirely matters of perspective and perception rather than "apples to oranges" comparisons. But while both are true stories, their substantive interpretations are quite different-- one is a story of an administration's success is stemming the tide of recession, the other is the high water mark of that tide, which has yet to begin receding. 

The other story is graph as rhetoric. The OfA is splendid rhetoric that seems to make an utterly persuasive point with simple yet bold graphics. But it is a rhetorical answer that conducts a slight of hand away from recovery of jobs lost to reductions in rate of loss. Credit worthy to be sure, but not so positive a result as the chart suggests. The rhetoric also succeeds because it has been so widely picked up and commented upon. Even the critics pass on the message that is sent by every viewing of the image.

My chart has its own rhetorical concerns. By focusing on the status of job losses, rather than their trajectory, mine shows the depths of job loss and the lack so far of a trend back up. Mine doesn't lie, because it too shows the reduction in rate of loss, but without a hint of even the beginning of recovery of jobs, mine clearly leaves the rhetorical impression that things are not only no better but are actually quite a bit worse than when Obama took office. The added optical illusion that the red bars are shorter than the blue, even though the opposite is the case, just adds to the false impression that most of the jobs troubles are within the Obama year.

Same data, two charts, two different impressions, both fundamentally true yet also fundamentally misleading in opposite ways.  When data and politics mix beware the power of graphs to imply their own conclusions, even with the same data. And appreciate the rhetorical success of a graph that does it's creator's bidding.


US: News Interest (Pew 2/12-15)

Topics: poll

Pew Research Center
2/12-15/10; 1,029 adults, 4% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Pew release)

National

Most Closely Followed Story
30% The aftermath of a major earthquake and relief efforts in Haiti
21% Reports about the condition of the U.S. economy
20% Major snow storms affecting the East Coast and the South
10% The start of the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, Canada
4% Concerns about problems with sudden acceleration and breaking in Toyotas
1% Former President Bill Clinton's heart trouble

Do you think news organizations are giving too much coverage, too little coverage, or the right amount of coverage to each of the following?

Reports about the condition of the U.S. economy:
16% Too much, 34% Too little, 46% Right amount

Former President Bill Clinton's heart trouble:
29% Too much, 7% too little, 56% Right amount

The aftermath of a major earthquake and relief efforts in Haiti:
19% Too much, 14% Too little, 65% Right amount

Concerns about problems with sudden acceleration and braking in Toyotas:
25% Too much, 13% Too little, 56% Right amount

The start of the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, Canada:
12% Too much, 14% Too little, 65% Right amount

Major snow storms affecting the East Coast and the South:
22% Too much, 5% Too little, 70% Right amount


Re: Tea Party Polling

Topics: Chris Bowers , CNN/ORC , Measurement , National Journal column , Tea Party movement

Does the just released CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll overstate "active support" for the Tea Party movement? They report "roughly 11 percent of all Americans say they have actively supported the tea party movement, either by donating money, attending a rally, or taking some other active step to support the movement." That number strikes Ben Smith as "surprisingly large," and Chris Bowers notes that respondents often exaggerate their true levels of activism. They are both right to caution us against interpreting these results too literally, but it's worthy considering how the CNN pollsters arrived at the 11% estimate and what it means.

In my column on polling on the Tea Party movement yesterday, I reported two findings from national polls released last week: The number of hard core Tea Party supporters is relatively small (somewhere in the mid-to-upper teens, depending on the measure), while 45% tell the Washington Post/ABC poll they at least "somewhat agree" with the Tea Party positions on issues.

The results of the CNN poll are broadly consistent:

  • The CNN poll finds 15% of adults say they "strongly support" the Tea Party, very similar to the 14% who told said they "strongly agree" with the Tea Party movement's positions on issues on the Post/ABC poll and slightly less than the 18% who say they consider themselves to be "supporters" of the movement on the Times/CBS poll.
  • CNN also finds a total of 35% who at least "moderately support the party. That is less than the 45% who say they agree with the Tea Party on issues in the Post/ABC post, but mostly because CNN offered the explicit choice "or don't you know enough about the Tea Party to say?

But the 11% statistic comes from three separate questions asked on the CNN survey.

2010-02-17-CNN-tea-party.png

The combine the results to find that a total of 11% of adults answer yes to any of the three questions. The number who say they have given money to the Tea Party movement is relatively small (2%). As Bowers guesses, a good chunk of the 11% -- probably about half -- comes from the 7% who say they "took any other active steps" to support the movement, which is obviously a pretty soft measure.

And Bowers is right that survey respondents tend to overstate all sorts of political participation, past voting, intent to vote, political giving, even how often they watch news broadcasts. So a literal interpretation of these statistics is not recommended. I would also caution against assuming that the Tea Party enthusiasts are unique on this score. I don't have a ready link, but political scientists have been studying vote over-reporting for decades and I do not recall reading about differences by political party or ideology.

The larger point here is that there is a relatively small number (10% to 20%) of Americans who express very strong sympathy to something called the Tea Party movement.    The recent polls, including this new one from CNN, tell us a great deal about who those Americans are and what they believe.


Dueling Charts 'Outliers'

Topics: Outliers Feature

Organizing for America releases a graphic on slowing job losses; assessments from Jesse Ashlock, John Dickerson, and FlowingData commenters; Lundry notes traffic stats.

The GOP responds with a chart of their own (via Lundry).

Joshua Tucker ponders
the meaning of a CNN poll showing many don't believe their own representative deserves reelection.

Glen Bolger finds a continuing GOP enthusiasm gap.

Mark Mellman warns of self-fulfilling prophecies of doom.

Terry Mandona and Berwood Yost find little difference in the way Americans perceive "politicians" and "elected officials."

David Hill considers why the Clinton's poll numbers are better than Obama's.

Frank Newport parses Robert Gibbs' Twitter feed.

Lymari Morales explains how to tell Gallup Daily tracking from "a Gallup poll."

A Center for American Progress poll finds most Americans favor revealing Don't Ask Don't Tell.

Gary Langer and Jennifer Agiesta share data showing the public opposes the Supreme Courts campaign finance ruling.


NC: 2010 Sen (PPP 2/12-15)

Topics: poll

Public Policy Polling (D)
2/12-15/10; 788 likely voters, 3.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(PPP release)

North Carolina

2010 Senate
42% Burr, 35% Generic Democrat (chart)
44% Burr, 32% Cunningham (chart)
44% Burr, 31% Lewis (chart)
43% Burr, 33% Marshall (chart)

Job Approval / Disapproval
Sen. Burr: 35 / 35 (chart)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Cal Cunningham: 6 / 9
Kenneth Lewis: 7 / 10
Elaine Marshall: 19 / 10


NV: 2010 Gov (Grove 1/31)

Topics: poll

Grove Insight (D) for Nevada State Education Association
1/31/10; 500 likely voters, 4.4% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Las Vegas sun article - link to poll download on right)

Nevada

Favorable / Unfavorable
Jim Gibbons: 25 / 54 (chart)
Rory Reid: 29 / 31
Brian Sandoval: 30 / 11

2010 Governor: General Election (trends)
44% Sandoval, 35% Reid
49% Reid, 33% Gibbons

Job Rating
Gov. Gibbons: 20% Excellent/Good, 75% Fair/Poor (chart)
Sen. Reid: 34% Excellent/good, 63% Fair/Poor (chart)
Pres. Obama: 44% Excellent/Good, 54% Fair/Poor (chart)


US: Tea Party (CNN 2/12-15)

Topics: poll

CNN / Opinion Research Corporation
2/12-15/10; 1,023 adults, 3% margin of error
954 registered voters, 3% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(CNN release)

National

2010 Congress: Generic Ballot
47% Republican, 45% Democrat (chart) (previously released)

Would you favor or oppose having a third political party that would run candidates for President, Congress and state offices against the Republican and Democratic candidates? (IF FAVOR) Suppose that having a third political party would mean that the winner of some elections would be a candidate who disagrees with you on most issues that matter to you. Would you favor or oppose having a third political party under those circumstances?
38% Favor third political party under those circumstances
26% Oppose third party under those circumstances (but favor initially)
34% Oppose under any circumstances

What is your view of the Tea Party -- would you say you strongly support it, moderately support it, moderately oppose it, or strongly oppose it, or don't you know enough about the Tea Party to say?
35% Support, 19% Oppose

Now suppose the elections for Congress were being held today and a third candidate were running who was endorsed by the Tea Party movement. Which candidate would you vote for in your Congressional district -
45% Democratic, 33% Republican, 16% Tea Party


IL: 2010 Sen (Giannoulias 2/9-14)

Topics: poll

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner for Alexi Giannoulias (D)
2/9-14/10; 600 likely voters, 4% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Giannoulias release)

Illinois

2010 Senate
Giannoulias 49%, Kirk 45%


OR: 2010 Gov Primary (Kitzhaber 2/4-9)

Topics: poll

Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates for John Kitzhaber (D)
2/4-9/10; 554 likely Democratic primary voters, 4.2% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Metz release)

Oregon

2010 Governor
Kitzhaber 55%, Bradbury 21%, Wilson 2%


OR: 2010 Sen (Rasmussen 2/16)

Topics: poll

Rasmussen
2/16/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

Oregon

2010 Senate
49% Wyden, 35% Huffman

Favorable / Unfavorable
Jim Huffman: 33 / 24
Ron Wyden: 55 / 36

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 50 / 49
Gov. Kulongoski: 40 / 60


US: National Survey (PPP 2/13-15)

Topics: poll

Public Policy Polling (D)
2/13-15/10; 743 registered voters, 3.6% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(PPP release)

National

Obama Job Approval
48% Approve, 47% Disapprove (chart)
Dems: 77 / 15 (chart)
Reps: 12 / 85 (chart)
Inds: 48 / 47 (chart)

Do you support or oppose President Obama's health care plan, or do you not have an opinion?
39% Support, 50% Oppose (chart)

Do you think gay men and women should be able to serve openly in the military?
54% Yes, 37% No

This fall will you definitely vote for a Democrat for Congress, consider voting for a Democrat for Congress, or definitely not vote for a Democrat for Congress?
34% Definitely Democratic, 24% Consider, 37% Definitely not


The Drudge-hyped CNN "shock poll"

Topics: 2012 , Barack Obama , CNN

Matt Drudge is currently blaring this headline about a new CNN poll (PDF):

CNN SHOCK POLL: MAJORITY SAY OBAMA DOESN'T DESERVE 2ND TERM

Actually, the poll isn't especially shocking. As The Hill points out, "52 percent of Americans said President Barack Obama doesn't deserve reelection in 2012" -- a number that is almost identical to the proportion who disapprove of the job he's doing (50%).

For context, a Fox News poll in August 2001 asked the following question about George W. Bush:

Considering how President (George W.) Bush has performed so far, do you think he deserves to be reelected or would the country probably be better off with someone else as president?

The results? 36% said Bush deserved to be reelected, 42% said the country would be better off with someone else, and 22% said it depends or weren't sure. These numbers are actually worse than Obama's relative to the 55% approval/32% disapproval numbers the Fox poll showed for Bush.

[Cross-posted to brendan-nyhan.com]


That is Why I Love Mu 'Outliers'

Topics: Outliers Feature

Frank Newport analyzes the latest data on DADT, health care, and banking regulation.

John Judis says a successful health care summit will boost approval of the Democratic reform plan.

John Sides points out that a poor economy undermines trust in government.

Jim Geraghty thinks Bayh's retirement is explained by mediocre poll numbers.

Tom Jensen says Democrats are in trouble with independents, but not moderates.

Politico's Alex Isenstadt reports on Democrats unhappy with Firedoglake's congressional district polling.

Gallup's Healthways Well-Being Index ranks all 435 Congressional Districts (via Morales).

Junk Charts critiques a Washington Post polling graphic.

Flowing Data explains how to create data visualizations with Tableau Public.

Andrew Gelman shares some statistical love poems.


Un-Disclosing Data is Hard

Topics: Disclosure , Harry Enten , Internet Archive , Strategic Vision

While I was out shoveling snow and trying to keep my snow-bound children entertained last week, Dartmouth undergraduate Harry Enten -- our Pollster.com intern-to-be for 2010 -- was busy blogging up a storm. One item he posted last week provides yet another epilogue to an epilogue on the story of Strategic Vision LLC.

My last installment on the odd twist in this story noted that after apparently blocking access to strategicvision.biz to our offices at the National Journal Group, the web masters at Strategic Vision also sought to block the Internet Archive from displaying content previously released on strategicvision.biz.

But Harry noticed something: "The web pages can still be accessed online right now even without the Internet Archive!" How?

Well, it turns out that, despite not having one single page to display the polling data from 2005-2007 (they do for 2008 and 2009), one can still retrieve the original individual pages the polling data was displayed upon. In what can only be deemed as one of the WORST coverups of all time, Strategic Vision, LLC left the individual polling pages on its servers.

All you need to access the data is the original link to any poll. Those links are easily available from polling aggregation sites such as RealClearPolitics.com, Pollster.com, and even Wikipedia.org.

He even provides a video to show, step-by-step, how the links can be found.

And just in case our friends at Strategic Vision, LLC decide to take those not-quite-removed-pages down, Harry "downloaded every single poll file from 2005-2009 and have uploaded it in a single zip file for anyone to download."

Thanks Harry!

PS: He has a new post today that catches a prominent blogger's oversight and teaches a lesson about putting too much trust in wikipedia.


CA: 2010 Gov (Rasmussen 2/15)

Topics: poll

Rasmussen
2/15/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

California

2010 Governor (trends)
Whitman (R) 43%, Brown (D) 43% (chart)
Brown (D) 46%, Poizner (R) 34% (chart)
Feinstein (D) 45%, Whitman (R) 43%
Feinstein (D) 48%, Poizner (R) 36%

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 57 / 42 (chart)
Gov. Schwarzenegger: 26 / 73 (chart)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Meg Whitman: 56 / 28
Jerry Brown: 53 / 41
Steve Poizner: 38 / 37
Dianne Feinstein: 53 / 42 (chart)


US: National Survey (CNN 2/12-15)

Topics: poll


CNN / Opinion Research Corporation
2/12-15/10; 1,023 adults, 3% margin of error
954 registered voters, 3% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(CNN release)

National

Obama Job Approval
49% Approve, 50% Disapprove (chart)

2010 Congress: Generic Ballot
47% Republican, 45% Democrat (chart)

Please tell me whether you think each of the following political officeholders deserves to be reelected or not:
The U.S. representative in your congressional district: 50% Deserves, 44% Does not
Most members of Congress: 35% Deserve, 62% Do not
Most Democratic members of Congress: 43% Deserve, 54% Do not
Most Republican members of Congress: 39% Deserve, 56% Do not

Do you think Barack Obama deserves to be reelected, or not?
44% Deserves, 52% Does not


Tea Party Polling

Topics: ABC/Washington Post , CBS/New York Times , National Journal column , Tea Party movement

My column for this week looks at the recent polling on the Tea Party movement with a focus on how pollsters pondered this issue and then tackled it in longer form surveys released last week. Special thanks to the Washington Post's Jennifer Agiesta for providing some additional data.

For the most thorough review of perceptions of the Tea Party movement, I highly recommend the reports by CBS News, ABC News and the Washington Post's story and accompanying graphic.

I want to expand a little on one point made toward the end of the column: The number of hard core supporters is relatively small (somewhere in the mid-to-upper teens, depending on the measure), while a much larger percentage (45%) tell the Post/ABC poll they at least "somewhat agree" with the Tea Party positions on issues.

But which positions do these 45% agree with? After all, many sources will point out, there are many Tea Party movements with sometimes only vaguely articulated issue positions. Neither of the two recent surveys directly probed knowledge of the tea party positions, but it is possible to glean some sense of their perceptions by looking at other attitudes among the self-identified Tea Party sympathizers.

For example, as I noted in the column, expressed agreement with Tea Party positions is much higher with conservatives (63%), strong Republicans (67%), those who disapprove of Obama (65%) and those who express anger at Washington (69%). Here are some additional details from the ABC News report:

[Tea Party support] peaks among people who are more apt to see the government as wasting money; people who strongly agree with the movement say on average that the government wastes 63 cents out of every tax dollar it collects. People who disagree with the Tea Party see less waste, albeit still a lot - 47 cents on the dollar.

Tea Party supporters are more apt to classify themselves as anti-incumbent - 64 percent of those who strongly agree with its positions do so, as do 53 percent of those who somewhat agree, compared with 40 percent of those who disagree. And the movement's conservative, Republican base shows up in vote preferences for the midterm elections. Among registered voters who agree at least somewhat with Tea Party positions, Republicans hold the lead over Democratic congressional candidates by a very wide 70-22 percent.

Taken together, these results imply that among Americans who have heard something about it, the words "Tea Party movement" imply a politically conservative reaction against Obama, Washington and perceived waste in government spending.

But both surveys also yield evidence that most Americans know little or nothing about the movement, and some additional results suggest that those who are only "somewhat" supportive hold positions that may be at odds with those frequently associated with the movement. Here is more from the ABC News report:

While the Tea Party promotes limited government, some of its supporters have different views on government health care mandates. For example, 62 percent of those who say they agree at least somewhat with Tea Party positions also say the government should require businesses to provide health insurance for employees.

Even more, 71 percent, say government should require insurance companies to sell coverage to people regardless of pre-existing conditions. And while shy of a majority, a substantial share of Tea Party supporters, 43 percent, say government should require all Americans to have health insurance, from their employer or another source, with financial assistance for those who need it.


IA: 2010 Gov (DMR 1/31-2/3)

Topics: poll

Iowa Poll / Des Moines Register / Selzer & Co.
1/31-2/3/10; 805 adults, 3.5% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Des Moines Register article)

Iowa

2010 Governor
53% Branstad (R), 33% Culver (D)
43% Vander Plaats (R), 40% Culver (D)
41% Culver (D), 37% Rants (R)
41% Culver (D), 36% Roberts (R)

Job Approval / Disapproval
Gov. Culver: 36 / 53


WA: 2010 Sen (Rasmussen 2/11)

Topics: poll

Rasmussen
2/11/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

Washington State

2010 Senate
48% Rossi (R), 46% Murray (D)
50% Murray (D), 38% Benton (R)
49% Murray (D), 345 Didier (R)
48% Murray (D), 33% Widener (D)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Dino Rossi: 54 / 41
Don Benton: 33 / 48
Patty Murray: 51 / 45
Clint Didier: 28 / 28
Chris Widener: 2 / 26

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 51 / 48
Gov. Gregoire: 41 / 57


CA: 2010 Sen (Rasmussen 2/11)

Topics: poll

Rasmussen
2/11/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

California

2010 Senate
46% Boxer (D), 42% Fiorina (R) (chart)
47% Boxer (D), 42% DeVore (R) (chart)
45% Boxer (D), 41% Campbell (R)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Barbara Boxer: 51 / 46 (chart)
Chuck DeVore: 32 / 36
Carly Fiorina: 37 / 40
Tom Campbell: 44 / 33

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 58 / 41 (chart)


TX: 2010 Gov (Kos 2/8-10)

Topics: poll

DailyKos.com (D) / Research 2000
2/8-10/10; 600 likely voters, 4% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Kos release)

Texas

Favorable / Unfavorable
Rick Perry: 50 / 45
Kay Bailey Hutchison: 52 / 37
Debra Medina: 47 / 35
Bill White: 49 / 33
John Cornyn: 49 / 41
Barack Obama: 44 / 54

2010 Governor: Republican Primary
42% Perry, 30% Hutchison, 17% Medina

2010 Governor: Republican Primary Runoff
43% Perry, 33% Hutchison
44% Perry, 23% Medina
38% Hutchison, 30% Medina

2010 Governor: General Election
46% Perry, 42% White
47% Hutchison, 41% White
44% Medina, 43% White


TX: 2010 Gov (Blum&Weprin 2/2-10)

Topics: poll

Blum & Weprin / Dallas Morning News / Houston Chronicle / Fort Worth Star-Telegram / Austin American Statesman / San Antonio Express-News
2/2-10/10; 2017 adults
1508 registered voters, 2.5% margin of error
465 likely Republican primary voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Blum & Weprin results)

Texas

2010 Governor: Republican Primary
45% Perry, 29% Hutchison, 17% Medina

2010 Governor: General Election
Perry (R) 43%, White (D) 37%
Hutchison (R) 42%, White (D) 34%

Job Approval / Disapproval
Gov. Perry: 46 / 38
Sen. Hutchison: 48 / 27
Pres. Obama: 40 / 48

Favorable / Unfavorable
Bill White: 23 / 7


 

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR