![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
chessdev.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticshttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028105-503544.html?tag=exclsv
Overall, 57 percent of respondents said the harsh political tone had nothing to do with the shooting, compared to 32 percent who felt it did. Republicans were more likely to feel the two were unrelated - 69 percent said rhetoric was not to blame; 19 percent said it played a part. Democrats were more split on the issue - 49 percent saw no connection; 42 percent said there was.
Independents more closely reflected the overall breakdown - 56 percent said rhetoric had nothing to do with the attack; 33 percent felt it did.
The telephone poll was conducted Jan 9-10 among 673 adults across the country. The margin of error is +/- 4 percent.
[chessdev] WITHOUT even going into "deep analysis" here ... anyone notice how the results are presented as YES or NO?
Dont most surveys ask you to rate your feelings on a topic by a scale? "Strongly/Somewhat/Not at all Agree"?...
am I just being mistrustful....or do these results look like they're blurring some important distinctions here?
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 11:16 (UTC)Probably. I suspect that the same is the case with LJ as a whole (I don't know why). I think this warrants a massive LJ survey. In a sense this place could be roughly taken as a representative sample for the whole LJ (well, excluding some of the most extreme elements on both sides who don't tend to fare well around these latitudes).
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 08:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 09:12 (UTC)I don't think that it was good polling.
Over here in the UK, opinion polls will use a bigger sample, and the strongly/somewat/ not at all format and people like Gallup, who do professional polling will aslo give a breakdown in the size of ther sample - how many young people voted, how marrieds vote compared to singles, etc.
they tend to go about predicting the results of elections in order to demonstrate their accuracy, then do marketing surveys for a price on behalf of commercial interests. they therefore tend to be accurate enough to draw the cash and are very good at what they do.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 19:38 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/1/11 00:20 (UTC)http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-01-12-poll-ariz-shooting_N.htm?csp=34news
http://www.gallup.com/poll/145556/Doubt-Political-Rhetoric-Major-Factor-Ariz-Shootings.aspx
Most Americans reject the idea that inflammatory political language by conservatives should be part of the debate about the forces behind the Arizona shooting that left six people dead and a congresswoman in critical condition, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds.
A 53% majority of those surveyed call that analysis mostly an attempt to use the tragedy to make conservatives look bad. About a third, 35%, say it is a legitimate point about how dangerous language can be.
And there is little sense that stricter gun control laws in Arizona might have averted the tragedy. Only one in five say they would have prevented the shooting; 72% say tighter controls wouldn't have prevented it.
...
Fifty-three percent say Republicans and their supporters have gone too far in using inflammatory language; 51% say that of Democrats; 49% say it of Tea Party supporters.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 09:36 (UTC)Particularly when nearly all of us know nearly nothing about what was actually going on in this guys head.
And whether or not such political speech MAY have an influence on people to act in this kind of way is really what the debate is about.
I think the results of this poll are essentially worthless in telling us anything of value or contributing to the debate.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 13:40 (UTC)I think the last few days of discussion/posts pretty much disagree with that... to some people, that IS the debate and has been.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 23:15 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/1/11 00:01 (UTC)the same groups that complain that improper content in movies can cause bad behavior in kids or deviants....
NOW argue that speech and imagery do not infuence?????
How revisionist...
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 11:10 (UTC)Could you venture with a guess why democrats were more split on the issue?
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 13:39 (UTC)It's probably everyone nationwide who picked up their phone between 6:11 - 6:13pm, Eastern Time who consented to a survey
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 11:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 12:47 (UTC)The former.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 19:04 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 19:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 20:36 (UTC)Democrats slightly improved their standing on most issues, most notably surpassing Republicans on handling the economy for the first time since June: 45 percent trust the Democrats to handle it, 40 percent the Republicans. Democrats also pulled even with Republicans on managing the federal budget deficit, and they expanded their advantage on handling health care.
Republicans in Congress got a slight bump, too, though they are not nearly as popular as Obama. Now, 36 percent give them high marks, compared with 29 percent last fall. But the increase was driven entirely by people who identify themselves as Republicans. Support among independents did not change.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:32 (UTC)Unfortunately, this AP poll is the only recent one to work with.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 20:48 (UTC)2) Yup. --Democrats slightly improved their standing on most issues, most notably surpassing Republicans on handling the economy for the first time since June: 45 percent trust the Democrats to handle it, 40 percent the Republicans. Democrats also pulled even with Republicans on managing the federal budget deficit, and they expanded their advantage on handling health care.
(no subject)
Date: 13/1/11 00:04 (UTC)http://pollingreport.com/health.htm
(no subject)
Date: 13/1/11 00:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 13:42 (UTC)Things to look out for:
Simple binary answers to nuanced issues.
Self-selecting (slop) polls conducted by phone or worse, internet clicks.
Small sample sizes without using stratified sampling or other non-random techniques.
The information was gathered immediately after an emotional incident.
That being said, public opinion doesn't really bear on fact. I can have an opinion that drinking milk causes violence and 39.6% can agree with me, but that does not mean that drinking milk causes violence. IMO it is the government's job to get facts about things and use only the facts before passing laws restricting the citizen. Congress seems to fail on this quite frequently because the members are more interested in getting re-elected than doing what it correct.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 15:43 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 17:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 19:03 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 17:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 17:47 (UTC)yes / no ?
no.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 18:01 (UTC)Of course, public opinion guys know that. Framing issues is a huge segment of public opinion research. That said, it's typically the clients who choose the questions. That doesn't mean that the study is useless, it's just limited in the information it provided. A study with 683 random people is a reasonably sized survey. And while the cell phone issue is becoming a larger problem, it hasn't been found to discredit telephone surveys yet. Especially when likely voters are less likely to be in a cell-only household than the geeral population at large.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 20:24 (UTC)I wonder if that suddenly changes the views of the polls validity.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 20:48 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:33 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:42 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:43 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:47 (UTC)If you think that it's likely that pigs are going to fly, you worry about the effects of flying pigs. If you don't think it's likely, there are other things to worry about.
The fact that people don't think violence is ever justified goes to show that they think that democracy is responsive enough to the people to avoid the need for violent regime change. Not that they are blind to America's problems.
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:48 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:56 (UTC)Again, democracy exists as an alternative to violence and it shouldn't be surprising in the least that people have faith in it's ability to internally keep the peace.
(no subject)
Date: 13/1/11 00:28 (UTC)They actually speak about putting DOWN insurrection and mention that the militias should be **regulated** -- meaning controlled by the local and federal government.
I agree that armed revolution would have been against the monarchy....not against themselves...
(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 19:10 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 21:54 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/1/11 21:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/1/11 19:46 (UTC)