Activism Discussion: How Obama Got Elected - Almost No Obama Voters Ace Election Test

How Obama Got Elected - Almost No Obama Voters Ace Election Test
Posts: 14

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

Stan De SD
2008-11-18 19:34:36 EST
Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained
perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election test which gauged
their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the
presidential tickets during the campaign, a new Zogby International
telephone poll shows.

======================================

Zogby Poll

512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50
shot just by guessing)

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign
because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election
by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would
likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25%
chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at
the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance
by guessing).

And yet.....

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their
party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage
daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her
"house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.

Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was
technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)


http://howobamagotelected.com/

======================================

Zogby Statement on Ziegler poll


"We stand by the results our survey work on behalf of John Ziegler, as
we stand by all of our work. We reject the notion that this was a push
poll because it very simply wasn't. It was a legitimate effort to test
the knowledge of voters who cast ballots for Barack Obama in the Nov.
4 election. Push polls are a malicious effort to sway public opinion
one way or the other, while message and knowledge testing is quite
another effort of public opinion research that is legitimate inquiry
and has value in the public square. In this case, the respondents were
given a full range of responses and were not pressured or influenced
to respond in one way or another. This poll was not designed to hurt
anyone, which is obvious as it was conducted after the election. The
client is free to draw his own conclusions about the research, as are
bloggers and other members of society. But Zogby International is a
neutral party in this matter. We were hired to test public opinion on
a particular subject and with no ax to grind, that's exactly what we
did. We don't have to agree or disagree with the questions, we simply
ask them and provide the client with a fair and accurate set of data
reflecting public opinion." - John Zogby

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.cfm?ID=1641

======================================

Liberals must be proud... :O|

Bill Z.
2008-11-18 21:12:51 EST
Stan de SD <StanDeSD@gmail.com> writes:

> Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained
> perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election test which gauged
> their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the
> presidential tickets during the campaign, a new Zogby International
> telephone poll shows.
>
> ======================================

... and some of it is a bit dubious to say the least.

>
> 81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign
> because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

<http://mediamatters.org/items/200808230003>: apparently Biden
had credited a British politician on numerous occassions for quotes
used in his stump speach but failed to do that in a speach on Aug 23.
So, it could have been an accidental lapse due to fatigue. He most
likely was going to quit anyway given how late it was and given how
well he was doing.

> 56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at
> the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance
> by guessing).

<http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html>:

The former Weatherman, William Ayers, now holds the position
of distinguished professor of education at the University of
Illinois-Chicago. ...

The Facts

The first article in the mainstream press linking Obama to
Ayers appeared in the London Daily Mail on February 2. It was
written by Peter Hitchens, the right-wing brother of the
left-wing firebrand turned Iraq war supporter, Christopher
Hitchens. Hitchens cited the Ayers connection to bolster his
argument that Obama is "far more radical than he would like us
to know."

...

The only hard facts that have come out so far are the $200
contribution by Ayers to the Obama re-election fund, and their
joint membership of the eight-person Woods Fund Board. Ayers
did not respond to e-mails and telephone calls requesting
clarification of the relationship. Obama spokesman Bill Burton
noted in a statement that Ayers was a professor of education
at the University of Illinois and a former aide to Mayor
Richard M. Daley ...

Whatever his past, Ayers is now a respected member of the
Chicago intelligentsia, and still a member of the Woods Fund
Board. The president of the Woods Fund, Deborah Harrington,
said he had been selected for the board because of his solid
academic credentials and "passion for social justice."

"This whole connection is a stretch," Harrington told
me. "Barack was very well known in Chicago, and a highly
respected legislator. It would be difficult to find people
round here who never volunteered or contributed money to one
of his campaigns."

The Atomic Brain
2008-11-18 22:36:10 EST

"Stan de SD" <StanDeSD@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2d7a0547-6f15-4bbc-8766-3497ce5d1d2c@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> Liberals must be proud... :O|

Still labeling people like products, huh Rush Junior?



Doomsday Cultist
2008-11-19 06:40:37 EST
On Nov 18, 7:34 pm, Stan de SD <StanD...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained
> perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election test which gauged
> their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the
> presidential tickets during the campaign, a new Zogby International
> telephone poll shows.
>
> ======================================

>
> Liberals must be proud... :O| >>


This video shows how stupid and ignorant Americans are:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp4iI59BfpQ




--
+

Pucker your lips for the Apocalypse!

Johnny Asia, Guitarist from the Future

http://music.download.com/johnnyasia

http://johnnyasia.net

-

Doomsday Cultist
2008-11-19 06:42:01 EST
On Nov 18, 7:34 pm, Stan de SD <StanD...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Liberals must be proud... :O| >>



Why people think Americans are stupid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0RH0cYs4lw&feature=related

Tim Howard
2008-11-20 03:14:39 EST
Stan de SD wrote:
> Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained
> perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election test which gauged
> their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the
> presidential tickets during the campaign, a new Zogby International
> telephone poll shows.
>

Some those questions are clearly subjective to say the least.

Answers to several questions are distressing, but it is more a
commentary on the political ignorance of the American public in general,
and on the lazy trivializing news media. McCain supporters, if asked,
would probably have similar %

Here is a response to this "poll".

November 18, 2008
Zogby's Misleading Knowledge Test

By Mark Blumenthal

Nate Silver has taken Zogby International to task for a telephone survey
of 512 Obama voters that claims to "gauge their knowledge of statements
and scandals associated with the presidential tickets during the
campaign." Silver is right....but not right...

The summary and statement posted on the Zogby web site claims that "only
54% of Obama voters were able to answer at least half or more of the
questions correctly," and more specifically that "statements linked to
Republican presidential candidate John McCain and his vice-presidential
running-mate Sarah Palin were far more likely to be answered correctly
by Obama voters than questions about statements associated with Obama
and Vice-President-Elect Joe Biden."

The survey was paid for by John Ziegler, a former talk radio host and
publisher of a conservative web site. The Zogby summary quotes Ziegler
claiming that "the poll really proves beyond any doubt the stunning
level of malpractice on the part of the media in not educating the Obama
portion of the voting populace."

The problem, as Silver points out, is that the survey does no such
thing. It proves only that Obama voters surveyed were less likely to
attribute to Obama or Biden a half dozen statements that were "at best
debatable, yet apparently represented as factual to the respondent,"
such as the following:

"Which of the four [candidates] said his policies would likely
bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket?"

"Which of the four [candidates] started his political career at the
home of two former members of the Weather Underground?"

"Which of the four [candidates] quit a previous campaign because of
plagiarism?"

"Which of the four [candidates] won his first election by getting
opponents kicked off the ballot?"

Silver concludes -- appropriately -- that Zogby's survey appears to be
less an unbiased measurement than part of "a viral marketing effort to
discredit the intelligence of Obama supporters."

Zogby's defense is to deny that he conducted a "push poll" (more on that
below), claiming instead that his survey represents "a legitimate effort
to test the knowledge of voters who cast ballots for Barack Obama" He
claims that "respondents were given a full range of responses and were
not pressured or influenced to respond in one way or another." That's a
little like describing the question, "when did you stop beating you
wife," as fair (and as a fair test of "knowledge") by saying the husband
has an opportunity to offer any date on the calendar as a response.

Zogby also claims to be a passive agent that just conducted research on
behalf of a client. "The client," Zogby writes,"is free to draw his own
conclusions about the research, as are bloggers and other members of
society." Really? Then why does the analysis posted on Zogby's website
repeatedly support "the client's" conclusions?

Unfortunately, Silver's case would have been stronger had he not reached
reflexively, as so many do, for the "push poll" label to describe the
Zogby poll. That's a bit like confusing assault with murder. A push poll
isn't a survey at all, but negative telemarketing calls made under the
guise of the survey. And the Random House Dictionary definition that
Silver linked to is at odds with those of the American Association for
Public Opinion Research, the Council for Marketing and Opinion Research,
and the American Association of Political Consultants, (see also the
work of Stu Rothenberg of Roll Call, Kathy Frankovic of CBS News and
yours truly).

Zogby's survey does not amount to a "push poll" in that sense, but using
the term allows him to respond -- predictably -- with a denial that
"this was not a push poll." It wasn't, but that's beside the point.
Describing his biased, leading questions as a legitimate test of
knowledge is hugely misleading, at best.

Orval Fairbairn
2008-11-20 09:24:02 EST
In article <49251c71$0$5502$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net>,
Tim Howard <tim.howard@suddenlink.net> wrote:

> Stan de SD wrote:
> > Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained
> > perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election test which gauged
> > their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the
> > presidential tickets during the campaign, a new Zogby International
> > telephone poll shows.
> >
>
> Some those questions are clearly subjective to say the least.
>
> Answers to several questions are distressing, but it is more a
> commentary on the political ignorance of the American public in general,
> and on the lazy trivializing news media. McCain supporters, if asked,
> would probably have similar %
>
> Here is a response to this "poll".
>
> November 18, 2008
> Zogby's Misleading Knowledge Test
>
> By Mark Blumenthal
>
> Nate Silver has taken Zogby International to task for a telephone survey
> of 512 Obama voters that claims to "gauge their knowledge of statements
> and scandals associated with the presidential tickets during the
> campaign." Silver is right....but not right...
>
> The summary and statement posted on the Zogby web site claims that "only
> 54% of Obama voters were able to answer at least half or more of the
> questions correctly," and more specifically that "statements linked to
> Republican presidential candidate John McCain and his vice-presidential
> running-mate Sarah Palin were far more likely to be answered correctly
> by Obama voters than questions about statements associated with Obama
> and Vice-President-Elect Joe Biden."
>
> The survey was paid for by John Ziegler, a former talk radio host and
> publisher of a conservative web site. The Zogby summary quotes Ziegler
> claiming that "the poll really proves beyond any doubt the stunning
> level of malpractice on the part of the media in not educating the Obama
> portion of the voting populace."
>
> The problem, as Silver points out, is that the survey does no such
> thing. It proves only that Obama voters surveyed were less likely to
> attribute to Obama or Biden a half dozen statements that were "at best
> debatable, yet apparently represented as factual to the respondent,"
> such as the following:
>
> "Which of the four [candidates] said his policies would likely
> bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket?"
>
> "Which of the four [candidates] started his political career at the
> home of two former members of the Weather Underground?"
>
> "Which of the four [candidates] quit a previous campaign because of
> plagiarism?"
>
> "Which of the four [candidates] won his first election by getting
> opponents kicked off the ballot?"
>
> Silver concludes -- appropriately -- that Zogby's survey appears to be
> less an unbiased measurement than part of "a viral marketing effort to
> discredit the intelligence of Obama supporters."
>
> Zogby's defense is to deny that he conducted a "push poll" (more on that
> below), claiming instead that his survey represents "a legitimate effort
> to test the knowledge of voters who cast ballots for Barack Obama" He
> claims that "respondents were given a full range of responses and were
> not pressured or influenced to respond in one way or another." That's a
> little like describing the question, "when did you stop beating you
> wife," as fair (and as a fair test of "knowledge") by saying the husband
> has an opportunity to offer any date on the calendar as a response.
>
> Zogby also claims to be a passive agent that just conducted research on
> behalf of a client. "The client," Zogby writes,"is free to draw his own
> conclusions about the research, as are bloggers and other members of
> society." Really? Then why does the analysis posted on Zogby's website
> repeatedly support "the client's" conclusions?
>
> Unfortunately, Silver's case would have been stronger had he not reached
> reflexively, as so many do, for the "push poll" label to describe the
> Zogby poll. That's a bit like confusing assault with murder. A push poll
> isn't a survey at all, but negative telemarketing calls made under the
> guise of the survey. And the Random House Dictionary definition that
> Silver linked to is at odds with those of the American Association for
> Public Opinion Research, the Council for Marketing and Opinion Research,
> and the American Association of Political Consultants, (see also the
> work of Stu Rothenberg of Roll Call, Kathy Frankovic of CBS News and
> yours truly).
>
> Zogby's survey does not amount to a "push poll" in that sense, but using
> the term allows him to respond -- predictably -- with a denial that
> "this was not a push poll." It wasn't, but that's beside the point.
> Describing his biased, leading questions as a legitimate test of
> knowledge is hugely misleading, at best.

But it STLII shows how gullible, uninformed and stupid the ObM voters
were!

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

Stan De SD
2008-11-20 14:24:52 EST
On Nov 18, 6:12 pm, nob...@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.) wrote:
>         Whatever his past, Ayers is now a respected member of the
>         Chicago intelligentsia,

Which doesn't say a lot for them, or for you either. What do you
honestly think about a man who dedicated a book to Sirhan Sirhan, the
man who assassinated RFK? You think that's "respectable"?

Stan De SD
2008-11-20 14:26:30 EST
On Nov 18, 7:36 pm, "The Atomic Brain" <a...@whdc.net> wrote:
> "Stan de SD" <StanD...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:2d7a0547-6f15-4bbc-8766-3497ce5d1d2c@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Liberals must be proud... :O|
>
> Still labeling people like products, huh Rush Junior?

Sill incapable of replying in kind? I gather your refusal to respond
is due to the fact you wouldn't have done much better than the
Obamatons who responded. Face it, the typical Obama voter was shallow,
clueless, and easily swayed by a cheering media who wanted to "feel
good" about themselves.


Stan De SD
2008-11-20 14:31:11 EST
On Nov 20, 12:14 am, Tim Howard <tim.how...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
> Stan de SD wrote:
> > Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained
> > perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election test which gauged
> > their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the
> > presidential tickets during the campaign, a newZogbyInternational
> > telephone poll shows.
>
> Some those questions are clearly subjective to say the least.

Yeah, like "who controls Congress", right? If the Obama-worshipping
sheeple had even GUESSED, they should have been able to get it right
50% of the time - but then again, any idiot whose sole source of
information was listening to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid blame
everything on the GOP and Bush, even though they CONTROLLED Congress
for the last 2 years, wouldn't have had a clue either. Face it, the
constituency of the left is that of the ignorant and unproductive...
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


2021 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron