Interviews with Obama Voters - Page 2 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-19-2008, 09:46 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
jlomon's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2006
Vehicle: 2013 VW Golf Sportwagen TDI, 2011 Mazda 2, 2000 E320 4Matic Wagon (retired),1994 C280 (retired)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 3,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewprof View Post
He called Obama a "house negro." "
I don't agree with this, but the house is kind of impressive, wouldn't you say?
jlomon is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-19-2008, 09:48 AM
DP
Moderator
 
DP's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 190E, 400E, SLK350
Location: Chesapeak Bay
Posts: 64,125
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 991 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlomon View Post
I don't agree with this, but the house is kind of impressive, wouldn't you say?
It's a jail.. I did a couple service calls (repaired some stuff) back in the eighties in its belly and I would not want to live there.
DP is offline  
post #13 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-19-2008, 11:46 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
TNTRower's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2007
Vehicle: '98 E320 Wagon (non 4matic)
Location: Atlanta, GA & Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
Posts: 6,663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to TNTRower
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewprof View Post
You have a "strategery"? I am humbleded
As well you should be, you may kiss my ring.


Who's John Galt.

"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" - Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 2

If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. --Benjamin Netayahu
TNTRower is offline  
post #14 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-20-2008, 08:58 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1973 450 SL
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
Zogby [the poll taker] is having problems with the poll as it is considered to be a push poll [you pick who you want to interview and the questions are designed for bad answers] Think Jaywalking on the Tonight's show.

Also, polls are not conducted with full video. Makes you wonder just what the motive of Zigler was for the poll and how many folks were polled to get the 9.5 minutes.
I understand over 500 were interviewed.

Charter member of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy and proud of it.

God Bless the America we're trying to create.
--Hillary Rodham Clinton
bottomline1 is offline  
post #15 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-20-2008, 09:08 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
McBear I do agree with you. I will say this though. Do you think it was all that hard for them to find people this uninformed? It happens on both sides. But really, do you think they had to work all that hard?
I really don't know. Not intending to make a partisan comment but I really don't know any uninformed democrats. Everyone that I know would be able to come on this board and give fact and figures on pretty much any political subject. And that includes the clerks and servers and other folks that I talk to on a regular basis.

An aside on that very subject. The 86 year old parking lot attendant [George Washington] that I talk to nearly every day got a ticket to the Inauguration and a seat on the charter bus going up. He is very politically astute and pragmatic. I truly believe this last month made his life complete. He spent all of his life working to put his kids through college so they would have a better life than he had.

This is the guy who got the job as a parking lot attendant because insurance would not pay for his Viagra for him and his girlfriends. He credits his long life to "some drinking and a little weed here and there". He retired from UK 20 years ago. He started life mucking stalls at a horse farm for a dollar a day.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #16 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-20-2008, 09:12 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottomline1 View Post
I understand over 500 were interviewed.
Wow, 500 to get under 10 minutes of video. That must mean the majority were on the ball.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #17 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-20-2008, 09:17 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1973 450 SL
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
Wow, 500 to get under 10 minutes of video. That must mean the majority were on the ball.
You may be mixing the Zogby poll and the efforts of the fellow (whose name I can't remember) that commissioned the poll who probably put out the video.

The 10 minutes may have been the equivalent of stopping a new drug test because all the subjects were dying.

Charter member of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy and proud of it.

God Bless the America we're trying to create.
--Hillary Rodham Clinton
bottomline1 is offline  
post #18 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-20-2008, 09:28 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottomline1 View Post
You may be mixing the Zogby poll and the efforts of the fellow (whose name I can't remember) that commissioned the poll who probably put out the video.

The 10 minutes may have been the equivalent of stopping a new drug test because all the subjects were dying.
Or it might have been grabbing 10 vid cuts out of 500 that made the respondents seem dumb to try and make a point that he wanted to make.

Since we can't see ALL the video, we won't know. And since it has no point, it doesn't matter.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #19 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-20-2008, 09:36 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Here you go. Even Zog says he would not have approved doing the poll.


Zogby’s Misleading Poll of Obama Voters

During a campaign, pollsters can build credibility by forecasting election results accurately. Afterward, they can build revenue by using that credibility to attract private clients. These private surveys often have an agenda, and their numbers can’t be tested against an objective standard, such as votes. Such surveys can test pollsters’ standards of conduct.

Zogby International recently conducted a survey for a critic of president-elect Barack Obama and then, together with the sponsor, interpreted the numbers from the survey in a misleading fashion.

John Zogby, the president and chief executive of Zogby International, released a statement on his Web site Tuesday that defended the poll in the face of heavy criticism from bloggers and some media organizations, saying, “We stand by the results [of] our survey work on behalf of [author and former talk show host] John Ziegler, as we stand by all of our work. … We were hired to test public opinion on a particular subject and with no ax to grind, that’s exactly what we did.”

But on Wednesday, Zogby told me he was on a book tour* when the contract was reached and when the survey was conducted, and wouldn’t have approved the poll in the form it took, or a press release posted on his firm’s Web site. “This was not Zogby International’s finest hour,” he said. “Something, somehow, fell through the cracks.” He said he would review the incident with his staff on Friday to determine what went wrong. Nonetheless, Zogby stood by the results of the poll themselves. “There is valuable information in this poll,” he said.

The survey’s sponsor, Ziegler, has created a Web site called How Obama Got Elected that says the Democratic senator’s victory was made possible by the news media, which failed to inform voters of Obama’s shortcomings and those of his running mate, Joe Biden. The survey was meant to bolster that argument, also to be presented in a documentary by Ziegler, “Media Malpractice…How Obama Got Elected.”

To conduct the survey, Ziegler turned to Zogby, a firm that has had some success in presidential-election polling but also has conducted some questionable sponsored surveys. Zogby posed 12 questions to 512 Obama voters last week, then ran the results this week on its site with the sub-headline “Survey finds most Obama voters remembered negative coverage of McCain/Palin statements but struggled to correctly answer questions about coverage associated with Obama/Biden.”

The press release highlighted that at least 80% of Obama voters knew that Palin had a pregnant teenage daughter and was the candidate associated with a $150,000 wardrobe, and that McCain was unable to identify the number of houses he owned. Meanwhile, more than 80% didn’t know unflattering facts about Obama, such as his successful efforts to have opponents removed from the ballot in his first political race and his comments that critics have interpreted to mean his energy policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry.

Here’s an alternative way of presenting the findings that’s at least as valid. There were 10 questions that were meant to be answered with the name of one of the candidates. Five of them covered events that had surfaced in the three months before the election: McCain’s inability to say how many homes he owned; Palin’s pregnant teenage daughter; Palin’s wardrobe budget; Obama’s intent to redistribute wealth; and Biden’s comment that Obama would be tested by an international crisis. On those questions, more than half of Obama voters correctly identified the involved candidate (the percentage for the last question was lowest, at 53.3%; on the others, it was in the 80s).

The other five questions covered events or comments during the primary or from decades ago, including Obama’s first campaign and a Biden presidential bid in 1987 done in by charges of plagiarism in law school and on the campaign trail. On four of these questions, the correct answer was chosen more frequently than the other three candidates combined, but many voters — on some questions, most — were unsure. On three questions, fewer than 25% of respondents got the right answer, prompting Ziegler to tell Fox News “that a group of monkeys if they had been guessing would have done better than Obama voters” on those questions, not because Obama voters were unintelligent but because they were misinformed.

On the fifth question about older events, “Which candidate said their policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket?”, more voters named McCain than Obama. However, Obama’s cited comments — made in January in a meeting with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board — referred to bankrupting new coal plants, not the industry. He was speaking about a cap-and-trade system for emissions, something that McCain also has supported.

“We wrote ‘likely’ because of that very caveat,” Ziegler told me. “We had to simplify it, and I stand by the simplification of the question.”

Noting the dated Biden plagiarism question, Ann Selzer, a pollster in Des Moines, said, “It’s not at all surprising Obama supporters do not know this fact. I would guess a similar number of McCain supporters do not know this fact.”

Ziegler agreed that people may have done worst on questions referring to older events. “I think that that’s true, and I think that’s part of the reason there was a disparity there,” he said. “It also goes to the point that the news media ignored the history of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.” When asked why he didn’t include questions referring to unfavorable aspects of McCain’s and Palin’s distant past, he said, “I felt that these were the best 12 for what I was trying to accomplish.”

Ziegler told Fox News that he spent about $13,000 on the poll and on a related short film, both of which will be used in his documentary. On Fox, he challenged liberals to sponsor a similar poll of McCain supporters. He told me he was sure McCain backers would do better: “They got their information from a completely different type of media, one that was not totally in the tank for Barack Obama.”

Zogby said he wouldn’t have approved the poll without including McCain supporters. “A more honest poll would have been conducted had we also focused on McCain people,” he said. He added that some of the questions weren’t worded fairly.

(On Thursday, Politico reported that Ziegler contacted Zogby this week to repeat the poll with McCain supporters but was rebuffed by the polling firm. John Zogby said he would want to formulate the questions and have either an objective sponsor or a pair of sponsors, one from the left and one from the right. Ziegler responded, “This didn’t fall through any ‘cracks,’ they just got scared. … there was nothing wrong with the original poll.” After publication of this post, Ziegler wrote a comment objecting to the headline.)

One of the other two poll questions referred to Tina Fey’s send-up of Palin — “Which candidate said they could see Russia from their house?” — rather than Palin herself; none of the four candidates was the right answer. The other question asked, simply, whether respondents could name which party controlled Congress before this month’s election. Just 43% correctly responded that the Democrats did, with 21% answering neither or saying they were unsure. Fox’s Sean Hannity called that “frightening,” but it may have said less about Obama voters’ knowledge than about all voters’ knowledge; just 53% of all respondents, from both parties, got a similar question right in a Pew poll in May that I wrote about last month.

Apart from the exclusion of McCain supporters and whether the poll’s questions were representative of overall campaign knowledge, the poll didn’t demonstrate that the news media favored Obama, or that any media distortions “got Obama elected.” No questions addressed how voters got their information or how the answers to the questions influenced their vote. It may well be that supporters of each candidate gravitate toward media that downplay the shortcomings of their own candidates and highlight those of opponents — or simply that they retain knowledge that conforms with their world view.

As the Washington Times aptly put it, the poll “essentially revealed that [Obama] voters remembered good stuff about the president-elect and bad stuff about Sen. John McCain’s campaign.”

“Maybe one of the questions this should raise is to what extent the mainstream media has the power to reach the average voter,” Ziegler said. Nonetheless, he said he was confident the media won Obama the election. “Would Obama have won without the media being in the tank for him? No. He would never have won the nomination. He is completely a media creation.”

Zogby’s record includes some electoral-forecasting success and some controversy. In 2000, Zogby was among the more accurate national pollsters. In 2004, the firm incorrectly forecast the race for Sen. John Kerry on Election Day. This year, as I noted in a column earlier this month, Zogby was among the top pollsters in state polls, though it also whiffed badly on the California Democratic primary.

Between elections, Zogby has conducted research for online-gambling advocates that the head of a polling professional association told me was “loaded and biased,” and started a survey about voters’ concerns of potential corruption in a Hillary Clinton White House with the statement “Some people believe that the Bill Clinton administration was corrupt.”

Though Zogby has defended those surveys, he also admits that at times bad polls get through the firm’s safeguards. For instance, a 2001 poll sponsored by a liberal Web site told respondents that a candidate for a White House position had “pleaded guilty to the crime of lying to Congress,” then asked, “Do you think that someone who admitted to deceiving Congress should or should not be appointed to a top level White House position?” Not surprisingly, three-quarters of respondents said no. After Opinion Journal’s James Taranto criticized the question as “misleading and tendentious,” Zogby said, “I quickly backed off and apologized. It was a terrible question. It was wrong. These things do happen. We would like to believe they happen very rarely.”

Further reading: The poll was not, as election forecaster and Obama supporter Nate Silver originally called it, a “push poll,” because it was not an attempt to influence respondents by faking opinion research, as former pollster Mark Blumenthal explained on his blog. Blumenthal nonetheless agreed with Silver’s other criticisms, writing, “Describing his biased, leading questions as a legitimate test of knowledge is hugely misleading, at best.” Silver posted the transcript of his heated interview with Ziegler. Ziegler responded to his critics and to Zogby’s decision not to conduct the same poll with McCain voters.

*This blog post originally and incorrectly stated that John Zogby was on vacation when this poll was conducted. He was on a book tour.

The Numbers Guy : Zogby's Misleading Poll of Obama Voters

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #20 of 20 (permalink) Old 11-21-2008, 03:46 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1973 450 SL
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
Here you go. Even Zog says he would not have approved doing the poll.


Zogby’s Misleading Poll of Obama Voters

During a campaign, pollsters can build credibility by forecasting election results accurately. Afterward, they can build revenue by using that credibility to attract private clients. These private surveys often have an agenda, and their numbers can’t be tested against an objective standard, such as votes. Such surveys can test pollsters’ standards of conduct.

Zogby International recently conducted a survey for a critic of president-elect Barack Obama and then, together with the sponsor, interpreted the numbers from the survey in a misleading fashion.

John Zogby, the president and chief executive of Zogby International, released a statement on his Web site Tuesday that defended the poll in the face of heavy criticism from bloggers and some media organizations, saying, “We stand by the results [of] our survey work on behalf of [author and former talk show host] John Ziegler, as we stand by all of our work. … We were hired to test public opinion on a particular subject and with no ax to grind, that’s exactly what we did.”

But on Wednesday, Zogby told me he was on a book tour* when the contract was reached and when the survey was conducted, and wouldn’t have approved the poll in the form it took, or a press release posted on his firm’s Web site. “This was not Zogby International’s finest hour,” he said. “Something, somehow, fell through the cracks.” He said he would review the incident with his staff on Friday to determine what went wrong. Nonetheless, Zogby stood by the results of the poll themselves. “There is valuable information in this poll,” he said.

The survey’s sponsor, Ziegler, has created a Web site called How Obama Got Elected that says the Democratic senator’s victory was made possible by the news media, which failed to inform voters of Obama’s shortcomings and those of his running mate, Joe Biden. The survey was meant to bolster that argument, also to be presented in a documentary by Ziegler, “Media Malpractice…How Obama Got Elected.”

To conduct the survey, Ziegler turned to Zogby, a firm that has had some success in presidential-election polling but also has conducted some questionable sponsored surveys. Zogby posed 12 questions to 512 Obama voters last week, then ran the results this week on its site with the sub-headline “Survey finds most Obama voters remembered negative coverage of McCain/Palin statements but struggled to correctly answer questions about coverage associated with Obama/Biden.”

The press release highlighted that at least 80% of Obama voters knew that Palin had a pregnant teenage daughter and was the candidate associated with a $150,000 wardrobe, and that McCain was unable to identify the number of houses he owned. Meanwhile, more than 80% didn’t know unflattering facts about Obama, such as his successful efforts to have opponents removed from the ballot in his first political race and his comments that critics have interpreted to mean his energy policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry.

Here’s an alternative way of presenting the findings that’s at least as valid. There were 10 questions that were meant to be answered with the name of one of the candidates. Five of them covered events that had surfaced in the three months before the election: McCain’s inability to say how many homes he owned; Palin’s pregnant teenage daughter; Palin’s wardrobe budget; Obama’s intent to redistribute wealth; and Biden’s comment that Obama would be tested by an international crisis. On those questions, more than half of Obama voters correctly identified the involved candidate (the percentage for the last question was lowest, at 53.3%; on the others, it was in the 80s).

The other five questions covered events or comments during the primary or from decades ago, including Obama’s first campaign and a Biden presidential bid in 1987 done in by charges of plagiarism in law school and on the campaign trail. On four of these questions, the correct answer was chosen more frequently than the other three candidates combined, but many voters — on some questions, most — were unsure. On three questions, fewer than 25% of respondents got the right answer, prompting Ziegler to tell Fox News “that a group of monkeys if they had been guessing would have done better than Obama voters” on those questions, not because Obama voters were unintelligent but because they were misinformed.

On the fifth question about older events, “Which candidate said their policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket?”, more voters named McCain than Obama. However, Obama’s cited comments — made in January in a meeting with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board — referred to bankrupting new coal plants, not the industry. He was speaking about a cap-and-trade system for emissions, something that McCain also has supported.

“We wrote ‘likely’ because of that very caveat,” Ziegler told me. “We had to simplify it, and I stand by the simplification of the question.”

Noting the dated Biden plagiarism question, Ann Selzer, a pollster in Des Moines, said, “It’s not at all surprising Obama supporters do not know this fact. I would guess a similar number of McCain supporters do not know this fact.”

Ziegler agreed that people may have done worst on questions referring to older events. “I think that that’s true, and I think that’s part of the reason there was a disparity there,” he said. “It also goes to the point that the news media ignored the history of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.” When asked why he didn’t include questions referring to unfavorable aspects of McCain’s and Palin’s distant past, he said, “I felt that these were the best 12 for what I was trying to accomplish.”

Ziegler told Fox News that he spent about $13,000 on the poll and on a related short film, both of which will be used in his documentary. On Fox, he challenged liberals to sponsor a similar poll of McCain supporters. He told me he was sure McCain backers would do better: “They got their information from a completely different type of media, one that was not totally in the tank for Barack Obama.”

Zogby said he wouldn’t have approved the poll without including McCain supporters. “A more honest poll would have been conducted had we also focused on McCain people,” he said. He added that some of the questions weren’t worded fairly.

(On Thursday, Politico reported that Ziegler contacted Zogby this week to repeat the poll with McCain supporters but was rebuffed by the polling firm. John Zogby said he would want to formulate the questions and have either an objective sponsor or a pair of sponsors, one from the left and one from the right. Ziegler responded, “This didn’t fall through any ‘cracks,’ they just got scared. … there was nothing wrong with the original poll.” After publication of this post, Ziegler wrote a comment objecting to the headline.)

One of the other two poll questions referred to Tina Fey’s send-up of Palin — “Which candidate said they could see Russia from their house?” — rather than Palin herself; none of the four candidates was the right answer. The other question asked, simply, whether respondents could name which party controlled Congress before this month’s election. Just 43% correctly responded that the Democrats did, with 21% answering neither or saying they were unsure. Fox’s Sean Hannity called that “frightening,” but it may have said less about Obama voters’ knowledge than about all voters’ knowledge; just 53% of all respondents, from both parties, got a similar question right in a Pew poll in May that I wrote about last month.

Apart from the exclusion of McCain supporters and whether the poll’s questions were representative of overall campaign knowledge, the poll didn’t demonstrate that the news media favored Obama, or that any media distortions “got Obama elected.” No questions addressed how voters got their information or how the answers to the questions influenced their vote. It may well be that supporters of each candidate gravitate toward media that downplay the shortcomings of their own candidates and highlight those of opponents — or simply that they retain knowledge that conforms with their world view.

As the Washington Times aptly put it, the poll “essentially revealed that [Obama] voters remembered good stuff about the president-elect and bad stuff about Sen. John McCain’s campaign.”

“Maybe one of the questions this should raise is to what extent the mainstream media has the power to reach the average voter,” Ziegler said. Nonetheless, he said he was confident the media won Obama the election. “Would Obama have won without the media being in the tank for him? No. He would never have won the nomination. He is completely a media creation.”

Zogby’s record includes some electoral-forecasting success and some controversy. In 2000, Zogby was among the more accurate national pollsters. In 2004, the firm incorrectly forecast the race for Sen. John Kerry on Election Day. This year, as I noted in a column earlier this month, Zogby was among the top pollsters in state polls, though it also whiffed badly on the California Democratic primary.

Between elections, Zogby has conducted research for online-gambling advocates that the head of a polling professional association told me was “loaded and biased,” and started a survey about voters’ concerns of potential corruption in a Hillary Clinton White House with the statement “Some people believe that the Bill Clinton administration was corrupt.”

Though Zogby has defended those surveys, he also admits that at times bad polls get through the firm’s safeguards. For instance, a 2001 poll sponsored by a liberal Web site told respondents that a candidate for a White House position had “pleaded guilty to the crime of lying to Congress,” then asked, “Do you think that someone who admitted to deceiving Congress should or should not be appointed to a top level White House position?” Not surprisingly, three-quarters of respondents said no. After Opinion Journal’s James Taranto criticized the question as “misleading and tendentious,” Zogby said, “I quickly backed off and apologized. It was a terrible question. It was wrong. These things do happen. We would like to believe they happen very rarely.”

Further reading: The poll was not, as election forecaster and Obama supporter Nate Silver originally called it, a “push poll,” because it was not an attempt to influence respondents by faking opinion research, as former pollster Mark Blumenthal explained on his blog. Blumenthal nonetheless agreed with Silver’s other criticisms, writing, “Describing his biased, leading questions as a legitimate test of knowledge is hugely misleading, at best.” Silver posted the transcript of his heated interview with Ziegler. Ziegler responded to his critics and to Zogby’s decision not to conduct the same poll with McCain voters.

*This blog post originally and incorrectly stated that John Zogby was on vacation when this poll was conducted. He was on a book tour.

The Numbers Guy : Zogby's Misleading Poll of Obama Voters
I highlighted some sections that clarify or contradict your earlier post.

Charter member of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy and proud of it.

God Bless the America we're trying to create.
--Hillary Rodham Clinton
bottomline1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Kathleen Parker: After Interviews, Palin Should Bow Out JimSmith Off-Topic 6 09-26-2008 09:59 PM
    Leno Interviews edfreeman Off-Topic 1 05-25-2008 05:04 PM
    Tucker Carlson interviews Ron Paul GeeS Off-Topic 23 06-15-2007 05:19 PM
    AsianML interviews with Impact Worldwide Roch207 Off-Topic 6 01-07-2006 05:18 PM
    Triumph the Insult Dog interviews voters... blackmercedes Off-Topic 1 10-24-2004 07:25 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome