As one who has for the last two years been a low level grunt gathering data for two different polling firms, one of which if you are a Californian you've probably heard of the (Mervin) Field Poll, a few quibbles. A thousand folks is the low end but I've seen many polls that if representative of all income groups, racial/ethnic groups and geographically inclusive, do, esp. when the various polls are compared, reflect popular opinion. Unfortunate as tthat opinion might be too many times. ("Mr. Cracker in Birmingham, 1956: What Do You Think About Martin Luther King, Jr's. campaign to desegregrate the bus system?" "I think he's a Commmmmminist...Outside Agitator...Those New York Jews...") Polling isn't as stupid as 1936 when a poll sponsored by one of the big magazines of the era, Colliers or some such, said Alf Landon was gonna beat FDR! Which would have been accurate iif only those with phones had voted in 1936! What Eric does below reminds me of the reaction of the late New Yorker film critic, Pauline Kael, flummoxed over Nixon beating McGovern in '72 since, "None of my friends voted for Nixon!"
In my messy room, I'll see if I can find the 5 pg. or so memo from the Field Poll, that compares the projection they made in each Governors race and Presidential election since 1948. Right every time, and within a tenth or two of a percent in all the races, even '92 when Perot got 19%.And from asking about a thousand folks that reflected the demographic totality.
One can like say the political scientist Benjamin Ginsberg make many valid criticisms of pollings effect on politics but, the below just strikes me as an example of a radical uncomfortable with the fact that the masses be in the grip of that darn hegemonic discourse. Michael Pugliese
>--- Original Message ---
>From: Eric Hamell <stripey7 at hotmail.com>
>To: sldrty-l at igc.topica.com, gpopchat at yahoogroups.com, skeptics at yahoogroups.com,
skeptical at yahoogroups.com
>Date: 12/21/01 8:16:36 PM
>
>
>>From: Ted Glick <indpol at igc.org>
>>Reply-To: indpol at igc.org
>>To: ippn-announce at topica.com
>>Subject: [IPPN] [Fwd: Latest Poll Results: 97% Oppose Bush's
War]
>>Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 07:58:06 -0500
>>
>>
>>
>>Larry Hagerty wrote:
>>
>> > Dear Editor,
>> >
>> > Here is a survey you probably haven't heard about yet. You
have my
>> > permission to print and/or distribute this essay in any
way you choose.
>> >
>> > Peace, love, and light,
>> >
>> > Lawrence Hagerty
>> > 2658 Del Mar Heights Rd., #329
>> > Del Mar, CA 92014
>> >
>> > 858-509-0067
>> > ===========================
>> >
>> > Latest Poll Results: 97% Oppose Bush's War
>> >
>> > Lawrence Hagerty, December 19, 2001
>> >
>> > Since we live in a country whose leaders value opinion
polls more
>>than
>> > they value the will of the democratic majority of voters,
I thought it
>> > would be worthwhile to conduct my own survey of public opinion
to see if
>>I
>> > could add something of value to the national debate. Lacking
the
>>resources
>> > of the corporate media giants, I had to improvise a new
polling
>>technique.
>> > Instead of making phone calls to a thousand or so well-selected
>>households,
>> > as the professional polling outfits do, I randomly polled
some of my
>> > friends and associates. The results were strikingly different
than those
>> > you hear about on television.
>> >
>> > In crafting my poll I did my best to follow the guidelines
set out in a
>> > recent survey that was conducted jointly by USA TODAY, CNN,
and the
>>Gallup
>> > organization. In that poll questions were asked of 1, 019
adults and the
>> > pollsters reported they had 95% confidence in the results,
within ± 3%.
>> > Based on the latest U.S. census data, this means that they
collected
>> > information from 0.000004% of the population. I decided
to take a
>>somewhat
>> > larger sampling and so I polled approximately 3% of my friends
and
>> > associates.
>> >
>> > Like other polling professionals, I did not allow my
respondents to
>> > elaborate on their answers. They were only allowed to answer
"yes" or
>>"no."
>> > Here are the questions I asked:
>> >
>> > --Now that U.S. bombs have killed more innocent civilians
in
>> > Afghanistan than were killed here in the September 11th
attacks, should
>>we
>> > shift from the "war-mode" to a "police-mode" in our quest
to exterminate
>> > the "evildoers?"
>> > --Should we now begin to bomb the other 60 countries
that we
>>suspect
>> > are harboring terrorists?
>> > --Are you willing to surrender your personal privacy
and freedom of
>> > speech for the rest of your life in order to support a war
that we are
>>told
>> > "will not end in our lifetimes?"
>> >
>> > It should come as no surprise for you to learn that
every person to
>> > whom I posed those questions answered "no" to all three.
I have
>>therefore
>> > concluded (with 95% confidence ± 3%) that 97% of my friends
and
>>associates
>> > oppose a continuation of this war.
>> >
>> > Now if you think my headline for this story is misleading,
you
>>might
>> > want to look more closely at the headline USA TODAY used
in reporting
>>one
>> > of their recent polls. The headline read, "Poll finds strong
support for
>> > expanding terror war." While this poll asked 24 questions,
I could only
>> > find two that even came close to addressing the issue of
the war on
>> > terrorism. They were:
>> >
>> > --How satisfied are you with the amount of progress
made by the
>>U.S.
>> > military in the war in Afghanistan? (92% satisfied)
>> >
>> > --If the U.S. goes to war in Iraq, do you think it
will be as
>> > successful as the efforts in Afghanistan have been, or not?
(68% said
>>"yes")
>> >
>> > From those two questions alone, USA TODAY appears to
have concluded
>> > that there is "strong support" for expanding the "terror
war." The first
>> > three questions in that poll focused on the Bush presidency
(in response
>>to
>> > one of the questions, only 24% of those polled believe Bush
won the
>> > election "fair and square"). The other 19 questions dealt
mainly with
>> > various ways of bringing bin Laden to justice.
>> >
>> > So what are we to make of all these polls? My suggestion
is that
>>you
>> > only trust the polls you conduct yourself. Ask your closest
friends the
>> > questions I asked, or make up your own. But the next time
you read or
>>hear
>> > a headline about how many people are merrily riding along
on the U.S.
>>war
>> > wagon, you might want to take it with a grain of salt. As
Arianna
>> > Huffington said in a recent editorial: "This willingness
to treat the
>> > numbers with a reverence ancient Romans reserved for chicken
entrails is
>> > standard operating procedure for both pundits and politicians
— and it
>> > often has disastrous consequences."
>> >
>> > Let us hope that Washington's current strategy of believing
the
>> > results of dubious opinion polls ends soon, before more
innocent people
>>are
>> > slaughtered.
>> >
>> > ===============================
>> > Other opinions by Lawrence Hagerty (which you also have
my permission to
>> > use) may be found at
>> > http://www.MatrixMasters.com, including:
>> >
>> > "The Time To Speak Up is Now"
>> > http://www.matrixmasters.com/wtc/lch/speakup/speakup.html
>> >
>> > "Just Say No To Oil"
>> > http://www.matrixmasters.com/wtc/lch/nooil/nooil.html
>> >
>> > "The Fourth Amendment Has Just Been Cancelled"
>> > http://www.matrixmasters.com/wtc/lch/endof4/endof4.html
>> >
>> > "The Difference Between American and Americans"
>> > http://www.matrixmasters.com/wtc/lch/avsa/avsa.html
>> >
>> > "Patriotism and Free Speech"
>> > http://www.matrixmasters.com/wtc/lch/freespeech/freespeech.html
>> >
>> > "A Resonant Event"
>> > http://www.matrixmasters.com/wtc/lch/re/re.html
>> >
>> > "To All Who Are Angry"
>> > http://www.matrixmasters.com/wtc/lch/toallangry/toallangry.html
>>
>>--
>>Ted Glick
>>IPPN National Coordinator
>>P.O. Box 1041, Bloomfield, N.J. 07003
>>www.ippn.org, 973-338-5398
>>"I am firmly convinced that the passionate will for justice
and truth has
>>done
>>more to improve (the human condition) than calculating political
shrewdness
>>which in the long run only breeds general mistrust." Albert
Einstein
>>
>>[This message sent using the IPPN Announce e-mail list. You
can join this
>>low-traffic email group on alternative politics by sending
a blank email
>>to:
>>ippn-announce-subscribe at topica.com You can unsubscribe by writing
>>ippn-announce-unsubscribe at topica.com
>>
>>To participate in a more active discussion of independent and
third
>>party politics, please send a blank email to:
>>ippn-discuss-subscribe at topica.com
>>
>>Thanks! And please visit www.ippn.org
>>for information on the on-going work of the
>>Pro-Democracy Campaign and other ippn activities.
>>
>>==^================================================================
>>This email was sent to: stripey7 at hotmail.com
>>
>>EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?b1ddtL.b2ehXA
>>Or send an email to: ippn-announce-unsubscribe at topica.com
>>
>>T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
>>http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
>>==^================================================================
>>
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
>==^================================================================
>This email was sent to: debsian at pacbell.net
>
>EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxirK.a2koOS
>Or send an email to: sldrty-l-unsubscribe at igc.topica.com
>
>T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
>http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
>==^================================================================
>
>