| Blogs > bondjam33 > The pursuit of happiness |
|
As promised the Quinnipiac poll graphic for people to check  This is the poll graphic as published by Quinniac Uiversity on 9th March 2015
|
|||
|
This RDD telephone survey was conducted from February 26 – March 2, 2015 throughout the nation. Responses are reported for 1,286 self-identified registered voters with a margin of sampling error of +/- 2.7 percentage points. Margins of sampling error for additional subgroups are listed in tables below. Surveys are conducted in English or Spanish dependent on respondent preference with live interviewers calling land lines and cell phones. All data was collected and tabulated by the Quinnipiac University Poll. PARTY IDENTIFICATION QUESTION WORDING - Generally speaking, do you consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, or what? REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY IDENTIFICATION Republican 32% Democrat 29 Independent 28 Other/DK/NA 11 PHONE DISTRIBUTION Cell only 34% Land Line only 7 Both, cmp from cell sample 15 Both, cmp from land sample 43 RACE White 73% Black 13 Hispanic 7 Other/DK/NA 7 REGISTERED VOTERS.......................................... AGE IN YRS....... Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom 18-34 35-54 55+ Weighted Percentage 100% 32% 29% 28% 48% 52% 21% 32% 42% Unweighted n 1,286 422 380 360 673 613 126 310 809 MoE (+/-  2.73 4.77 5.03 5.17 3.78 3.96 8.73 5.57 3.45METHODOLOGICAL DETAILS Dual frame landline and cell phone samples are generated using Random Digit Dialing procedures by Survey Sampling International (SS  . Both the landline and cellular phone samples are stratified by Census division according to area code.Land line numbers are scheduled for 5+ call attempts and cell phone numbers are scheduled for 4+ call attempts. When calling landlines interviewers ask to speak with the adult member of the household having the next birthday. If that person is not available a call back is scheduled for a better time to speak with that person. Interviews are conducted on cell phones with both cell only and dual owner respondents. The complete land and cell sample is weighted to National Health Interview Survey estimates for [land only/cell only/dual owner] households. Questions are asked of registered voters as they appear in the release document. If a question is asked of a subset of the sample a descriptive note is added in parenthesis preceding the question. Questions are numbered as asked with additional questions found in successive releases. This survey uses statistical weighting procedures to account for deviations in the survey sample from known population characteristics, which helps correct for differential survey participation and random variation in samples. The overall adult sample is weighted to recent Census or American Community Survey data using a sample balancing procedure to match the demographic makeup of the population by region, gender, age, education and race. Margins of sampling error for this survey are not adjusted for design effect. Quinnipiac Polls are funded entirely by Quinnipiac University. The Quinnipiac University Poll is part of the Department of Public Affairs.
| ||
|
Crazy Horse - you simply copied and pasted your post on my blog. That is not really kosher my friend. However as you have pasted your blog again here lets have a look at what you have posted. This is an opinion piece which clearly does not reflect the actual figures. I am quite happy to leave it up just so people can look at the REAL numbers on the graphic above and they can see how far from the truth this opinion piece is. You will notice that the graphic of the ACTUAL FIGURES gives FOX a trustworthiness total of just 55% - placing it SECOND LAST ahead of ONLY MSNBC. The same graphic places FOX and MSNBC LAST in the untrustworthiness poll with 40% total. This is way worse than CBS or ABC on 31% and even significantly worse than CNN (35% ) and NBC (36 % ) Making the standard comparison of Trustworthy minus Untrustworthy % (which I would contend is the most legitimate way of making a proper comparison ) then we get CBS 62 -32 % = +30%, ABC 62-32= +30%, CNN 60-34 = +26%, NBC 60 -36 = +24%, FOX 55 - 40 = +15%, MSNBC 52 -40 = +12%. Those figures really do not make such good reading for FOX. I wonder why they did not announce them this way ? You really do have a habit of shooting off your own foot lol.
| ||
|
Crazy horse- it is difficult to hold a converstaion with someone who does not understand what is said to them so I will spell it out in words of one syllable as far as I am able. The piece you put on this site did not use all the information but selected only one figure to tell one side of the story. That makes it an opinion piece. Quoting the bona fides of the writer does not make it less so. I do not care if Mr Gass rode the winner of the triple crown whilst playing Yankee Doodle Dandy on a harp. He picked out some figures in order to express an opinion about them. Do you understand what an opinion piece is now? His interpretation of the figures is clearly revealed as his opinion because (in my opinion -- see I am also writing an opinion piece) any realistic examination of the figures in the graphic above would lead to a different conclusion. I have posted all of the figures in the sample- they are absolutely clear from the graphic. I leave it up to the intelligence of readers of this blog to come to their own conclusions about the figures and I would be interested to know if any of them come to the same conclusions as Mr Gass and,if so, how they would justify that conclusion in the light of the ACTUAL figures?
| ||
|
Please point out any expressions of outrage? My points are related precisely to the numbers and the fact that the piece written is an opinuion based on a skewed interpretation of the figures. As for attacking you for what he said - I quite simply did not do so. I did take exception to the fact that you did not recognise Mr Gass' opinion piece as such when it clearly was. That was not an attack; simply an attempt to establish the fact. I am not outraged by a skewed interpretation of factual material because I can clearly demonstrate the fallibility of that interpretation. I have nothing to be outraged about -- and, if you look through all my posts I am sure you will find that i am rarely if ever, outraged although i can sometimes be quizzical ironic or even downright amused by what people write and think.
|
×
×