CNN Poll Puzzling...

[Flubadubya]

Even the CNN pollster Fred Newport is "puzzled" over Bush's new bump to 56% approval rating. As it turns out, their poll shows his rating on the economy to be at 42%, rating on world affairs at 49%, and rating on Iraq at 47%.

As the man said himself, this leaves us scratching our heads at why his overall rating is up to 56%.

Well Duh! If you can't trust your own poll, why should we? :grr:

[DeepModem Mom]

1. Is the teflon so strong...

because people, despite what they see and hear with their own eyes and ears, have been convinced by the media, and it's Republican talking points, that there must be something wrong with you if you don't support George Bush?

[msanger]

2. people are still afraid

to see that their leader "in this time of crisis" is just an incompetent jerk.

I think that as the election gets nearer, and as it begins to feel less dangerous to realize that the commnader in chief is incompetent, more people will become willing to see the truth for what it is.

[zeemike]

3. Why is it?

That most people think the polls are accurate and truthful?
We don’t trust the media and we can tell that they cover just the things that make Bush look good but assume that the polling companies which are not at all independent from the corporate world, are doing it without any intent to influence public opinion. .

[ozone_man]

4. So, it is obvious that the Democrats need to focus on the economy,

like a broken record. Don't let Bush wrap himself in the flag.

The candidate must be someone with a resume qualifying him/her to fix the economy. This is the issue. 3,000,000 jobs lost in 3 years, let's see if he can make 4,000,000 in 4 years.

Health care is second, in my opinion, so let's get someone who knows how to fix health care in the country.

Iraq only requires that the U.S. leave and let the U.N. take over. That's what they were created for. Bush was trying to distract Americans from the economy. Don't let him get away with it. Stick his nose in at every opportunity.

[Atman]

5. Subterfuge Bush Promotion by CNN

Not that it would surprise me. I think they deliberately set up their morning show to appeal to the people running around the house getting ready for work, not actually sitting and watching. Because, if you watched this morning -- or, more accurately, listened -- you'd have heard the glowing report about Bush's new "good" poll numbers, complete with sound bites of Bush's Podunk TV address wherein he says he doesn't care about polls.

If you only listened, it was one hell of a one-week upturn for Chimpy. But what happened if you watched? You got a different story.

Yup. VIEWERS of the morning news got to see the caption that ran underneath much of the story..."38% say they would vote for Bush in 04."

The story did finally go on to mention this in the end, with an expanded graphic showing 38% definitely would vote Bush, 38% definitely would not vote Bush, and 24% remained undecided. So, potentially, instead of Bush's "stellar" 56%, a more accurate story would have been reporting on the 62% who are NOT planning on voting for Bush. That is a big number.

And the press, not surprisingly, is manipulating it. At least CNN can say, "but we showed that number!" while ignoring the fact that it flashed for 10 seconds following a three minute piece about how wonderful W was doing.

Remember, Bush is running America like a business. That means...

Let the buyer beware!

[59millionmorons]

6. Polls help drive the news

I don't believe this poll for a minute, as we all no Newsweek has a new poll with Bush dropping to 51%. But this goes both ways the next time Gallup comes out with a poll and it's down, then they will get to say Bush is slipping in the polls and they get another story for that day. This is the problem when you employ a bad pollster. The same pollster that had Max Cleeland winning in GA by 1%. They were wrong.

[Ilsa]

7. I think the new ratings are an Ah-nold bump. n/t