The New Bailout
 

:lol2:

Did Reid roll Pelosi?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid played a little high-stakes chicken with each other at the tail end of Wednesday’s shotgun stimulus talks.

It’s not clear who won – or who blinked.

According to a half dozen Congressional aides and members, Reid went before the cameras Wednesday to announce a stimulus deal before Pelosi had agreed on all the details of school construction financing.

“It’s ruffled feathers, big time,” said a House Democrat speaking on condition of anonymity. “The speaker went through the roof.”

Added one House Democratic aide: “He tried to roll her and she knew it.”

A few minutes after Reid announced the deal, Senate Appropriations Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) convened a public meeting of the House-Senate conference committee.

It was supposed to be a glorified photo op. But there were no House Democrats in the room – and Inouye hastily announced the meeting would be scrapped pending a Pelosi “briefing” of members on the details.

The problem, according to people familiar with the situation, was that Pelosi hadn’t completely signed off on the Senate’s approach to restoring some of the $21 billion in school construction funding. House Democrats are pushing to have school-repair funding listed as a recurring expense; Senate Republicans want such an allocation to be a one-time-only deal.

The approach adopted by the Senate still infuriates many members of her caucus, and Pelosi had yet to fully make her case to dissenters, a source told Politico.

The result: Pelosi summoned Reid to her office – her turf – to hash out unspecified modifications to the package prior to a 5:15 re-convening of the conference committee.

People close to Pelosi painted a different picture – one that portrays Reid as the one being rolled. Pelosi, they say, strategically permitted Reid to make his announcement – and then held up her approval to extract a slightly better deal.

Contradicting other sources who said that Pelosi had been blindsided, a House Democratic aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that Reid had placed a “head’s up” phone call to Pelosi before announcing the deal.

A Senate aide concurred, saying that Pelosi "wasn't blindsided" and "didn't say no" when Reid announced he was going public. The staffer added that Pelosi spent much of the day trying -- unsuccessfully -- to convince the three Senate Republicans to make changes.

Pelosi told reporters late Wednesday that she had some success selling the Senate on unspecified legislative language "that spoke to the purpose of school construction."

Whatever the real story, Pelosi’s members were more than a little bewildered and headed into Wednesday’s night’s negotiation singing their Kumbayas through gritted teeth.

“[Senate Democrats] don’t know everything that’s in the bill,” said a laughing Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Ways and Committee. “So I’m afraid to go to that damned conference.”

Even Senate Democrats seemed a little flummoxed. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), briefing reporters after the Reid presser, stopped short of actually saying he was 100 percent sure a deal had been cut.

"There was general agreement," he said. "It doesn't mean everything is locked in yet. But if we didn't have an agreement, then there wouldn't have been a news conference."


http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennt...d.html?showall

There is no honor among dumbasses.

Bipartisan... :lol2:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30667

What a bogus charge.

First draft of House/Senate conference committee bills to work out the differences in language between the two bills is nearly always done by the staffs of the majority, often working late into the night..and then presented to the full conference committee for review and discussion.

The purpose of the first draft is NOT to provide new proposals but to address the differences in the House and Senate versions as passed by their respective majorities.

Since nearly all Republicans voted against the bills in the House and Senate, by the very nature of their vote, they had little, if any, input into the first draft of a conference bill.

So you are saying that Pelosi and Reid have not shut out the Republickins from the process and the people on the inside say otherwise. Ok.

No..please reread your article and my response carefully. Your conservative publication, at the urgiing of the Republicans in Congress, is making an issue out of nothng.

Add it obviously worked, since you are so concerned!

I said the Democratic staff developed the FIRST DRAFT. Your article implies that this uncommon, when in fact, it is not.

The Republicans were involved in the discusisons and development of the final draft that was or will be voted on the House/Senate today.

I do believe that would be Three Repubs. Anyway it will be interesting to see how they reconcile the House and Senate versions. I just want them to get it done so we can see if it really is going to make any difference at all. There is plenty of evidence out there to suggest the the Republickins have had very little influence if any on the House bill.

How many Repubilcans are on the Conference Committee....that would be Four (and Six Democrats, reflecthing their majority status).

But you do understand that they are now just dealing with the left-overs. Essentially the meat of the day was put on the table by the Dems. The Conf Comm is juggling around the last few pieces and tweaking it, since the Dems are 6-4 it really does not matter what the Repubs want. I do believe it is set up that way for a reason. Maybe you assume there will be a lot of compromise, I do not.

Welcome to life in the minority. The R's were real kind to the D's when the shoe was on the other foot. Don't like it now do you/they? Too late to cry about it.

Perhaps both sides will learn from the experience and start doing what is best for the country instead of themselves. I don't think so, but I still have hope.

Of course it is set up that way for a reason...it always has and always will. The majoirty party has a majority on the conference committee. In this case, 3Ds and 2Rs from the Senate and 3Ds and 2Rs from the House. Why is that so shocking?

Compromise doesnt mean an equal voice or the same number of seats at the table when you are the minority party.

I thought Obama and the Democratic leadership went the extra mile by ensuring that a significant portion of the stimulus bill (1/3 of total) met the Republican demands for tax cuts and against the wishes of the more liberal wing of the Democratic party who wanted nearly all spending.

I dont think the Republicans would have been satisfied until it was the other way around: 2/3 tax cuts and 1/3 spenidng. .

So lets not pretend that the Republicans were willing to compromise and the Democrats were not.

The Democrats are the majority in part because the voters did not want the same old policies and solutions.

In the end, you are right...the Democrats have more ownship of this bill. If it works, they get the credit. If it fails, they get the blame.

Repubilcans are already suggesting it will be a 2010 campaign issue. IMO, its a little too soon for that and a risky strategy for Republicans, giving the preception to some thay they prefer being obstructionists rather than contributing to consens building.

Fixed that for ya ;)

So we are in agreement after all.

Please dont change the context of my post when it appears in a quote box..as you did in the above post (#12).

I dont know if it was an attempt at humor, but in any case, I assume you have no right to change my words unless I am violating some rules or protocals of the Cellar.

If you do have that right to edit the meaning of a member's post, please let me know and I will take my participation elsewhere.

Thanks!

Yes it was an attempt at humor - something I have been failing at quite well lately.
You made some very good points and I am sorry if I diminished them with what I did.

No big deal. I just have never seen that in other political forums.

So I can do this and it is a commonly acceptable practice here?

fixed it for you! ;)

Wow...a very strange way to debate, discuss, dispute ..but hey, its not my house. I'm just a guest here.

For the record, I wont ever this do this again!

Yup - thats about how it goes.

SURPRISE! Dems Break Promise: Stimulus Bill to Floor Friday
by Connie Hair

In a press conference Thursday, the House Republican leadership spoke candidly about being kept out of the House-Senate conference on the Obama-Pelosi-Reid so-called “economic stimulus” bill. They confirmed they had not yet seen the text of the bill as of 4 p.m.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he was unsure how many Democrats would vote with Republicans again on this bill but that he thought Republicans “may get a few” Democrats to side with them. The fact that the Demos have now broken their promise to have the public able to see the bill for 48 hours may drive more Dems into the Republican camp.

“[i] don’t know, ‘cause they haven’t seen the bill either,” Boehner said.


“The American people have a right to know what’s in this bill,” Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind) told HUMAN EVENTS after the press conference. “Every member of Congress -- Republicans and Democrats -- voted to post this bill on the internet for 48 hours, 48 hours ago. We’ll see if the Democrats keep their word.”

Actually -- as of 5:15 pm, the Democrats had broken their word. The stimulus bill -- which we still haven’t seen -- will be released late tonight and will be brought up on the House floor at 9 am tomorrow.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30697

Money for mice is not in the bill. It looks like the Washington Times was a bit more careful than some who picked up on the story by couching it in "intends to spend" and "among other things".

According to this blog (YMMV), the story came from a GOP staffer who is claiming that an unnamed official from an unnamed federal agency said that if unsaid agency gets stimulus money, they will put $30 million into wetlands restoration in the area that includes the mouse's habitat.

So, even if the source is correct, the money is for wetlands restoration in the SF Bay Area, a much bigger issue than mice. If the source is incorrect, the money is for wetlands restoration in all of the US (I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that the bill at least mentions wetlands), a MUCH bigger issue than mice, and may not affect the mice at all:

Good. Thanks.

I guess I would do my utmost to say it wasn't true if I was her, or her staff. But since NO ONE can see the details of what is in the compromise bill we will not know until it is passed.

LOL.....A GOP staffer makes an unsubstantiated claim that an unnamed official from an unnamed federal agency....

That says it all to me!

The conference committee report is on the House Rules Committee website.

I hope that GOP staffer (or Merc) can find that provision now and share it with the rest of us!

I cant help but laugh at all this whining from Republicans about not being able to see the bill or participate in the conference committee or offer amendments.

How soon they forget their own rules when they were in the majority.

Personally, I would like to see Pelosi be a little more accommodating with the rules in the spirit of openness and bi-partisanship, but given that her rules are no where near as restrictive as the House rules under Hastert and DeLay for six years, I dont have much empathy for the whiners.

I think I pointed out in another discussion that if Pelosi's rules were as strict as her predecessors, in which by one rule, a bill would not be considered unless it had the support of the majority of the majority party, Bush would never have gotten his last two Iraq war funding bills. A majority of Democrats never supported those bills.

The Republicans didnt whine as much in 07-08 because they knew they had the wild card in the White House who could veto any Democratic bill. Now that they lost that edge, they act, and obviously have convinced some, as if Pelosi is setting new standards of exclusion.

If only the facts supported the whining!

And this from a person who has done nothing but whine about transparency or lack of it in the Bush era. Laughable.

As stated earlier. Pelosi bullshited the public and didnot post the information for a period of 48hours before the vote. Sorry my friend but for the single biggest piece of legislation that will have your childrens childrens children be in debt to the government that doesn cut it.

So it was on the internet in a non-searchable form for 12 hours. It was over 1000 pages and was distributed for review last night. Good job there Dems. Well done.

Democratic Senator Predicts None of His Colleagues 'Will Have the Chance' to Read Final Stimulus Bill Before Vote
Friday, February 13, 2009
By Ryan Byrnes and Edwin Mora




Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D.-N.J.)(CNSNews.com) – Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) predicted on Thursday that none of his Senate colleagues would "have the chance" to read the entire final version of the $790-billion stimulus bill before the bill comes up for a final vote in Congress.

“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg told CNSNews.com

http://cnsnews.com/public/content/ar...x?RsrcID=43478

HURRY, FELLAS, LET'S VOTE, I AM OFF TO ROME!
Fri Feb 13 2009 09:18:52 ET

Rep. John Culberson, TX claims the "stimulus" bill must be urgently voted on today -- because Speaker Nancy Pelosi is leaving at 6:00 PM for an 8 day trip to Europe!

Culberson made the charge on Houston's KSEV radio.

Pelosi is hoping to lead a delegation to Europe; there's a meeting with the Pope and an award from an Italian legislative group.

Calls to Pelosi's spokesman went unreturned.

In the rushing, Democrats have now broken their promise to have the public see the $790 billion bill for 48 hours before any vote.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) predicted that none of his Senate colleagues would 'have the chance' to read the entire final version of the 1,071-page bill before it comes up for a final vote.

SURPRISE! Dems Break Promise: Stimulus Bill to Floor Friday
by Connie Hair (more by this author)
Posted 02/12/2009 ET
Updated 02/13/2009 ET


In a press conference Thursday, the House Republican leadership spoke candidly about being kept out of the House-Senate conference on the Obama-Pelosi-Reid so-called “economic stimulus” bill. They confirmed they had not yet seen the text of the bill as of 4 p.m.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he was unsure how many Democrats would vote with Republicans again on this bill but that he thought Republicans “may get a few” Democrats to side with them. The fact that the Demos have now broken their promise to have the public able to see the bill for 48 hours may drive more Dems into the Republican camp.

“[i] don’t know, ‘cause they haven’t seen the bill either,” Boehner said.

“The American people have a right to know what’s in this bill,” Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind) told HUMAN EVENTS after the press conference. “Every member of Congress -- Republicans and Democrats -- voted to post this bill on the internet for 48 hours, 48 hours ago. We’ll see if the Democrats keep their word.”

Actually -- as of 5:15 pm, the Democrats had broken their word. The stimulus bill -- which we still haven’t seen -- will be released late tonight and will be brought up on the House floor at 9 am tomorrow.

The following statement was released by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer at 4:57 p.m.:

"The House is scheduled to meet at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow and is expected to proceed directly to consideration of the American Recovery and Reinvestment conference report. The conference report text will be filed this evening, giving members enough time to review the conference report before voting on it tomorrow afternoon."

Meanwhile, at an earlier presser Thursday, Pelosi -- while talking about legislation regarding school construction funds -- said it was vital to see the language of a bill before making decisions. ReadtheStimulus.org had the following quote:

“With all of this you have to see the language. You said this --- I said that --- I understood it to be this way --- you know, we wanted to see it in writing and when we did that then we were able to go forward."

"Around here language means a lot. Words weigh a ton and one person's understanding of a spoken description might vary from another's. We wanted to see it. And not only just I had to see it, I had to show it to my colleagues and my caucus. We wanted to take all the time that was necessary to make sure it was right."

Congressional members are also exchanging barbs via the popular social network Twitter. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) twittered, "Don't know when we're going to vote. Will the no votes delay vote just because they can? Speed is important. They know that."

House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) twittered back, “Those in favor of speed over commonsense may just be afraid of letting the People know what they are ramming through.”

UPDATE: The Democrats finally made the bill's language available around 11 p.m. Thursday, approximately 10 hours before members meet Friday to consider the bill and 38 hours short of the time promised Americans to review the bill.


http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30697

Merc...such is life when you are the minority party.

If you dont get an equal voice at the table, you bitch and whine, ignore your own hypocrisy from when you had the power, then spread bullshit like the above and hope it sticks.

IMO, it may play to your base but it is not a winning strategy to attract swing voters in the future.

The partisan's only hope is for Obama to be completely ineffective, it will be total Limbaugh propaganda 24-7. Party before country.

Merc and his buddies can take solace in the fact that if this doesn't work, they can tell everyone else in the bread line "I told you so."

A charming victory for the most patriotic among us. :neutral:

After reading the last 100 TheMercenary posts, obvious is that Democrats are finally doing everything right. Don Quixote is now so desperate as to even attack windmills - daily.

First the wackos spent like drunken sailors so as to destroy the American economy. "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Isn't reality a bitch?

Now that stimulus money must target real problems, these same hateful Republican want to stifle all spending and create even more economic destruction using tax cuts. Anything to enrich the rich. Extremists are even attacking windmills.

Good to see that government is finally doing something right. So much hysteria posted by TheMercenary who is routinely quoting Rush Limbaugh. Hysteriacal anti-Americans love the destruction they reaped on America. Anything that might destroy their precious recession must be stopped.

So you completely accept that the double standards being displayed are status quo and will be the SOP for the next 4 years or more, and that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid lied about any kind of bipartisan solutions. Thanks at least for your honesty in the matter.

None of that is true. What is true is your posts read like Rush Limbaugh wrote them. That means little is true and the wacko extremists are in a tizzy trying to blame anyone else for creating our disastrous economy - by spending because "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter". A direct quote from a wacko extremists who spend money as if is were free and expendable.

Three 747s packed nose to tail with pallets of 100 dollar bills flown into Iraq and distributed without any accounting. That is fiscal responsibility from the same Republicans who fear to spend on Americans - and then blame Obama.

No wonder wacko ring wing extremists are so hysterical. They must get us to forget who spend money on things that only create recessions and routinely subverted things that made America productive. "Mission Accomplished".

Always hype hysteria first to blame someone else for American losing jobs. A Rush Limbaugh technique right out of Hitler's playbook. Incite hate in society's least intelligent members.

Spending cut where needed and that so anger extremist Republicans. From the Washingont Post of 13 Feb 2009: Finally spending cuts are implemented where most needed.

Extremists Republicans enriched themselves and their supporters while reducing American incomes by 2%. Time to cut costs where Republicans don't want spending cuts.

One of my favorite posts ever.

I just want to see the GOP spanked for a few years, out of general mean-ness and misanthropy.

Could we please have a moment of silence to mourn the death of the Republic of the United States of America?

A little late, aren't you?

Usually, yes.

Negro, stop. :lol2: I can't even read his shit.

There are apparently a million holes in that bill.

I think it was Otto von Bismarck who once remarked, "Laws are like sausages. It's better not to see them being made."

Having been on the inside myself, I would agree.

The bigger the bill, the more grit in the sausage....but in the end, the results are what counts.

Personally, I dont think this bill was big enough in terms of spending on infrastructure and other short term job creation programs.

But, we'll just have to wait and see....and keep hearing about Pelosi's mouse!

What did you do?

Either way the D's win - If it works its their fix, if it doesn't it was Bush's fault in the first place.

And the less we hear about Pelosi - the better.

I worked in the Senate for two years (83-84) for Senator Jennings Randolph....long hours and low pay...but what a trip it was!

In the 2010 Congressional elections, the defining issue is very likely to be the success or failure of this stimulus program. I dont think the Bush card will play.

Well you must be a damm expert than!

Isn't that hilarious?

Why the anger?

I have never said my opinion is any more valid than anyone else's

I will never let that pass, it will now be Obama's fault and Pelosi and Reid. They own everything that happens or fails to happen for the next 4 years.

Democrats muscle huge stimulus through Congress

WASHINGTON (AP) - In a major victory for President Barack Obama, Democrats muscled a huge, $787 billion stimulus bill through Congress late Friday night in hopes of combating the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Republican opposition was nearly unanimous.

After lobbying energetically for the bill, Obama is expected to sign it within a few days, less than a month after taking office.

Supporters said the legislation would save or create 3.5 million jobs. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., conceded there was no guarantee, but he said that "millions and millions and millions of people will be helped, as they have lost their jobs and can't put food on the table of their families."

Vigorously disagreeing, House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio dumped a copy of the 1,071-page bill to the floor in a gesture of contempt. "The bill that was about jobs, jobs, jobs has turned into a bill that's about spending, spending, spending," he said.

The Senate approved the measure 60-38 with three GOP moderates providing crucial support - the only members of their party to back it. Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio cast the decisive vote after flying aboard a government plane from Ohio, where he was mourning his mother's death.

Hours earlier, the House vote was 246-183, with all Republicans opposed to the package of tax cuts and federal spending that Obama has made the centerpiece of his plan for economic recovery.

The legislation, among the costliest ever considered in Congress, provides billions of dollars to aid victims of the recession through unemployment benefits, food stamps, medical care, job retraining and more. Tens of billions are ticketed for the states to offset cuts they might otherwise have to make in aid to schools and local governments, and there is more than $48 billion for transportation projects such as road and bridge construction, mass transit and high-speed rail.

Democrats said the bill's tax cuts would help 95 percent of all Americans, much of the relief in the form of a break of $400 for individuals and $800 for couples. At the insistence of the White House, people who do not earn enough money to owe income taxes are eligible, an attempt to offset the payroll taxes they pay.

In a bow to political reality, lawmakers included $70 billion to shelter upper middle-class and wealthier taxpayers from an income tax increase that would otherwise hit them, a provision that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said would do relatively little to create jobs.

Also included were funds for two of Obama's initiatives, the expansion of computerized information technology in the health care industry and billions to create so-called green jobs the administration says will begin reducing the country's dependence on foreign oil.

Asked for his reaction to House passage of the bill, Obama said "thumbs up" and indeed gave a thumbs-up sign as he left the White House with his family for a long weekend in Chicago.

There was little or no suspense about the outcome, although the final act played out over hours and extended late into the night.

That was to allow time for Brown to fly back. He cast his vote more than five hours after most senators had left the Capitol for a 10-day vacation, one of the longest roll calls in Senate history.

Congress cast its votes as federal regulators announced the closing of the Sherman County Bank in Loup City, Neb.; Riverside Bank of the Gulf Coast in Florida, based in Cape Coral; Corn Belt Bank and Trust Co. of Pittsfield, Ill.; and Pinnacle Bank of Beaverton, Ore. They raised to 13 the number of failures this year of federally insured banking companies and were the latest reminders of the toll taken by recession and frozen credit markets.

The day's events at the Capitol were scripted to allow Democratic leaders to fulfill their pledge to send Obama legislation by mid-February.

"Barack Obama, in just a few short weeks as president, has passed one of the biggest packages for economic recovery in our nation's history," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, anticipating final Senate passage.

The approval also capped an early period of accomplishment for the Democrats, who won control of the White House and expanded their majorities in Congress in last fall's elections.

Since taking office on Jan. 20, the president has signed legislation extending government-financed health care to millions of lower-income children who lack it, a bill that President George W. Bush twice vetoed. He also has placed his signature on a measure making it easier for workers to sue their employers for alleged job discrimination, effectively overturning a ruling by the Supreme Court's conservative majority.

Obama made the stimulus a cornerstone of his economic recovery plan even before he took office, but his calls for bipartisanship were an early casualty.

Republicans complained they had been locked out of the early decisions, and Democrats countered that Boehner had tried to rally opposition even before the president met privately with the GOP rank and file.

In retrospect, said White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, the White House wasn't "sharp enough" in emphasizing the benefits of the bill as Republicans began to criticize spending on items such as family planning services, anti-smoking programs and reseeding the National Mall.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid faced a different task - finding enough GOP moderates to give him the 60 votes needed to surmount a variety of procedural hurdles. To do that, he and the White House agreed to trim billions in spending from the original $820 billion House-passed bill, enough to obtain the backing of GOP Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

As the final compromise took shape in a frenzied round of bargaining earlier this week, it was trimmed again to hold the support of the moderates, whose opposition to a new program for federal school construction caused anger among House Democrats.

In the end, a compromise was reached that allows states to use funds for modernizing schools. But in a display of displeasure, Pelosi decided to skip the news conference last Wednesday where Reid announced a final agreement.

In addition to tax relief for individuals and businesses who purchase new equipment, lawmakers inserted breaks for first-time homebuyers and consumers purchasing new cars in an attempt to aid two industries particularly hard-hit by the recession. In response to pressure from lawmakers from Pennsylvania, Indiana and elsewhere, the bill was altered at the last minute to permit the buyers of recreational vehicles and motorcycles to claim the same break as those buying cars and light trucks.

In the House, all 246 votes in favor were cast by Democrats. Seven Democrats joined 176 Republicans in opposition.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/...gkahrvqrxq.gif

From a week before the Democrats "muscled" it through final passage. We'll just have to wait and see how the numbers play out over time.

10 day vacation? What have these fuckers done to deserve a 10 day vacation?:mad:

redux, Who was polled, what was their political affiliation and how were the questions phrased. What was the number of people sampled? What geographic region? Was it a nationwide poll or local from a specific district or state. There are a million questions about how and who was polled that make the info presented useless without the supporting answers.

With respect to limiting the pay of executives... from CNN

Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,018 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 6-7, 2009, as part of Gallup Poll Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

Other results are based on telephone interviews with 1,012 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 4, 2009. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls. (this sentence is a standard disclaimer generally used by most pollsters in the event that is the poll is used in some fucked up manner beyond its intent)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/114202/Ob...lus-Fight.aspx

Gallup, like all reputable national polling organizations, uses widely accepted statistical techniques for the sample to be representative of age, income, region, political affiliation, etc. then the data is "weighted" to even more accurately represent the total population.

That is why Gallup can they say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

Standardized protocols are also used to minimize question bias.

Again, a poll is simply a snapshot of public opinion on a particular issue (s) at a particular point in (or over) time. Its not something you should stake your life on but it is also not something to dismiss as useless or not credible if you are at all interested in what the public may be thinking (in very general terms) about a particular person or issue.

added:
I can say that with a high degree of confidence and Merc can say its bullshit until he finds a poll that he likes. ;)

"Vacation" means "going back to their respective states to work", usually.

Live, its Saturday Night!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVLEPDG082o

Who answered? Unknown
What was their political affiliation? Unknown
How were the questions phrased? Unknown
What was the number of people sampled? Answered
From what geographic region? Unknown
Were the respondents evenly distributed? Unknown


Gallup, like all reputable national polling organizations, uses widely accepted statistical techniques for the sample to be representative of age, income, region, political affiliation, etc. then the data is "weighted" to even more accurately represent the total population.
Standardized protocols are also used to minimize question bias.[/quote]

I don’t think anyone here is a poll expert, but many times these things seem to be biased. They repeatedly state how they want to or try to minimize the bias or statistical inaccuracies. They try to accurately represent a huge number of people based on percentage wise, a miniscule sampling. I’m not against polls, but there are too many variables that are never answered. Not the least of which in this case is who actually responded. Aside from their age there is no answer. It was a national poll, but was there an even sampling of the data nationally or did more people respond from one area versus another? I think the outcome would be very different if they asked those in the northeast versus the west coast, for example.

Or more importantly let’s say they attempted to reach an even number of people from as diverse a group as possible. It is not clear whether one party responded more than another did. Another example is the time of day polls are conducted. If they are calling during normal business hours, are they getting a relative sampling of those people or is the data skewed? Of course the data is skewed, it has to be. I am not implying that this poll or any other is intentionally doing this. It is just the way it is. It is nowhere near an exact science. Also, how are they weighting the data?

Of course you can. But isn't that why you posted this poll, because you liked it?

Classicman...with all due respect, your post suggest that you dont understand what is meant by the "data is weighted" after the sampling.

That is how pollsters account for the discrepancies you mentioned. If more Rs responded to a poll then Ds (there are more registered Ds in the country than Rs) or more from the NE than the SW, they would "weight" the results to more accurately reflect the national profile. I dont claim to be an expert, but I do remember that from Polling 101.

A 95% confidence level within maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points is pretty damn high by any statistical standards.

And no, I like polls because they tell me something about the what the American public is thinking about a political issue of the day.

Lately, they have reinforced my own opinions. For much of the early 00s, that was not the case, but I found them to be equally meaningful.

But, hey, if you dont think they have much value...thats fine with me.

I remember when Hoyer proposed more five-day work weeks for the House when the Democrats took over in 2007.

He (and by extension, Democrats) was called anti-family!

In all fairness, I suspect many Democrats dont like it ether. Old habits are non-partisan but "anti-family" rhetoric doesnt help.

What I am saying is that neither do you or anyone else - They weight the polls to even out what is not even. That is my point.

I didn't take polling 101 - I don't recall it being offered where I got my degrees. Sounds like an interesting course though.
What I do remember about polling from college is how extremely difficult it is to get accurate information and how skewed the data therefore can be. They attempt to weigh/modify/alter the data to make it credible and make a prediction. Sometimes they are right and sometimes they are wrong.