Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“Poll Shows Public Supports Obama on Gas Prices”

National Journal:

More Americans trust President Obama than congressional Republicans to make the right decisions to bring down the price of gasoline, according to a new poll, although neither side commands a majority.

What’s more, as prices continue to rise and the specter of $5-per-gallon gas for the summer driving season looms over the political landscape, the latest United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll shows the public slightly more supportive of the energy priorities of the Democrats and the president than those of the GOP.

Forty-four percent of respondents trust Obama more “to make the right decisions to help bring down the price of gasoline,” versus 32 percent for Republicans in Congress, according to the poll. Only 1 percent said both; 16 percent said neither and 7 percent didn’t know or refused to answer.

Americans put somewhat more stock in the Democrats’ policy of conservation and development of alternative energy sources, such as wind and solar power, than they do in the Republicans’ emphasis on greater domestic production of oil and gas. Fifty percent of respondents said that the Democratic approach “would do more to lower fuel prices,” while 42 percent went with the GOP approach.

[…]

The United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International, which surveyed 1,005 adults by landline and cellular phone March 8-11. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.

I have a theory: these polls are conducted by the media to gauge just how successful they’ve been at spreading disinformation to the public and controlling the greater narrative.

That is, these polls are designed to grade media malpractice (or “activism for social justice,” as they’d themselves likely describe it, being the good little useful idiots they are) — with the content of the poll questions really a means toward an end: making sure that “reality,” by way of consensus, is being properly and progressively manufactured.

That the pollsters are able to find 1,005 people a plurality of which believe that more drilling, oil exploration, etc., — that is, an increase in supply — is less likely to lower gas prices than, say, more government grants to solar and wind farms, just shows that we have a populace that has been successfully dumbed down to the point of borderline intellectual impotence.

Which is exactly what you want when your goal is to control “the masses.”

23 Replies to ““Poll Shows Public Supports Obama on Gas Prices””

  1. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Good theory.

  2. Crawford says:

    That’s been my theory for years. Polls exist for two reasons: to push lies and to gauge how well the lies have been pushed.

  3. DarthLevin says:

    These are probably the same people who are the primary target of the ads for payday loans, structured settlement payouts, and ambulance chasers you see between cases on Judge Judy and Maury Povich.

  4. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I’d love t0 know the assumptions they had to model in order to get the sample they wanted.

    I’m guessing 35-40% reg. dem., 35-40% independent 20-30% reg. rep.

  5. geoffb says:

    Dueling polls. And the oddity that WaPo/ABC haven’t asked the gas price question since 2006.

  6. geoffb says:

    A NYT/CBS to add to the mix. They break down the Dem/Rep ratio right at the start. WaPo/ABC have it in the last question at the link above.

  7. Jeff G. says:

    These are probably the same people who are the primary target of the ads for payday loans, structured settlement payouts, and ambulance chasers you see between cases on Judge Judy and Maury Povich.

    And on my sidebars. Because no one else will advertise with me.

  8. cranky-d says:

    The fact that upon hearing this theory it sounds obvious is a good reason to believe it’s correct.

  9. B Moe says:

    There is also the possibility that the majority of Americans are fucking idiots, which the polls we take every other November seem to indicate.

  10. palaeomerus says:

    I have a theory that worthless polls with badly chosen, small, non-random samples do not reflect the views of the general population but do serve a purpose as fake news because the press isn’t good at finding real news anymore and is often afraid to tell us about it when they stumble into some because it might get in the way of their PR narrative.

    “There is also the possibility that the majority of Americans are fucking idiots, which the polls we take every other November seem to indicate.”

    The majority of eligible Americans usually don’t even bother to vote. Voting is for squares.

  11. motionview says:

    On my way to the home office, one way or another I’ll be back by Friday.

  12. McGehee says:

    I have a theory: these polls are conducted by the media to gauge just how successful they’ve been at spreading disinformation to the public and controlling the greater narrative.

    Polls like this one are conducted by the media for the purpose of spreading disinformation to the public and controlling the greater narrative. They gauge their effectiveness these days mostly by asking each other.

  13. sdferr says:

    Speaking of polling in America, it’s no accident the likes of Pam Carlin were ready and able to pop-up into the national conversation when there was trouble with the polls in Florida 2000. Or that the Holder Justice Dept is freighted with leftist ideologues in positions of power in the Civil Rights division. They may be philosophically stupid, the leftists, but they aren’t dumb, and know very well where power is to be grabbed.

  14. sdferr says:

    That’s Pam Karlan, apologies for the misspelling there.

  15. mojo says:

    My theory: They think you’re stupid and will therefore believe anything they tell you, no matter how ridiculous or patently untrue.

  16. Maybe the masses are just lobbying for more free money to pay for their gas.

  17. Pellegri says:

    How does this even make scientific sense when you extrapolate it from the givens?

    Somehow magical renewable energy is going to free up more oil for our cars because we’re not burning it in our oil-powered power plants that never existed in the first place?

    ???????????

  18. Jeff G. says:

    logic and rationality are patriarchal and bourgeois forms of oppression. Ignore them.

  19. newrouter says:

    Ineptocracy – A new word for our times

    *Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy)* – A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

    http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2012/03/ineptocracy_a_n.html

  20. sdferr says:

    See: Hayek, F. A., The Road to Serfdom, chapter 10 — Why the Worst Get on Top

  21. LBascom says:

    Who is really to blame for high oil prices?

    U.S. oil production grew at an average rate of 3.2 percent per year during the 1960s, peaking at 9.6 mpd in 1970. In that year, however, the Environmental Protection Agency was created, and U.S. production has been in decline ever since. As shown, the growth of OPEC production, which had been extremely rapid during the 1960s, came to a screeching halt in 1973, when the OPEC powers replaced the previously dominant Seven Sisters’ policy of expanding production to fuel the world economy with an alternative policy of constricting production to loot the world economy.

  22. Swen says:

    Who do you trust to make the right decisions to bring down the price of gasoline, President Obama or congressional Republicans?

    … 16 percent said neither …

    Only 16 percent? We are so doomed….

  23. Pellegri says:

    No, damn it!

    I am a woman and a scientist and I got my degree fair and square. I am not submitting to this idiotic narrative. It can go die in a fire.

    Preferably the most green, ecologically sound fire it can find.

Comments are closed.