Thursday, July 20, 2006

Bush's Missouri Approval Rating Stuck At 36%

SurveyUSA is out with its new July monthly tracking poll on President Bush.
But there isn't much new in the numbers.

The President's approval rating remains at 36%, the exact same number Bush scored in June.

The regional breakdown shows movement, possibly within the bases on both the left and right. Bush scores with 54% of respondents in the Ozarks, and just 27% of those polled in St. Louis. That means in one month, Bush gained 6 points in southwest Missouri but lost 5 points in St. Louis.

Good news for W in central Missouri . . . there, he is up 9 points.

For you Razorback fans, the President's Arkansas approval rating is 37%.

11 comments:

bobicus tomatocus said...

This is the same poll which list 40-50% of the state voters coming from the St. Louis area, correct?

Thanks. That is all I needed to know.

For real polling numbers, check out Rasmussen reports here: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Bush_Job_Approval.htm

Rasmussen was the only guy who got it all right during the 2004 election. Survey USA has a really bad track record.

Once again, the work is left up to us to debunk this poll.

Speaking of, I remember all the press which you gaive Claire during the PD poll which put her up six points; but hardly mentioned (okay, how about failed to mention all together except a glance) the Rasmussen poll which had her and Jim tied at 42% with Jim in the lead with the three month rolling poll: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/June%202006/moSenate.htm.

Typical.

SurveyUSA said...

SurveyUSA's entire 14 year election poll track record is posted here at our website, as is our specific analysis of which pollsters were most accurate in the 2004 election.

SurveyUSA's regionalization called "St. Louis/Eastern Missouri" consists of the following counties:

Bollinger
Butler
Cape Girardeau
Carter
Crawford
Dunklin
Franklin
Iron
Jefferson
Lincoln
Madison
Mississippi
Montgomery
New Madrid
Pemiscot
Perry
Pike
Reynolds
Ripley
Scott
St. Charles
St. Francois
St. Louis
St. Louis city
Ste. Genevieve
Stoddard
Warren
Washington
Wayne

If you have reason to believe that those 29 counties contain more or less than 49% of the population of Missouri, please let us know.

bobicus tomatocus said...

I may take you up on your offer when I get a chance to do a bit of research. I know the voting patterns of this state, and last time I checked, 50% of state votes did not come from the St. Louis Area.

For all we know, you might have a large sample in Russ Carnahan's district and skimped on many of these counties which are rural and balance out the urban districts. You should know that.

I will add that there is a reason why Real Clear Politics dropped your poll from their research.

I might also point out that using your own statistics on your site, my point is still well made. Rassmussen is the gold standard.

We are said...

Uh, Bob... well, first, why'd you rip a name from Veggie Tales? No matter there, just curious. But last time I checked, Cape Girardeau is seriously far south of St. Louis. So I don't believe this poll is taking votes from only the St. Louis area. Likewise, New Madrid, if memory serves, isn't too awfully close to downtown either. Neither is Scott, Stoddard, Dunklin, or Pemiscott. Ripley and Carter counties are even further from St. Louis (and, again, if memory serves, a good bit more rural). My point is that this poll says St. Louis / EASTERN MISSOURI. And thus I'll say the same thing I've said before: QUIT CHALLENGING POLLS JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY SAY. Calling someone a liar just because what they say hurts your feelings is an elementary school way of reacting. Tell you what; I'll be nice and even do some of the work for you: go to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/maps/missouri_map.html, and you can chart the counties that this poll refers to.

bobicus tomatocus said...

@we are:

Thanks for proving my point.

All a polling organization needs to do is sample x ammount of people from those counties and they can call it the St. Louis region.

To be more specific, they can include people a few people in those surrounding areas yet poll most of those individuals from a heavily Democratic district and there you have it, the results a pollster might be looking for.

Lets just say I understand polling more than the average person. When reporters use polls to drive or make a story and it is not a very fair poll, then I take issue with it.

We are said...

And you have... what proof? What evidence that this poll is biased, except that it goes against Blunt?

We are said...

More to the point, it seems that, if the poll refers to anywhere that is strongly Democrat, does that make it biased, regardless of where else it investigates?

We are said...

Even more to the point, shouldn't, in order to be accurate, a poll proportionally contact voters in accord with the number of registered voters/active voters by area? For example, Ellington, in Reynolds County, has a total population of 1,045; surely this county should not have equal sway on a poll that includes St. Louis, with its population of over 350,000. For that matter, only 6,689 people reside in Reynolds County, while 1,016,315 live in St. Louis county. For a poll to be true to the population of the area, it would have to, by city, poll 350 people to every one from Ellington. Since electing a governor is not on a city-by-city basis, nor county-by-county, you will, of course, understand how the poll is more accurate when the overall feel of the population is weighed. Sorry if the results don't please you, but that's no reason to be alleging a flawed poll.

We are said...

Your lack of response to these questions and points does not bode well toward inspiring confidence that you actually know anything about polls, other than having an inclination to slam the ones that do not support your side.

bobicus tomatocus said...

Actually, I've moved on..

This is like two passing ships in the night argument wise.

The bottom line is that when you designated 50% of the states voters coming from the St. Louis area the sample is highly suspect. It is too heavily weighted in what is notoriously a Democratic strong hold at the same time as under weighting the Republican base.

I pointed to actual results from other, more reliable polling firms which point to a vastly different story than what is being told.

What I find fascinating in this whole story is that Survey USA registered a Blogger account on the same day which this post was made. My guess is that our dear political reporter knows the people over at SUSA pretty well.

uderhood said...

Here are some links that I believe will be interested