The Young Turn Against Obamacare

[shagdrum]

THE YOUNG TURN AGAINST OBAMACARE
By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann

Previously, we reported to you that our national polling showed that the under-30 voters were the strongest supporters of the Obama healthcare initiative. While seniors opposed it by almost 2-to-1 and voters 30-64 opposed it by five- to 10-point margins, the under-30 voters backed his program by 58-30.

So with the funds you have donated, we ran television advertisments and an Internet campaign aimed at young people focused in Arkansas, North Dakota and Maine. The results are incredible! Now under-30 voters are the strongest opponents of the plan. In the table below, we show you the vote on the Obama plan broken down by age. (We aggregated all three states so we would have enough interviews to make the age subsets statistically meaningful.)

Support/Oppose Obama plan, combined data for Arkansas, North Dakota and Maine

Age / Support & Oppose Obama Plan

Under 30 = 25 Support & 65 Oppose

30-49 = 28 Support & 60 Oppose

50-64 = 41 Support & 50 Oppose

Over 65 = 32 Support & 55 Oppose

The polling had predicted that the young would swing sharply and dramatically against the Obama program once they got the key information about it, but we are blown away by these results.

These data are from polls the League of American Voters commissioned John Zogby to conduct. Commenting on the results, John said, “These results among 18- to 29-year-olds are striking. It puts in jeopardy the whole theory of the new Democratic majority, because young people are essential to that base.”

Boy, is he ever correct!

At the same time that we are seeing this big shift, the national data on ObamaCare continues to show slippage. Rasmussen shows support down to 38 percent (56 percent opposed) from 45-52 right after the House vote.

Will the Senate listen to public opinion? Damn right they will! At this rate, they would have to face the loss of their entire political base to pass this legislation. Politicians don’t work that way! These early procedural votes don’t mean much. As George W. Bush said in the war on terror, “We have to be right all the time. The enemy just has to get it right once.” Now it is the opposite. We just need to win one vote to kill the plan. They need to win them all. And at this rate, the plan is in deep, deep trouble.

PLEASE keep the money flowing! We want to run ads along this line in all the swing states (Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Maine, Indiana, Virginia, Connecticut). To do so for the three weeks before the Senate vote will cost us $1.3 million.

 

[topher5150]

Viva La Revolution

 

[fossten]

This isn't a revolution, guys, let's not get too giddy. The reality is that the ratcheting noose will continue to tighten. Washington knows that the way to do this is by pissing off portions of the electorate at a time. As long as the entire country isn't angered, they can get away with it. The Democrats will overreach, but the Republicans will get power back and return to gradual suffocation.

 

[topher5150]

This isn't a revolution, guys, let's not get too giddy.

dang it i bought all of those pitch forks, and made all of those torches for nothing

 

[lincolnx2]

I personally disagree with all this healthcare bull crap, why should my tax dollars pay to protect the kids of a person who fails to work, I think we give too much to people who fail to prepare for their own wellbeing. I think everyone should disagree with what Obama is trying to do, F* free healthcare.

 

[fossten]

I personally disagree with all this healthcare bull crap, why should my tax dollars pay to protect the kids of a person who fails to work, I think we give too much to people who fail to prepare for their own wellbeing. I think everyone should disagree with what Obama is trying to do, F* free healthcare.

It's not free, anyway. Nothing is free.

 

[lincolnx2]

It's not free, anyway. Nothing is free.

It's free for the lazy people that sit on their arses all day and have kids, its not free for working people.

 

[foxpaws]

So, I noticed the League of American Voters (a group dedicated to stopping Obamacare) commissioned the poll - and there are no links to the poll within Zogby, or this article... I would be very interested to see the questions that were asked, and some breakdown on the people asked (i.e. were they all from affluent neighborhoods). It is very easy to skew polling numbers, both with the makeup of the groups being polled, as well as the types of questions being asked.

Without any of that information this article basically tells me nothing... other than to be a commercial for Dick Morris and his ilk to take your money...

 

[fossten]

So, I noticed the League of American Voters (a group dedicated to stopping Obamacare) commissioned the poll - and there are no links to the poll within Zogby, or this article... I would be very interested to see the questions that were asked, and some breakdown on the people asked (i.e. were they all from affluent neighborhoods). It is very easy to skew polling numbers, both with the makeup of the groups being polled, as well as the types of questions being asked.

Without any of that information this article basically tells me nothing... other than to be a commercial for Dick Morris and his ilk to take your money...

Of course, we'll be anxiously and breathlessly awaiting your equal analysis of every poll posted that is supportive of Obama from this day forward.

 

[foxpaws]

Of course, we'll be anxiously and breathlessly awaiting your equal analysis of every poll posted that is supportive of Obama from this day forward.

I am sure foss that you would point out this problem with any poll that was favorable to Obama. If 'the friends of Obama' hired Zogby to do some polling, then referred to it in an article on Kos, without any links to the actual poll, or a breakdown of income/party as well as the actual questions in the poll, you would be all over it if someone was foolish enough to post it here.

 

[shagdrum]

You can find on Zogby's site a synopsis (with link to full results) for the states of Maine (here) and North Dakota (here). Both synopsis' have links to full results at the bottom of the page.

In both instances the question was worded as such:

Do you support or oppose the healthcare bill proposed by President Obama now making its way through Congress?​

If this question is biased in any way, it would be in favor or Obamacare as it does not point out any of the costs/trade-offs associated with Obamacare. However, that was what the ads by the League of Voters (which the poll was aiming to measure the effectiveness of) pointed out.

 

[foxpaws]

You can find on Zogby's site a synopsis (with link to full results) for the states of Maine (here) and North Dakota (here). Both synopsis' have links to full results at the bottom of the page.

In both instances the question was worded as such:

Do you support or oppose the healthcare bill proposed by President Obama now making its way through Congress?​

If this question is biased in any way, it would be in favor or Obamacare as it does not point out any of the costs/trade-offs associated with Obamacare. However, that was what the ads by the League of Voters (which the poll was aiming to measure the effectiveness of) pointed out.

Questions like this also appeared...

Supporters of the healthcare bill say healthcare is a right and that this legislation will assure that every American has health insurance. They say it will lower health care costs and reduce the federal deficit. They say that anyone who wants to continue their current healthcare policy can do so and that it will stop insurance companies from denying coverage to people with existing conditions. Opponents say the bill will cut Medicare $400 billion and cover 36 million new patients without more doctors, leading to possible shortages, long waits for care and rationing especially for the elderly. Opponents also say it will require all uninsured to pay $15,000 for health insurance or pay a fine of two and one half percent of their income and that it will drive up premiums for those how have insurance by $2,000 a year.Based on these arguments, would you say that you support or oppose the health care bill proposed by President Obama and now making its way through Congress? ​

Talk about push polling...gak

Also shag- there is no way they could extrapolate age breakdowns - if you look at the full results... only 16% of the people polled were in the 18 to 29 category in ND and 14% in that same category in Maine - and the individual question results aren't keyed to age bracket - they are general results - so it is impossible to tell how that age group in either state was responding to particular questions.

It is a pretty flawed poll.

 

[shagdrum]

Questions like this also appeared...

Supporters of the healthcare bill say healthcare is a right and that this legislation will assure that every American has health insurance. They say it will lower health care costs and reduce the federal deficit. They say that anyone who wants to continue their current healthcare policy can do so and that it will stop insurance companies from denying coverage to people with existing conditions. Opponents say the bill will cut Medicare $400 billion and cover 36 million new patients without more doctors, leading to possible shortages, long waits for care and rationing especially for the elderly. Opponents also say it will require all uninsured to pay $15,000 for health insurance or pay a fine of two and one half percent of their income and that it will drive up premiums for those how have insurance by $2,000 a year.Based on these arguments, would you say that you support or oppose the health care bill proposed by President Obama and now making its way through Congress? ​

Talk about push polling...gak

...and which side are they pushing with that question?

The question presents both sides of the argument. Is it misrepresenting one side or the other?

For it to be push polling, it has to be pushing one side. What side is the question pushing.

I personally think the question may be too complex for polling purposes. However, one bad question hardly invalidates the whole poll.

Also shag- there is no way they could extrapolate age breakdowns - if you look at the full results...

If they have any breakdown of age, that is present for every question. It is not in those "results" because those "results" are a summary of all the raw data and the complex analysis' used. If they left it as raw data form or in the SPSS analysis form, no one but political scientists and statisticians would be able to understand it. Morris could take the raw data, run it through SPSS (or another statistical analysis program) and find the age breakdown for each individual question. Either way, the claim that there is no way to extrapolate age is incorrect.

 

[fossten]

I am sure foss that you would point out this problem with any poll that was favorable to Obama. If 'the friends of Obama' hired Zogby to do some polling, then referred to it in an article on Kos, without any links to the actual poll, or a breakdown of income/party as well as the actual questions in the poll, you would be all over it if someone was foolish enough to post it here.

Tu quoque, fox. You're the hypocrite, not me.

Do you believe that the American people generally support or oppose Obamacare?

...and which side are they pushing with that question?

The question presents both sides of the argument. Is it misrepresenting one side or the other?

For it to be push polling, it has to be pushing one side. What side is the question pushing.

Yeah, but, see, Shag, the opposition part of the question has 10 more words than the support part, so, ya see, it's slanted. /foxpaws

 

[foxpaws]

I personally think the question may be too complex for polling purposes. However, one bad question hardly invalidates the whole poll.

Yes Shag, if you knew about polling you would know that one bad question does invalidate the poll.

If they have any breakdown of age, that is present for every question. It is not in those "results" because those "results" are a summary of all the raw data and the complex analysis' used. If they left it as raw data form or in the SPSS analysis form, no one but political scientists and statisticians would be able to understand it. Morris could take the raw data, run it through SPSS (or another statistical analysis program) and find the age breakdown for each individual question. Either way, the claim that there is no way to extrapolate age is incorrect.

the full data shag is after your jump - you can download the pdfs which contain the entire data - which is not broken down into age groups - you can ask for that if you commission a poll - or you cannot - it is rather obvious that this group didn't. You cannot extrapolate age breakdown correctly with the data given. It appears that the Morris group took the data results and compared using just percentages, unless they have data that they haven't disclosed, and Zogby is pretty good at publishing the entire reports.

Trying to get any type of data mining out of those results would be nearly impossible - they didn't even break it down across party lines, sex, or race, however they do have that individual data available. It is odd, they obviously were looking to confirm their supposition that younger voters were swayed by the TV commercials they ran, but they neglected to pull that group out separately.

Also, it seems a little 'iffy' knowing that in that age group TV watching is minimal at best, and when they do watch it is often either on the internet or DVR'd where commercials have little if any views, so tying it to TV commercial viewing is stretching it at best. Plus, that isn't even a question in the survey - even a basic 'have you seen commercials about the healthcare plan in congress' questions.

Once again - it is a way to make people believe that the money they are giving to this group to run commercials is doing something.

I know polling - this one is useless.

 

[shagdrum]

the full data shag is after your jump - you can download the pdfs which contain the entire data

No it does not contain the entire data; it is simply a summary of the results of the entire survey (broken down by the various questions asked). If you have any experience with statistical analysis, and using statistical analysis software you would know that.

Think if it this way; if they conduct a questionnaire then, for every respondent they have the same demographic data. So to not have the info to breakdown the age demographic for each question they would have to go back and remove the data that they use at the end of the pdf file to create the age breakdown. Unless you see a way that they can conduct a questionnaire so as to have the info to breakdown the age demographic as they did at the end of the pdf file but not have the information to be able to break it down concerning each question.

If that pdf file was the entire data set, it would not be in that format. You would be able to identify individual respondents and their answers to the various questions.

 

[foxpaws]

No it does not contain the entire data; it is simply a summary of the results of the entire survey (broken down by the various questions asked). If you have any experience with statistical analysis, and using statistical analysis software you would know that.

Well, shag - it says at the link 'full data here', I am just going by Zogby at this point.

Think if it this way; if they conduct a questionnaire then, for every respondent they have the same demographic data. So to not have the info to breakdown the age demographic for each question they would have to go back and remove the data that they use at the end of the pdf file to create the age breakdown. Unless you see a way that they can conduct a questionnaire so as to have the info to breakdown the age demographic as they did at the end of the pdf file but not have the information to be able to break it down concerning each question.

If that pdf file was the entire data set, it would not be in that format. You would be able to identify individual respondents and their answers to the various questions.

I look at lots of data like this - once again shag - there is no way to really break this down to anything meaningful. Heck, I was looking at something that would help me look at the data - how did the group being polled vote in the last presidential election and both ND and Ark came in very heavily McCain. Actually this poll is even more heavily skewed that way - ND - national election 53/45 poll 47/34 ARK - 59/39 poll 51/32. Way over what could be considered average, however, they don't have it in the Maine breakdown - so, someone is playing fast and lose here Shag... Oddly in both cases the number of people who voted for 'other' was way weird, in ND in the election only 2% however in the poll it is 18.5% and in Ark in the election again only 2% voted for 'other' but in the poll is is 16.5%, this poll is highly irregular just based on this result. And they don't have a 'didn't vote' option - all in all very bad polling.

I have looked at a lot of data on behalf of campaigns shag - this is a poll that was commissioned by a fairly biased group and guess what it is very biased, in not only how and what questions were asked, but the group that was polled. Not surprising. They wanted a certain result - and polled to get that result. Hopefully you sent them money shag - based on their data.

This is usually how the data is stated - especially if you are mining data regarding specific group, such as age (as this group stated it was).... Which is how this data is being presented on the Morris site, that younger voters are going against obama's healthcare plan.

Question: Do you support or oppose the healthcare bill proposed by President Obama and now making its way through Congress?​

age                    age x                age xx           age xxx          total
str support	       xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
smw support	       xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
smw oppose	        xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
str oppose	        xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
NS                    xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)

                      gender x           gender xx             
str support	        xx (x%)            xx (x%)           
smw support	        xx (x%)            xx (x%)            
smw oppose             xx (x%)            xx (x%)           
str oppose             xx (x%)            xx (x%)             
NS                     xx (x%)             xx (x%)           

                      race x              race xx            race xxx           total
str support	       xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
smw support	       xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
smw oppose	        xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
str oppose	        xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
NS                    xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)

                      party x             party xx          party xxx          total
str support	       xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
smw support	       xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
smw oppose	        xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
str oppose	        xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)
NS                    xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)            xx (x%)

this format is pretty standard for political polling, it gives the people who are looking at the data a much better way to view issues across different groups. It also starts to give you enough data to put through SPSS or other types of statistical analysis software. The data that was presented by Zogby doesn't have enough.

Since this poll isn't broken down this way - it is basically useless.

 

[PetesSweets86]

Only reason why the young are less approving of oama care is because they are f*cking being retarded. They will listen to the tbaggers, Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, the birthers. Hell they are surrounded by idiotic information and accept it, to which they become stupid as well. I'm 23 and I follow neither the lefties or the righties.....because both sides slide around with lies like a greased pig...and I'd rather not get my hands dirty...but watch and see where the true problems lie.....

 

[foxpaws]

Only reason why the young are less approving of oama care is because they are f*cking being retarded. They will listen to the tbaggers, Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, the birthers. Hell they are surrounded by idiotic information and accept it, to which they become stupid as well. I'm 23 and I follow neither the lefties or the righties.....because both sides slide around with lies like a greased pig...and I'd rather not get my hands dirty...but watch and see where the true problems lie.....

Pete - sweet - I would actually think that there are a lot of youth disappointed with him for a couple of reasons. Jobs - the youth are one of the hardest hit by the economy, and are unemployed in far greater numbers than the national average. And secondly - campaign promises (other than jobs). Obama has yet to really deliver on any of his campaign promises. I wonder if healthcare was a done deal, if the youth would be happier, or if the Afghanistan issue was more settled, with timetables, etc. They helped vote him in on an agenda, which has yet to be achieved. Many Democrats are unhappy with him because healthcare is languishing, we have wars that seem to have no end, that the government isn't becoming even more proactive in the economy. They aren't going to be voting republican or tea bag party - but, they aren't happy with Obama. His approval rating not only has to do with what he has done (in conservative's eyes) but what he hasn't accomplished (in liberal terms).

 

[shagdrum]

:blah: :blah: :blah:

Again, how can they conduct a questionnaire and have the data for the age breakdown at the end of the data but not have info to be able to breakdown age for every question.

The little "format" you provided is not the raw data. It is clear that you have not used statistical analysis software (like SPSS, which is typical). You are able to treat each question as a variable and compare and analyze different variables against one another through a crosstab analysis', etc. The breakdown provided in the link is simply the results of each individual variable. What Morris did to reach his conclusions was compare the two variables of answers to a specific question and the ages involved to reach his conclusion.

Think about how a questionnaire is conducted; first, questions concerning demographics are asked (which would include age). Then the policy questions that the poll is concerned with are asked. If the demographic questions were not asked, then they would not be able to break down that demographic as they do. The fact that they are able to break it down shows that they have the info to be able to break down the results to the various questions by age.

You are only considering the pdf file and ignoring how they got that information and are able to summarize it in that format.

This is not something open to debate or interpretation, unlike many things in political science. This is where the hard science part comes in. These are empirical techniques that utilize specialized software to be able to look at and analyze statistics in different ways (something I spend all last semester learning how to do). To try and debate this is highly ignorant and presumptuous. Much as you are incapable of admitting it, you don't know what you are talking about here.

Also, don't try and characterize this as "not enough data" to run thorugh SPSS. I have personally run SPSS utilizing less data to conduct more complex analysis'.

 

[foxpaws]

Again, how can they conduct a questionnaire and have the data for the age breakdown at the end of the data but not have info to be able to breakdown age for every question.

The little "format" you provided is not the raw data. It is clear that you have not used statistical analysis software (like SPSS, which is typical). You are able to treat each question as a variable and compare and analyze different variables against one another through a crosstab analysis', etc. The breakdown provided in the link is simply the results of each individual variable. What Morris did was compare the two variables of answers to a specific question and the ages involved to reach his conclusion.

Think about how a questionnaire is conducted; first, questions concerning demographics are asked (which would include age). Then the policy questions that the poll is concerned with are asked. If the demographic questions were not asked, then they would not be able to break down that demographic as they do. The fact that they are able to break it down shows that they have the info to be able to break down the results to the various questions by age.

You are only considering the pdf file and ignoring how they got that information and are able to summarize it in that format.

So, shag - why doesn't Morris give us that data - what is he hiding... by not going with standard data presentation all it does is raise a red flag for people who are very used to viewing data. Add to that the fact that his polling base is pretty skewed, and he is using push polling type of questions, are further indications that this poll should be filed under 'too biased to be used for anything'. Well, anything other than trying to raise money for a particular cause.

Once again, the data as presented is useless, and doesn't confirm the supposition on his site that the young are going against Obama's healthcare reform because of a commercial campaign. Why link to pdf's that reveal nothing about the subject matter, unless either they don't have that data available (they might not have paid Zogby to break it down that way), or they don't want that particular data available for comparison.

Did you send him money Shag - as I said, I certainly hope so. What little I can breakdown from this data is that the commercials are basically going out to preach to the already convinced.

Once again - there is nothing regarding the commercials in the questions, the questions aren't presented with age breakdown, the polling base is heavily skewed. All in all this looks like a very amateurish effort.

 

[shagdrum]

So, shag - why doesn't Morris give us that data - what is he hiding

That last little "what is he hiding" part is makes it a loaded question because you are assuming he is hiding something.

The fact of the matter is that, unless you are trained to be able to analyze the data and have the programs to do so; the raw data is confusing and useless. No conclusions can be drawn from it. He doesn't have it readily available for the same reasons that most polls don't have the raw data readily available. That doesn't mean that you can't request it and get it provided in a data file (as I had to do for my stats project on same-sex marriage last semester). But your distortion makes it seem like there is no way to get it; like there is some deception on Morris' part.

So you are lying about the data here, you are representing yourself as more knowledgeable in statistical analysis they you clearly are (as you have done when it comes to political philosophy), you are ignoring key points I already made here, and generally confusing things. We come back to that question you never answer; WHY DO YOU ATTEMPT TO DECEIVE PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM?

 

[foxpaws]

That last little "what is he hiding" part is makes it a loaded question because you are assuming he is hiding something.

The fact of the matter is that, unless you are trained to be able to analyze the data and have the programs to do so; the raw data is confusing and useless. No conclusions can be drawn from it. He doesn't have it readily available for the same reasons that most polls don't have the raw data readily available. That doesn't mean that you can't request it and get it provided in a data file (as I had to do for my stats project on same-sex marriage last semester). But your distortion makes it seem like there is no way to get it; like there is some deception on Morris' part.

So you are lying about the data here, you are representing yourself as more knowledgeable in statistical analysis they you clearly are (as you have done when it comes to political philosophy), you are ignoring key points I already made here, and generally confusing things. We come back to that question you never answer; WHY DO YOU ATTEMPT TO DECEIVE PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM?

No conclusions can be drawn from the raw data - really shag - would you like to revisit that statement - all that they have is raw data - they analyze it and they then post their findings... From those findings Morris concluded many, many things...

Morris didn't even link to his data - nor is his data presented in a standardized form regarding breakdown of age, et al. I assume there is a reason for this (i.e. deception), but perhaps I am wrong - perhaps he just doesn't know any better - or maybe it is his little group. Either way - there is no data that has been presented that backs up the claims made in the article.

If you can show that it does - please shag... enlighten us. Otherwise I will assume that you are once again desperately trying to find a way to show that something you posted is in anyway valid.

I wonder why you are trying to ignore this - This article itself is not only biased, using an obviously biased poll, and it doesn't show the data that is uses to back its claims. It is a joke. I have spent a career looking at numbers similar to this - and I know perfectly well what I am looking at here when I see these numbers. Skewed polling base, push polling questions, obvious questions missing, not using standardized reporting, data hidden.

I am not deceiving anyone shag - once again - label quickly, and attempt to dismiss - fine. I know what you are doing, and if you think it works, that most people would fall for this, go for it.

 

[shagdrum]

:blah: :blah: :blah:

I have pointed out how you are deceiving and you continue to do so. Yet you avoid the question; why do you attempt to deceive people on this forum?

If you are not going to answer it then people will wonder why. If my question is loaded, then you could show that (instead of simply denying that you are deceiving). But you haven't do that despite the fact that I have explained how you have deceived. The closest you have come is to ignore key parts of my claims to misrepresent them and then dismiss them; basically, more deception.

If you are going to avoid the question, that action serves as an indictment that you are in fact attempting to deceive.

Again, why do you attempt to deceive people on this forum?

 

[foxpaws]

I have pointed out how you are deceiving and you continue to do so. Yet you avoid the question; why do you attempt to deceive people on this forum?

If you are not going to answer it then people will wonder why. If my question is loaded, then you could show that (instead of simply denying that you are deceiving). But you haven't do that despite the fact that I have explained how you have deceived. The closest you have come is to ignore key parts of my claims to misrepresent them and then dismiss them; basically, more deception.

If you are going to avoid the question, that action serves as an indictment that you are in fact attempting to deceive.

Again, why do you attempt to deceive people on this forum?

Shag - read the last paragraph in my previous post.

I have never ever stated that I thought I was looking at raw data - I have stated many times that the data I have been given regarding this issue is biased, flawed, unstandardized, and more. Not once have you been able to prove the article's claims. The article can't prove it's claims either.

You can call me whatever you want - but, this article is seriously flawed, and you can't disprove that.