Instead, perhaps the question could be -- After 9/11 President Bush promised to bring Osama bin Laden to justice. Do you think he has done enough to try to fulfill that promise?

How about (not a replacement for 3 but a suggestion to work in somewhere before/in between/after 3) something like this:

I believe that: us troops should be fully withdrawn from iraq within: immediately, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 5 years, 10 years, never.

Q1 should have some more positive alternative to "made a mistake." Perhaps something like "do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or do you think it was the correct decision?" This also allows the question choices to be rotated more easily (i.e. asking half of the sample "do you think the United states made the correct decision in sending troops to Iraq, or do you think it was a mistake?"

Q2a should be changed accordingly, but it is also confusing as it currently stands. Think about what will happen when the results come back and 20% chose the third AND fourth responses while 12% chose just the third and 8% chose just the fourth. How should that be interpreted??? Make each possible response contain a distinctly different idea. (Also, rephrase the question so that it fits the responses: "Which of the following responses describes...")

Q3: The phrasing here is awkward, because even Bush and Cheney say that they are planning to bring the troops home "as soon as possible." Those four words are open to a variety of interpretations. Use more specific language (4a is much better).

Q8 - Q10: The phrase "domestic spying" is inherently prejudicial, and it could convey a completely imcorrect impression to those who have NOT been following the story (suggesting, for example, that the scandal involves secret agents planted in various cover occupations etc.) I'd encourage wording like "electronic surveillance."

Also, Q8 and Q10 (esp Q10) make it sound as if the president and his advisers are doing the spying themselves, instead of the NSA. Remember, the VAST majority of people who will be answering this survey do not follow political news consistently. Always assume the respondent knows less rather than more.

Q11 is sort of odd -- is there anything to investigate about Bush's "involvement"? He's already said he ordered the whole thing. Is the intent to ask whether there should be an investigation of how extensive the surveillance program was? If so, the question should be worded in that way.

There are lots of other places where one could quibble, but I'll leave those to others.

For Q 12
(All) "If it were determined that President Bush was involved with domestic spying that was illegal, do you think Congress should hold him accountable through impeachment?"

i would be more precise and say:

If Congress were to determine that President Bush broke national security laws would you support his impeachment?

This would give us the key number: If we all find out that bush broke the law, how many would consider that impeachable.

The sudden spurt of anti Times posts on the blogs had me concerned and curious, and I believe that this may have pinpointed what is behind it.  Maybe not.

A) THE ECONOMY

Do you feel better or worse about the economy in general now than before Bush was elected?

   Why?  (either open ended or a better/worse list of possible reasons: National Debt, bankrupcy legislation, Lack of Govt spending at home, homeland security, price of housing, etc.) You get the idea, this could be a quick list of 5 to 10 items to get an idea of where people think we are heading.  If we know where they feel poorly about the economy we know how to win. ("It's the Economy, Stupid!)

B) CONFIDENCE IN CONGRESS

(This one is not as thought out)
In General, do you approve or disapprove of the legislation Comming out of Congress?

Do you approve or disapprove of the work your Congressman is doing?
(Rotate)(or create a list)

• What is he/she doing Right?
  
• What is he/she doing Wrong?
  

• What is he/she doing Right?
  
• What is he/she doing Wrong?
  

• What is he/she doing Right?
  
• What is he/she doing Wrong?

I also think that a few questions on Values would be good for looking ahead:

Exporting of Jobs overseas (Good Bad?)
Maintaining Social Security
Interest in universial healthcare for all citizens
Immigration (Is it a problem, how important?) (answers could show up interesting with the hispanic demographic)

It might also be fun (if possible) to pair up some opposing RvD issues (i.e. What is more important to you, Keeping jobs in the US or Gay Marrage? Social Security v. Faith legislation. For some  examples, use a rotating list) How do opposing R & D values poll head to head against another?

Do the demographics include a political preferance? R, D, Lean r or d?

Comments/Critiques?  All are Welcome.

Yes, more than three things, it just kept running on... 14 minutes huh?

Also get a question in there lumping all the impeachable offenses: lying about WMD, lies about the CIA Leak case, Abramoff stuff (if anything about him that ties him directly to Bush comes up in the next few weeks/months that), and warrantless spying on US citizens. Perhaps a question or two about Bush's honesty, while you're at it. It might be interesting to see what events ("you're doing a heckuva job Brownie," not firing Karl Rove, etc.) got those who thought he was honest to change their minds.

"In closing please tell us....dis...dat 'n de udder"

I think the question should differentiate between people who want to bring the troops home based on certain progress markers and they don't all leave until those things are accomplished, and those who want them to come home in a certain amount of time, period. (This is the problem I have most often with politicians such as Sen. Kerry who say "time-table" and it is hard to tell which they mean.) What the progress markers are or what the time periods are can be included in the same, or a secondary question.

Thus, the question could go something along the lines of:

"Should the troops be brought home only as we are able to achieve certain pre-described progress points, or should they come home within a certain time frame regardless of what progress has been made?"

Then give a list of options of progress points they consider important or an amount of time for withdrawal, depending.

John McCain is not pro-choice!

Think link below is a PoliPundit.com article that discusses this topic regarding the polling that was conducted by various firms in the run-up to the 2004 elections. Yeah, it's a conservative site, but there is a lot of good info in there about what makes a poll trustworthy vs. something you should ignore.

Poll Methodology

Shouldn't we have a similar question to 2a for those who are against the war?

Q1: "mistake" and "not a mistake" lead the responder to choose "mistake."  You can keep "mistake" but change "not a mistake" to "correct."  For extra bonus points, rotate the two choices.  Rotating answer choices is a very common poll practice.

Q4b:  I don't see how this question is unique to people who answer "keep troops in Iraq."  You can still have military bases there if you think we should withdraw troops.  Withdrawal can mean a withdrawal from normal combat or peace keeping operations.

On Iraq:  I might add a question that is common when candidates are testing their "message."  Ask something like "With which statement do you agree with most?"  Then, you have one statement from President Bush where he says we must stay in Iraq untilt the job is done and one statement from, say, Murtha, where he says our presence is doing more harm than good.

On Terrorism:  I'm not thrilled with those questions from a standpoint of making waves in traditional media.  Some suggestions:  Ask if they believe Bush has focused not enough attention on capturing Osama because of his War in Iraq.  Ask if they think Bush has implemented the Sept. 11th Commission recommendations to a sufficient degree.

Q9:  I would change "court order" to "warrant."  People may not know what exactly a court order is, but they know what a warrant is.

General Comment:  I assume there will be questions at the end or at the beginning to obtain the demographics of the responder.  Those should be standard and the pollster will have stock questions for those, but they are very important.

Great idea though and I hope you find these comments helpful.

3) The options here seem like they should be reworded. Perhaps something like "should troops be kept in Iraq indefinitely to achieve certain goals or should a firm timetable be established for redeployment?"

You may also want to delve into this ball of wax: "do you think that Iraq is more stable than before the US invasion?
do you think that Iraqis are better off because of the US invasion?
do you think that the US should pay attention to recent polls indicating that a majority of Iraqis want US troops to leave?
if Iraqis democratically establish a government that is hostile to the United States and supportive of anti-US regimes, would you support US efforts to undermine or overthrow that government?
do you believe that the US has established that preemptive regime change is in the best interest of Americans and establishing peace internationally?
do you believe that terrorism has been encouraged or discouraged by the war?"

6) Some interesting followups to this question (some drawing from other comments) might be: do you think bin Laden will ever be captured/killed? In what ways do you feel that US military action has impacted bin Laden's ability to carry out terrorist attacks against the US (greatly hindered, somewhat hindered, somewhat helped, greatly helped)? Do you feel that finding bin Laden remains a top priority for this administration? Do you think that finding bin Laden SHOULD be a top priority for the United States or have other security concerns become more important?

Reorder/reword of course, but along those lines.

7) Interesting followup here might be "do you pay attention to the threat levels from DHS?"

8-10) I think you may want to be less forceful- that is, lead up to your point. Ask something like "Do you believe that the surveillance ordered by this administration has only investigated legitimate terror suspects or has been used on other citizens as well?" and then "Do you believe that the NSA should be allowed to do this without a court-issued warrant?" and then "Do you believe that the President has the authority to take actions like these without the consent of Congress?"
And again, word it so that it's as neutral as possible and consistent with phrasing elsewhere.

11-14) I think these questions are pretty solid, though you might want to try working in something asking whether and/or to what degree the President's credibility and leadership has been impacted by the mounting accusations against him. More broad, but perhaps a good barometer of general public sentiment. Maybe ask about each of the two main issues (domestic spying, falsified intel). The crux here is: Are people losing faith in Bush because of all the negative pub?

Again, I'm not trying to word all of these perfectly, just give a rough idea of what I'm thinking. I also realize that there are length/time restraints to be dealt with, so obviously we can't jam everything in, but these are a few to chew on.

I frankly am beginning to question the whole process. Alito is qualified, but there's no tough questions yet - nothing we can work with.

The libertarians are really upset that Bush is basically using everything here, to just extend his empire. The war on terror, as it was written in an excellent WSJ article today, will not end with a surrender ceremony. So these war powers that bush keeps giving himself are very, very questionable.

But at the same time, pro life and social conservatives are really stoked to see alito there.

I think the best thing I can say is heck, alito has a lot of writings on the subject. But beyond that, the fact that he's written so many times that he will burn Roe Vs. Wade, is an open invitation to the whole social conservative culture war.

And that will of course hide the fact that citizens of the US have been excluded from the lawmaking process for years now, and the lobbyists are destroying our country - fundraiser? How about a corporation thats willing to bankroll the whole thing instead of trying to go find a hundred small donors.

Up until, that is.. Howard Dean...

Does anyone else except for me remember how much hatred the lobbyists laid upon Howard Dean? How quickly the media bias turned against him, even up to the point of paying off his campaign manager..

The hand that records the secret conversation.. is where you find the thumbdrive which stores the mp3 of the future.

(1) Questions that can be asked repeatedly into the future.  These are the backbone of serious public opinion research, and--via cross-tabs--provide valueable benchmarks for examining the questions that do have a limited shelf-life.

(2) Questions that get at people's continued belief in discredited claims--WMDs in Iraq, Iraqi hijackers, cooperation between Iraq and al Qaeda, and belief that the world's people supported the war.  In the past, PIPA has shown that these are strongly correlated with support for Bush & his policies.  By re-using their questions, we can do comparisons with data that's almost 1 1/2 years old, and examine the continuing significance of Bush Admin disinformation.

(3) Questions about the Downing Street Memos. If we don't ask these, no one else will.  Something along the lines of:

Q: According to the "Downing Street Memos," nearly a year before the Iraq War, Britain's top spy told the British War Cabinet that in Washington, "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" to justify going to war with Iraq. If true, this would mean that Bush Administration deliberately mislead us into war. The Bush Administration has refused to answer Congressional inquiries about this since last summer. Should the Congress begin an impeachment inquiry if the Administration refuses to cooperate with a Congressional investigation?

I also agree with others in critiquing 8-10.  "electronic surveillance of Americans" is superior to "domestic spying."  But Q 10 has bigger problems:

(A) Whether people know it or not, Bush's conduct does violate civil liberties.  This question suggests a non-existent possibility. It is analogous to asking, "Do you trust bookies to take bets without violating laws against gambling?"

(B) The Constitution doesn't just protect American citizens. It protects everyone in America--residents, tourists, everyone.

On Q1, it might be seen as leading (or unnecessary) to state "In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq..."  Respondents rationally will take developments into account in making their decision.  Retain the general intent but reduce length by stating "At the present time,..." or "All told,..." which may be less subject to critique.  

Q3, I like arenwin's suggestion if you want to determine how comfortable the public is in letting the President judge when to withdraw versus having a timetable which he has opposed

("Should troops be kept in Iraq as long as necessary until the President believes the country is secure, or should a timetable be established for their return?")

However if you just want to determine appropriate dates, how about:
"What is your preferred date for U.S. troops to be withdrawn from Iraq?" Options: Within 6 mos, by 6mo-1 yr, by 1-2 yrs or longer? (the 'immediately' response being covered by the 'within 6 months' option which I think is as immediate as is possible/ a shorter duration can be used if others disagree)

I think the military base question is not exclusive from the troop withdrawal question and can be a stand-alone Q4 for all respondents: "Do you think the U.S. should establish permanent military bases in Iraq?" Y/N

I like Q6 (as the administration doesn't often focus on the real cause of 9/11 terror), and Q5 is good for tracking purposes (but if it and Q7 are in other polls they should be replaced).

I agree with all of Professor M's points.

In order for me to be comfortable with impeachment for domestic spying, I would have to be convinced that the spying was for purposes other than national security.

If, for example, the administration had some kind of op like COINTELPRO, in which they tapped calls of dissidents and political opponents, then by all means, impeach away.

If, on the other hand, the illegal wire taps were used, as the administration claims, only when known Al Quaeda numbers were in play...  well, in that case I think it'd be tough to justify impeachment.

I don't know how that will effect the poll.

Also, I am going to push one more time for changing "Al-Qaeda" to "terrorist organizations." If you were to ask me if Saddam had connections with Al-Qaeda, I would have to respond with an emphatic "ummm..., maybe?" but if you were to reword that to say terrorists organizations, I would say "absolutely, positively, no doubt about it." So, as it is worded, I wouldn't check that reason if I were taking the poll, but I would if it were changed.

Also agreed that saying "Congress should hold him accountable by impeachment" in (12) and (14) badly biases the question. Instead, consider the more neutral "Congress should impeach and remove him him office."

Also, where question 12 currently reads "If it were determined that President Bush was involved with domestic spying that was illegal", I would considered changing it to "If it were determined that the domestic spying ordered by President Bush was illegal". We know he he did it, and we know it was his idea. He's admitted that on national TV. The only question is whether it was illegal. Focus on that.

1)    Do you support ALL FUTURE PRESIDENTS having the power to spy on U.S. citizens WITHOUT also being required to demonstrate (via obtaining a warrant) that it is solely for a purpose vital to national security?

2)    How concerned are you that this power might eventually be abused by a future President in a way that is detrimental to innocent individuals and/or to our society overall?

3)    Do you trust the current President to not abuse this power?

According to him:

But, unlike some of my liberal friends, I don't think the answer would be much different if the phrase "without a warrant" had been included. The key missing word was "illegally."

So my formulation would be not "Presidential action without Congressional authorization" but "Presidential lawbreaking." The question is whether the President can authorize his subordinates to commit felonies whenever in his sole judgment he decides that committing those felonies would serve the national security. I think we can count on the voters to give the right answer to that question.

Further according to Kleiman,

The idea that we need to protect our privacy even in the face of the terrorist threat is almost certainly restricted to a minority, though a minority that includes almost everyone you know. So if the question is framed in terms of security v. privacy or liberty, it's a losing issue for the Democrats, just as Mickey Kaus and Glenn Reynolds hope it will be. But the idea that the President should obey the law enjoys very widespread support. That's the frame Democrats, and friends of civil liberty, should try to put around this issue. Just keep repeating "a government of laws, not of men."

Perhaps you could include a question along the lines of:   "Do you think the administration has been candid regarding public expression of its reasons for invading Iraq?"  

or:

"Do you think the reasons stated publically by the administration for the invasion of Iraq reflect their actual motivations for this policy?"

Republican Senator Specter has said that "impeachment is a remedy" if the President has broken the law. Senator Kerry has said, "If we take back the House, there's a solid case to bring articles of impeachment against this president." House leaders Conyers, Waters, Rangel, and Woolsey are sponsoring a resolution calling for a select committee "to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment." With which of the following statements would you most agree:

• there has been too much media coverage of these events
  
• there has been insufficient media coverage of these events
  
• there has been a proper amount of media coverage of these events

ADD------->>
Because Saddam Hussein is an 'ole buddy'
of Osama Been Missing!

Because I can now order 'Failure Fries' without fear or dishonor!

Because I can smash the Dixie Chicks' cd's
and feel good about it!

Sorry! Couldn't resist!

For question 2a., I still say you need an option for "because it was in the best interest of our national security" or something similar. Otherwise, you are going to get a lot of "other" responses from us right-wingnuts. From my viewpoint (and I know there are a lot of people who believe the same thing) that reason trumps all the others.
Also, I am going to push one more time for changing "Al-Qaeda" to "terrorist organizations." If you were to ask me if Saddam had connections with Al-Qaeda, I would have to respond with an emphatic "ummm..., maybe?" but if you were to reword that to say terrorists organizations, I would say "absolutely, positively, no doubt about it." So, as it is worded, I wouldn't check that reason if I were taking the poll, but I would if it were changed.

emoticones
emoticones
jeux
jeux
jeux
jeux
jeux
jeux
jeux
jeux
jeux
jeux
jeux
musiques
musiques
musiques
musiques
chansons
chansons
chansons
chansons
chansons
chansons
paroles
paroles
paroles
paroles
paroles
parole
parole
parole
parole
parole
ecrans de veille
ecrans de veille
wallpaper
album
album
album
cartes amour
cartes animees

cartes animees
cartes anniversaire
cartes anniversaire
cartes electroniques
cartes musicales
cartes musicales
cartes noel
cartes noel
cartes noel
cartes postal
cartes postal
cartes postale
cartes postale
cartes postales
cartes postales
cartes virtuelles
cartes virtuelles
cartes virtuelles
cartes virtuelles
cartes amour
carte animee
carte animee
carte anniversaire
carte anniversaire
carte anniversaire
carte electronique
carte musicale
carte musicale
carte noel
carte noel
carte noel
carte postale
carte postale
carte virtuelle
carte virtuelle
carte virtuelle
carte virtuelle
video comique
video delire
video gag
video humoristique
video humour
video insolite
video drole
videos
videos
videos
audio
audio
caudio
audio
telecharger cd