How to Manipulate a Poll
Just for fun
Sample question:
1. "If they took all the guns away the world would be a safer place."
A: I guess democrats would say: Yes. No. I don't know.
A: I guess republicans would say: Yes. No. I don't know.
A: I think: Yes. No. I don't know.
2. Does question 1 include the police?
3. In question 1, who is "they" who takes all the guns away?
4. If they take all the guns away, do the Russians and Chinese go along?
5. Can we take away all the guns from the criminals first?
6. T or F: The world was a safer place before guns were invented.
7. T or F: If guns disappeared criminals and dictators would make new ones.
8. T or F: If there were no guns, street gangs would use brutal methods instead.
9. T or F: Since criminals could just take my gun, I could just take theirs.
10. Essay question: The news media keeps me fully informed on this subject.
Extra credit: What the media does provide about guns has no bias: True. False. Can't tell.
Bonus Q: If the government and political forces attempted to ban firearms outright, as the losing presidential candidate seemed predisposed to do, and some politicians have openly advocated for, who would be exempt? Circle as many as you think apply. The Secret Service, Local Police (New York City has 51,000), FBI, CIA, NSA, TSA, BATFE, National Guard, Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Supreme Court Police, Dept. of Agriculture Police, Homeland Security Police, EPA Police, NASA, Customs, Border Patrol, ICE, Coast Guard, County Sheriffs, 55 groups specified in federal statutes at last count, Other (specify, use extra paper if needed). Could the country have private investigators, body guards and armored car services, and finally, who would be in charge of banning firearms outright for people already banned, like armed criminals.
Sample question:
1. "If they took all the guns away the world would be a safer place."
A: I guess democrats would say: Yes. No. I don't know.
A: I guess republicans would say: Yes. No. I don't know.
A: I think: Yes. No. I don't know.
2. Does question 1 include the police?
3. In question 1, who is "they" who takes all the guns away?
4. If they take all the guns away, do the Russians and Chinese go along?
5. Can we take away all the guns from the criminals first?
6. T or F: The world was a safer place before guns were invented.
7. T or F: If guns disappeared criminals and dictators would make new ones.
8. T or F: If there were no guns, street gangs would use brutal methods instead.
9. T or F: Since criminals could just take my gun, I could just take theirs.
10. Essay question: The news media keeps me fully informed on this subject.
Extra credit: What the media does provide about guns has no bias: True. False. Can't tell.
Bonus Q: If the government and political forces attempted to ban firearms outright, as the losing presidential candidate seemed predisposed to do, and some politicians have openly advocated for, who would be exempt? Circle as many as you think apply. The Secret Service, Local Police (New York City has 51,000), FBI, CIA, NSA, TSA, BATFE, National Guard, Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Supreme Court Police, Dept. of Agriculture Police, Homeland Security Police, EPA Police, NASA, Customs, Border Patrol, ICE, Coast Guard, County Sheriffs, 55 groups specified in federal statutes at last count, Other (specify, use extra paper if needed). Could the country have private investigators, body guards and armored car services, and finally, who would be in charge of banning firearms outright for people already banned, like armed criminals.
A thought provoking article. Most polls are designed to influence people, not merely gauge public opinion on an issue. A ‘push poll’ is an interactive marketing technique, most commonly employed during political campaigning, in which an individual or organization attempts to manipulate or alter prospective voters' views/beliefs under the guise of conducting an opinion poll. The pollster asks leading questions or suggestive questions that “push” the interviewee towards adopting a positive or negative response to an issue. In order to conceal the manipulation the interviewee will typically manipulate the interviewee before asking a seemingly neutral question.
Thus a pro-abortion pollster would let the interviewee know they are pro-abortion and think anti-abortionists are immoral while informing them about main the arguments in favor of abortion (none against) and then ask a seemingly neutral question: “Do you support abortion?” The question is not neutral of course as most people are naturally averse to saying “no” to a proposition and would rather say “yes”. How do you know if interviewees were subject to such manipulation? You do not, but must assume they were. You must treat all polls as propaganda designed to service the interests of the people who pay for them and be willing counter your opponent’s rigged polls with your own.
If you think the latter course of action is “immoral” or "dishonest" then perhaps you might like to condemn the Allies for misleading the Nazis about where the D-Day landings were.
Posted by: Richard Lutz | Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 11:45 PM