PDA

View Full Version : Elections Military Times Poll Show Soldiers Pick McCain Over Obama 68-23%


KCJohnny
10-20-2008, 09:31 AM
Military Times Poll Show Soldiers Pick McCain Over Obama 68-23% (http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/2008/10/18/military-times-poll-show-soldiers-pick-mccain-over-obama-68.html)

http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/universal/images/transparent.pngSaturday, October 18, 2008 at 11:10AM
In a Military Times poll that surveyed 4,300 readers who are active duty, national guard or reserves, soldiers favor John McCain for president over Barack Obama by a 68% - 23% margin (http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2008/10/military_poll_methodology_100608W/). The respondents are all registered who plan to vote.
Enlisted soldiers prefer John McCain 67% - 24% and officers prefer McCain 70% - 22%.

Speaker Pelosi: "The war [in Iraq] is a total failure"...

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3kqPzUhNPiA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3kqPzUhNPiA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Direckshun
10-20-2008, 10:42 AM
They're voting, but they ain't enthusiastic about it.

Obama has slaughtered McCain in donations from the military.

penchief
10-20-2008, 10:43 AM
Why does Colin Powell hate God?

Brock
10-20-2008, 11:14 AM
Maybe they'll get lucky and have more than 30 percent of their votes counted.

patteeu
10-20-2008, 11:30 AM
They're voting, but they ain't enthusiastic about it.

Obama has slaughtered McCain in donations from the military.

Political donations from the military are less than a drop in the bucket in terms of total campaign contributions received by these campaigns. I'd take the 68-23% edge in military votes over the edge in insignificant campaign contributions any day. The only reason Obama's campaign contribution edge was ever touted in the first place was because of what the touters thought it meant about overall support.

Amnorix
10-20-2008, 12:11 PM
errr....wouldn't Republicans win every election if it was up to the military alone? Why is this news?

HolmeZz
10-20-2008, 12:19 PM
What a poorly conducted poll. 'Readers' of your magazine? Really? That's not how you do a poll. That's how you get an assessment of who reads your magazine. If you want to know the actual leanings of the whole military in a poll, you have to factor in demographics and average everything out to get an accurate assessment of the entire military.

For example, blacks make up 30% of the enlisted army, yet you're trying to pass off Obama as getting about 20% of the vote. Anybody with half a brain could see how off the poll is just by that.

The Military vote usually breaks about 55-45 Republican, give a few points either way depending on the actual candidates. It's not a swing block of voters, it's fairly predictable.

patteeu
10-20-2008, 12:28 PM
errr....wouldn't Republicans win every election if it was up to the military alone? Why is this news?

Because there was a group delusion shared by many of Obama's most hope-filled acolytes that Obama was more popular among members of the military than John McCain.

HolmeZz
10-20-2008, 12:29 PM
Because there was a group delusion shared by many of Obama's most hope-filled acolytes that Obama was more popular among members of the military than John McCain.

Who said Obama was going to win the military vote?

J Diddy
10-20-2008, 12:30 PM
Political donations from the military are less than a drop in the bucket in terms of total campaign contributions received by these campaigns. I'd take the 68-23% edge in military votes over the edge in insignificant campaign contributions any day. The only reason Obama's campaign contribution edge was ever touted in the first place was because of what the touters thought it meant about overall support.


Or it means you'd take the one that would most validate your claim, as you have.

Direckshun
10-20-2008, 12:30 PM
It should be noted that patteeu once argued to me that Military Times' polls don't matter.

patteeu
10-20-2008, 12:31 PM
What a poorly conducted poll. 'Readers' of your magazine? Really? That's not how you do a poll. That's how you get an assessment of who reads your magazine. If you want to know the actual leanings of the whole military in a poll, you have to factor in demographics and average everything out to get an accurate assessment of the entire military.

For example, blacks make up 30% of the enlisted army, yet you're trying to pass off Obama as getting about 20% of the vote. Anybody with half a brain could see how off the poll is just by that.

The Military vote usually breaks about 55-45 Republican, give a few points either way depending on the actual candidates. It's not a swing block of voters, it's fairly predictable.

Did you make this (valid) point when many of your fellow Obama supporters were extrapolating Obama's campaign contribution edge among military personnel without bothering to make the same demographic considerations?

HolmeZz
10-20-2008, 12:36 PM
Did you make this (valid) point when many of your fellow Obama supporters were extrapolating Obama's campaign contribution edge among military personnel without bothering to make the same demographic considerations?

What exactly would the demographics of campaign contributions matter? I didn't see any claims other than "Obama gets more military contributions than any of the other candidates". Are you arguing that that claim is somehow invalid if most of those contributions are from black soldiers? I don't get your point.

Alton deFlat
10-20-2008, 12:43 PM
What a poorly conducted poll. 'Readers' of your magazine? Really? That's not how you do a poll. That's how you get an assessment of who reads your magazine. If you want to know the actual leanings of the whole military in a poll, you have to factor in demographics and average everything out to get an accurate assessment of the entire military.

For example, blacks make up 30% of the enlisted army, yet you're trying to pass off Obama as getting about 20% of the vote. Anybody with half a brain could see how off the poll is just by that.

The Military vote usually breaks about 55-45 Republican, give a few points either way depending on the actual candidates. It's not a swing block of voters, it's fairly predictable.

:clap:

Well said!

patteeu
10-20-2008, 12:43 PM
It should be noted that patteeu once argued to me that Military Times' polls don't matter.

On the contrary, I gave specific reasons why your interpretation of a military times poll was unfounded. I've seen nothing since then to make me believe that you were right and I was wrong. In fact, as soft as the anti-war sentiment in this country turned out to be in general, I'd say it's pretty clear that you had it wrong.

If you'd like to take a shot at explaining why the outcome of this poll doesn't mean what it seems to mean I'd love to hear it.

I thought about bringing that old discussion up when I saw your first response to this thread, but decided not to point out that you were previously a big admirer of military times polls. Now that you bring it up, I guess it's worth setting the record straight.

patteeu
10-20-2008, 12:52 PM
What exactly would the demographics of campaign contributions matter? I didn't see any claims other than "Obama gets more military contributions than any of the other candidates". Are you arguing that that claim is somehow invalid if most of those contributions are from black soldiers? I don't get your point.

Many went further with their claims than you seem to remember. The claim I'm objecting to is "Obama is the most popular POTUS candidate among the military because he's winning the campaign contribution race by a substantial margin". The Ron Paul guys were making similarly flawed claims during the primaries. Race is most likely the biggest factor in Obama's case but I wouldn't apply such a strict racial prism.

Campaign contributions come from people who are extraordinarily motivated. There are a lot of people who are motivated enough to vote but not motivated enough to send a check to their preferred candidate. Many of these extremely motivated supporters are, no doubt, black soldiers who want to see the history making first election of a black man to the presidency but that's not the only possible group that would cause a distortion. The point is that just like magazine readership polls, campaign contribution levels aren't always a good proxy for political support.

Calcountry
10-20-2008, 01:02 PM
What a poorly conducted poll. 'Readers' of your magazine? Really? That's not how you do a poll. That's how you get an assessment of who reads your magazine. If you want to know the actual leanings of the whole military in a poll, you have to factor in demographics and average everything out to get an accurate assessment of the entire military.

For example, blacks make up 30% of the enlisted army, yet you're trying to pass off Obama as getting about 20% of the vote. Anybody with half a brain could see how off the poll is just by that.

The Military vote usually breaks about 55-45 Republican, give a few points either way depending on the actual candidates. It's not a swing block of voters, it's fairly predictable.After this election, they will need to bring back the draft.

HolmeZz
10-20-2008, 01:18 PM
After this election, they will need to bring back the draft.

You think John McCain is going to win and start a half dozen more wars?

patteeu
10-20-2008, 01:20 PM
You think John McCain is going to win and start a half dozen more wars?

I think we're more likely to have another major war if Obama is elected. Seriously.

Amnorix
10-20-2008, 02:31 PM
Because there was a group delusion shared by many of Obama's most hope-filled acolytes that Obama was more popular among members of the military than John McCain.


Ah, that was silly of them to begin with then. Everyone knows the military is full of God and guns spouting redneck hicks like KCJohnny!


:D :p


(Please note that it's just a joke people. I have tremendous respect for the military and all its achievements)

HolmeZz
10-20-2008, 02:38 PM
I think we're more likely to have another major war if Obama is elected. Seriously.

So you're leaning Obama?

Dave Lane
10-20-2008, 03:02 PM
.

StcChief
10-20-2008, 03:34 PM
After this election, they will need to bring back the draft.they already should have, DC would be a better place, with these guys grumbling in a fox hole or hold up in Canada.

Programmer
10-20-2008, 04:08 PM
I think we're more likely to have another major war if Obama is elected. Seriously.

If that is likely to happen I hope it is sooner than later. Obama wants to disarm the U.S. of nuclear weapons. He wants to cut defense spending.
He wants to close more bases to save money.

Now we know where he plans on getting all of the money to pay for his social programs.

If the war happens late in his tenure we will no longer be the U.S. of A.

KCJohnny
10-20-2008, 08:32 PM
Political donations from the military are less than a drop in the bucket in terms of total campaign contributions received by these campaigns. I'd take the 68-23% edge in military votes over the edge in insignificant campaign contributions any day. The only reason Obama's campaign contribution edge was ever touted in the first place was because of what the touters thought it meant about overall support.

I saw the figures - around $300,000 total donations and that was months ago. Chump change. The poll by Military Times is a far more authoritative indicator of military support. It also jibes with recent polls among uniformed personnel.

KCJohnny
10-20-2008, 08:36 PM
I think we're more likely to have another major war if Obama is elected. Seriously.

And Joe Biden agrees (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=194700)with you.