Pew: 51 percent of Americans view the NSA favorably

[TomKat]

51% of Americans don't think Aleister Crowley was a bad guy.

I like the story about how he is the father of Barbara Pierce. They look just like each other too.

 

[AuH20]

I like the story about how he is the father of Barbara Pierce. They look just like each other too.

Boleskine House on the shore of Loch Ness is even more spookier. I don't know what he was up to, but it probably wasn't something most mortal souls could ultimately endure...

 

[Mani]

The PEW also neglected to mention 40% of the participants in the poll were family and friends of the NSA.


The under 30 crowd gave a 61% favorable rating of the NSA!?! I smell a fat fuck named Frank Lutz somewhere hiding behind this. He must be giving "how to make bullshit polls and make them sound real" seminars and PEW seems to be a regular customer.

 

[DamianTV]

The PEW also neglected to mention 40% of the participants in the poll were family and friends of the NSA.


The under 30 crowd gave a 61% favorable rating of the NSA!?! I smell a fat fuck named Frank Lutz somewhere hiding behind this. He must be giving "how to make bullshit polls and make them sound real" seminars and PEW seems to be a regular customer.

Post #20 comrade!

 

[TheTexan]

Youre all forgetting that the questions that people are asked are not repeated when presented as a fact. They constantly twist these things to distort peoples perceptions. They may have asked something like "do you think we need a strong government to be secure?" to which a certain percentage will answer "yes" and a certain percentage will answer "no". However, once this data is compiled, the Question itself is completely changed, damn near to the point of irrelevancy.

Source? I think you're just in denial that these are the general public's actual opinions.

They will take all these "yes" answers and state "Americans support NSA Spying" even though it was NOT the question they asked to begin with.

In a separate poll that is also fairly recent...

"Q: As you may know, it has been reported that the National Security Agency has been getting secret court orders to track telephone call records of MILLIONS of Americans in an effort to investigate terrorism. Would you consider this access to telephone call records an acceptable or unacceptable way for the federal government to investigate terrorism?"

Acceptable: 56%
Unacceptable 41%

"Q: What do you think is more important right now - (for the federal government to investigate possible terrorist threats, even if that intrudes on personal privacy); or (for the federal government not to intrude on personal privacy, even if that limits its ability to investigate possible terrorist threats)?"

INVESTIGATE THREATS EVEN IF IT INTRUDES ON PRIVACY: 62%
NOT INTRUDE EVEN IF IT LIMITS ABILITY TO INVESTIGATE THREATS: 34%

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...6049508-d20c-11e2-9577-df9f1c3348f5_page.html

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

Youre all forgetting that the questions that people are asked are not repeated when presented as a fact. They constantly twist these things to distort peoples perceptions. They may have asked something like "do you think we need a strong government to be secure?" to which a certain percentage will answer "yes" and a certain percentage will answer "no". However, once this data is compiled, the Question itself is completely changed, damn near to the point of irrelevancy. They will take all these "yes" answers and state "Americans support NSA Spying" even though it was NOT the question they asked to begin with. It is Group Think Psychology. If one individiual believes the majority, or even super majority of people have one opinion, they may very well change their own opinions to match those of the Perceived Group, even if the Percieved Group is a statistical question manipulating statistic.

What we need to be thinking is how the hell we got to this figure to begin with. Fuck Pew Polls, lets go directly to the people that were polled and ask them. Then we can understand how this manipulation works on the truly weak minded.

But for the NSA to have a five times higher approval rating than our Criminal Congress, whose biggest issue is the NSA, I not only call BULLSHIT but COMPLETE AND TOTAL FUCKING BULLSHIT.

Where is Frank Lutz?

This is PEW guy. Go to their site and find the long form for the research. They completely break down everything and publish their polling methodology. You are not backing up your accusations.

These surveys are also a anomaly. a statistical blip on a timeline that corresponds exactly with the Charlie Hebdo attacks. They will return to their normal trajectory after a few more Snowden revelations.

-t

 

[moostraks]

Source? I think you're just in denial that these are the general public's actual opinions.



In a separate poll that is also fairly recent...

"Q: As you may know, it has been reported that the National Security Agency has been getting secret court orders to track telephone call records of MILLIONS of Americans in an effort to investigate terrorism. Would you consider this access to telephone call records an acceptable or unacceptable way for the federal government to investigate terrorism?"

Acceptable: 56%
Unacceptable 41%

"Q: What do you think is more important right now - (for the federal government to investigate possible terrorist threats, even if that intrudes on personal privacy); or (for the federal government not to intrude on personal privacy, even if that limits its ability to investigate possible terrorist threats)?"

INVESTIGATE THREATS EVEN IF IT INTRUDES ON PRIVACY: 62%
NOT INTRUDE EVEN IF IT LIMITS ABILITY TO INVESTIGATE THREATS: 34%

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...6049508-d20c-11e2-9577-df9f1c3348f5_page.html

CFR is discussing the apparent evidence of the effectiveness of the 4th branch's ISIS/IS/ISIL propaganda and what measures will be necessary for reaching the other 49% in reeducation camps.

 

[Acala]

I would be shocked if 50% of the American public had even a clue what the NSA is.

 

[Mani]

I would be shocked if 50% of the American public had even a clue what the NSA is.

Good point. Once in a while I check out a bit by Jimmy Kimmel where he asks fake news to people. He said normally it takes hours to find enough dumb people (my words) to make one of those 4 minute bits.

It was Martin Luther King Day and so he asked the fake news question, "What did you think of Martin Luther King's speech today?" He said it took them literally minutes to film this one. They asked 14 people and 7 people was all it took.

The interviewer is egging them on like, "Didn't he look like he gained a lot of weight?"


It's a small sample size, but if it only takes a few minutes to find 7 people who either don't know who Martin Luther King is, or that he's been dead for almost 50 years, I guess I shouldn't expect them to have an informed opinion on the NSA.



I bet they could all tell you what Kim Kardashian ate for breakfast though...

 

[Weston White]

Ray Peterson: Remember what you were saying about people in the 'burbs, Art, people like Skip, people who mow their lawn for the 800th time, and then SNAP? WELL, THAT'S US. IT'S NOT THEM, THAT'S US. WE'RE the ones who are vaulting over the fences, and peeking in through people's windows. We're the ones who are THROWING GARBAGE IN THE STREET, AND LIGHTING FIRES. WE'RE THE ONES WHO ARE ACTING SUSPICIOUS AND PARANOID, ART. WE'RE THE LUNATICS. US. IT'S NOT THEM. It's us.

Art Wiengartner: [after a pause] I don't know what to say... What, do you want me to move?

Ray Peterson: [chanting] I'm not going to listen to this, I'm not going to hear this now.

Art: Ray! Ray! You're chanting!

Art: Ray, unconscious chanting! You're chanting!

Ray Peterson: [continues chanting with fingers in ears]

Art: [chants] I want to kill everyone. Satan is good. Satan is our pal.

Art: Hey, once they get in here... [points to Ray's head]

Art: ...it's over, pal.

—The Burbs

 

[Occam's Banana]

Anyone else notice how often controversial polls always end up ~+/- 1% of the 50% mark?

Like that ever happens in the real world.

Actually, this sort of thing is not surprising at all. Other things equal, democracy naturally tends to this kind of result.

In part, this is attributable to what it means to say that something is "controversial." Something that falls out at 90% vs. 10% is ipso facto not particularly "controversial" - or, at least, not nearly as "controversial" as something that falls out at 51% vs. 49%.

And then there is the fact that one of the essential characteristics of democracy is the enablement of the exploitation of the minority by the majority. Such exploitations are "maximized" when the "winning" group is as small as it can be and still be the "winning" group (51%) and the "losing" group is as large as it can be and still be the "losing" group (49%).