Yesterday evening, our own Frances Martel wrote a column about the study indicating that Fox News viewers were less informed about news than those who watched other channels – and than those who watch no news at all. The title of her piece: “Left Rejoices As Poll Of 612 New Jerseyans Declares Fox News Makes People Stupid”.

I used to run political campaigns; as part of that, I commissioned polls. I have a good sense of how polling works, what it’s good for, what makes a poll valid. Martel’s implication that 612 people is an absurdly low sample size is not only erroneous, it’s a staple of those who want to cast doubt on research for political purposes. Skepticism is always warranted. It is not, however, valid to take issue with basic math.

It appears that Trump fatigue has not yet set in, at least with likely voters in the GOP primary according to independent polling company Rasmussen Reports. Worth nothing that the poll was conducted before Barack Obama‘s somewhat shocking revelation that he was in fact born in the United States (and the subsequent anti-Trump teeth gnashing by pundits of all stripes.) Nonetheless, should anyone be surprised that such a naked ploy for attention has led to the top of the polls?

Move over Frank Luntz: online dating site OK Cupid has released an extensive survey on American party identification using their members as a sample group. For the most part, the results are nothing new: people tend to grow conservative as they age; views on abortion fall on party lines, etc. The study, surveying more than 100,000 people, presents a grim conclusion for the Democrats’ political diversity, but a bright future for accurate online polling.

It appears that the relentless coverage of the Climategate scandal may have had some effect. Despite the record low temperatures — and regardless of what they may actually signify — fewer people believe that extreme weather conditions are the result of global warming than did just two years ago.

According to Politico, Scott Rasmussen‘s polling firm Rasmussen Reports has come under increasing fire from liberal bloggers and pundits, many of whom see it as a conservative front and talking point factory. Surprisingly, liberal polling and statistics maven Nate Silver came to Rasmussen’s (qualified) defense:

We’re 100% sure this story is going to get a little complicated.

Last night on The Daily Show, Jon Stewart highlighted a graphic on Fox & Friends relating to global warming and, loosely, Climategate. But the numbers didn’t add up – or did they?

Earlier today, Mediaite’s Glynnis MacNicol reported on a new Rasmussen poll that indicates that while 44% of adults (although they never do get to how children would vote) say they would vote to re-elect President Obama were the election held today, 49% say they would not. She correctly notes that the poll doesn’t consider a hypothetical opponent, or other variables.

So yes. As the saying goes, what a difference a year makes. Twelve months after the momentous election of Barack Obama as the nation’s 44th president, a poll shows that were the election to be held today Obama might not be so successful.

According to a recent Rasmussen survey 80% of Americans think that Americans pay too much attention to sensational news stories. Snap conclusion? At least some cable TV viewers are aware they are supporting something they disapprove of. Apparently ‘sensational TV’ is the new tobacco industry.

According to a recent Rasmussen poll, there’s a strong connection between individuals’ political leanings and their attitudes towards the media overall. “While 58% of Democrats view journalists favorably, 70% of Republicans and 55% of unaffiliateds do not.” Rather than pontificate about what we think this means, we’d rather hear from you. Thoughts?