June 29, 2010
— Ace To say he "admits" it isn't quite right; this isn't a grudging admission, but a statement that he feels he was defrauded. So, he publicized bunk polls, but at least he's copping to it.
I have just published a report by three statistics wizards showing, quite convincingly, that the weekly Research 2000 State of the Nation poll we ran the past year and a half was likely bunk.Since the moment Mark Grebner, Michael Weissman, and Jonathan Weissman approached me, I took their concerns seriously and cooperated fully with their investigation. I also offered to run the results on Daily Kos provided that they 1) fully documented each claim in detail, 2) got that documentation peer reviewed by disinterested third parties, and 3) gave Research 2000 an opportunity to respond. By the end of last week, they had accomplished the first two items on that list. I held publication of the report until today, because I didn't want to partake in a cliche Friday Bad News Dump. This is serious business, and I wasn't going to bury it over a weekend.
We contracted with Research 2000 to conduct polling and to provide us with the results of their surveys. Based on the report of the statisticians, it's clear that we did not get what we paid for. We were defrauded by Research 2000, and while we don't know if some or all of the data was fabricated or manipulated beyond recognition, we know we can't trust it. Meanwhile, Research 2000 has refused to offer any explanation. Early in this process, I asked for and they offered to provide us with their raw data for independent analysis -- which could potentially exculpate them. That was two weeks ago, and despite repeated promises to provide us that data, Research 2000 ultimately refused to do so. At one point, they claimed they couldn't deliver them because their computers were down and they had to work out of a Kinkos office. Research 2000 was delivered a copy of the report early Monday morning, and though they quickly responded and promised a full response, once again the authors of the report heard nothing more.
While the investigation didn't look at all of Research 2000 polling conducted for us, fact is I no longer have any confidence in any of it, and neither should anyone else. I ask that all poll tracking sites remove any Research 2000 polls commissioned by us from their databases. I hereby renounce any post we've written based exclusively on Research 2000 polling.
Okay, that's a clear admission.
But note he's renouncing any post he's written.
Not any book.
I point this out because he's got a book about "The American Taliban" (that would be you all) coming out in two months, and it seems to me very likely that his various Research 2000 polls which painted conservatives in an extremist light were part of his case there.
I guess he'll probably delete references to the Research 2000 polls while keeping all the conclusions, because, let's face it, it's not as if his beliefs were based on polling and other objective indicators anyway.
Thanks to Slublog and Drew.
Falsified? The actual statistical case against the polls is not one about mere methodological failure, but of simply making stuff up.
1. A large set of number pairs which should be independent of each other in detail, yet almost always are either both even or both odd.2. A set of polls on separate groups which track each other far too closely, given the statistical uncertainties.
3. The collection of week-to-week changes, in which one particular small change (zero) occurs far too rarely. This test is particularly valuable because the reports exhibit a property known to show up when people try to make up random sequences.
The statistical analysis suggests that these numbers were simply made up on the fly, and the reason for these odd occurrences is that people screw up when trying to make things look random.
For example, in point number 2, a smaller sub-sample should show much wilder variation than your main (big) sample, because you're polling many fewer people in that subgroup and hence the Margin of Error is of course larger. But Research 2000 consistently seems to find what you'd call "likely numbers" for these groups -- numbers that seem to make sense, that accord with your gut instinct.
But that's a mistake, because, statistically, with these small subgroups, you should be getting what looks like clearly outside-the-margin-of-error stuff very frequently. In other words, if your numbers are genuine, statistics demands that a lot of these small sub-group numbers look like complete and utter garbage.
If they all keep looking like what you'd expect them to look like, that's because they're not real, but rather someone making up numbers that accord with your gut.
Not So Random Walk?: I think for the past year people have cited these polls, after an initial skepticism, on the theory that they sort of looked like the other polls, only a little more skewed liberal.
Well, it turns out that maybe they looked like the other polls, only skewed a bit more liberal, because they just took the other polls and pushed the numbers a little more liberal.
I have joked around with a pollster I know that I can do just that for far cheaper than her company can -- hey, pay me $10,000, I'll just take a blend of polls from Real Clear Politics and push the numbers around slightly. I give you a discount because I'm just making this up based on other polls and it takes me only a few hours to fake it up; but, on the other hand, let's face it, it's almost as good as the real thing, right?
I mean, honestly, how far off will my fake numbers be from the real ones?
I don't know what's happened here and am reluctant to malign a company with an allegation this large (which, if true, would surely destroy the company entirely).
But they haven't responded to Kos about these problems for two weeks.
Will the MFM Retract? The media didn't use a lot of these polls, but they did use them on occasion. Like, Ezra Klein, lefty blogger hired by the Washington Post.

TPM isn't real media but the lefty media treats it like it is; they loved themselves some R2K polls, too.
Thanks to Slublog for that, again.
Kos: I Can't Wait For You To Read My Book Because It's Loaded With Great Research 2000 Polling Info: I noted that his book American Taliban had been partly based on R2K polling.
From NRO, here's Kos pimping that aspect of it.
As I've mentioned before, I'm putting the finishing touches on my new book, American Taliban, which catalogues the ways in which modern-day conservatives share the same agenda as radical Jihadists in the Islamic world. But I found myself making certain claims about Republicans that I didn't know if they could be backed up. So I thought, "why don't we ask them directly?" And so, this massive poll, by non-partisan independent pollster Research 2000 of over 2,000 self-identified Republicans, was born.The results are nothing short of startling.
It's a long poll, so the results are summarized below the fold. For a direct link to the poll's crosstabs, click here.
Ultimately, these results explain why it is impossible for elected Republicans to work with Democrats to improve our country. Their base are conspiracy mongers who don't believe Obama was born in the United States, that he is the second coming of Lenin, and that he is racist against white people. They already want to impeach him despite the glaringly obvious lack of high crimes or misdemeanors. If any Republican strays and decides to do the right thing and try to work in a bipartisan fashion, they suffer primaries and attacks. Even the Maine twins have quit cooperating out of fear of their homegrown teabaggers.
Given what their base demands, and this poll illustrates them perfectly, it's no wonder the GOP is the party of no.
"Given what their base demands, and this poll illustrates them perfectly, it's no wonder the GOP is the party of no."
Wow! It's almost like the poll knew exactly what you wanted it to say, dude!
Man did you get lucky!!!11!eleventy!!
Posted by: Ace at
10:10 AM
| Comments (146)
Post contains 1415 words, total size 9 kb.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at June 29, 2010 10:14 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: 141 Driver at June 29, 2010 10:15 AM (LEynS)
Posted by: the peanut gallery at June 29, 2010 10:15 AM (NurK6)
Posted by: Hey.Wheres.Barry at June 29, 2010 10:16 AM (gQLr2)
Research 2000 Polls
What were they?
Janeane Garofalo and Michael Moore asked each other questions.
Posted by: anti-con at June 29, 2010 10:17 AM (s8X9y)
Posted by: Shecky Obama at June 29, 2010 10:17 AM (PGdij)
Posted by: Typical Duplicious DemocRAT at June 29, 2010 10:17 AM (wXaK3)
Posted by: barry goldwater 2012 at June 29, 2010 10:18 AM (RQaPH)
If you want truth, you need to find the folks who do market research.
Posted by: Kristopher at June 29, 2010 10:18 AM (kCEOg)
Posted by: Research 2000 Poll for Daily Kos at June 29, 2010 10:19 AM (RD7QR)
speaking of polls...
did y'all see the polls about how Americans (and Loiusianans) feel about shutting down oil drilling?
Posted by: a proud ewaster at June 29, 2010 10:19 AM (uFokq)
Liberal Reality® (Some assembly required)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at June 29, 2010 10:21 AM (0q2P7)
If Republicans were anything like the actual Taliban they'd be negotiating a surrender to us and Code Pink would visit our leaders to express sympathy.
Posted by: Beagle at June 29, 2010 10:24 AM (sOtz/)
I wonder what has forced the little piece of shit into owning up to all his fabrications? Must have been busted by somebody and is trying to blunt the point.
Posted by: Dang Straights at June 29, 2010 10:24 AM (fx8sm)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at June 29, 2010 10:25 AM (i3AsK)
***Flaming Barney Frank***
Scott Brown is a big fat fucking NO for the Democrat's financial reform scheme.
Posted by: a proud ewaster at June 29, 2010 10:25 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: LincolnTf at June 29, 2010 10:25 AM (Um3jj)
If Markos can claim to be an Iraq war vet (first Gulf war), then what is a little fudging around the edges?
Don't you forget his serving in Germany makes him an expert, on everything.
Posted by: always right at June 29, 2010 10:25 AM (7GfKM)
Posted by: Kossack at June 29, 2010 10:26 AM (4Kl5M)
Posted by: Jean at June 29, 2010 10:27 AM (Ef5w3)
I guess he'll probably delete references to the Research 2000 polls while keeping all the conclusions, because, let's face it, it's not as if his beliefs were based on polling and other objective indicators anyway.
I don't get it, what's the problem here, Ace?
Posted by: Social Scientists at June 29, 2010 10:28 AM (T0NGe)
Falsified? The actual statistical case against the polls is not one about mere methodological failure, but of simply making stuff up.
Seriously, Ace, what are you getting at here?
Posted by: Social Scientists at June 29, 2010 10:29 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Upscale Community Organizing Thought Criminal at June 29, 2010 02:22 PM (IhHdM)
Now that's what I'm talking about!
Posted by: Andee Sullivan at June 29, 2010 10:29 AM (YVZlY)
Posted by: Jean at June 29, 2010 10:29 AM (l1XDC)
Janeane Garofalo and Michael Moore asked each other questions.
Posted by: anti-con at June 29, 2010 02:17 PM (s8X9y)
So Kos, who is politically an America-hating, neo-Marxist kook who in the past has cheered the deaths of Americans at the hands of terrorists (and may still do that when the opportunity arises), commissioned/shopped a fraudulent poll to show he's not a kook, but when outed blames the pollsters for giving him what he set out to get.
Got it!
Screw him! In a sane world, he would have been singing from a rope years ago and we would have already forgotten his name.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at June 29, 2010 10:30 AM (oIp16)
Posted by: Never Mind at June 29, 2010 10:30 AM (tIfeq)
I took one look at one of their polls a year ago and saw that it was so far out of a statistical norm that it had to be total fabrication.
Math is racist. And hard. But mostly racist.
Posted by: Social Scientists and Lefties (but I repeat myself) at June 29, 2010 10:30 AM (T0NGe)
Data is racist.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at June 29, 2010 10:32 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: Drew in MO at June 29, 2010 10:33 AM (bqKDG)
Falsified? The actual statistical case against the polls is not one about mere methodological failure, but of simply making stuff up.
Seriously, Ace, what are you getting at here?
Yeah, what they said.
Posted by: Michael Mann's Hockey Stick at June 29, 2010 10:33 AM (i3AsK)
Potayto, potahto
Posted by: Kossack at June 29, 2010 02:26 PM (4Kl5M)
Getting elected to the school board, blowing up the school for girls...
Telling your daughter to wear something less revealing than a micro mini, spraying acid in the faces of women who show their faces...
Hoping Christians don't renounce their faith, killing apostates who renounce their faith per sharia law in an actual court proceeding...
Posted by: Beagle at June 29, 2010 10:33 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: Old Dad at June 29, 2010 10:34 AM (LBXax)
Posted by: Al Gore at June 29, 2010 10:34 AM (IhQuA)
Posted by: GarandFan at June 29, 2010 10:35 AM (6mwMs)
Posted by: LincolnTf at June 29, 2010 10:36 AM (Um3jj)
***Flaming Barney Frank***
Scott Brown is a big fat fucking NO for the Democrat's financial reform scheme.
Posted by: a proud ewaster at June 29, 2010 02:25 PM (uFokq)
Ya think Brown will ever learn that the libs will always sneak pork spending in all bills...startin to think this guy ain't too swift on the up-take.
Posted by: dananjcon at June 29, 2010 10:36 AM (pr+up)
Posted by: AmishDude at June 29, 2010 10:37 AM (T0NGe)
How about American Taliban, False Assertions and Other Straw Dogs.
What would be the point of arguing with idiots like this? It makes you wonder why they pay for polling at all.
Posted by: ontherocks at June 29, 2010 10:37 AM (HBqDo)
Posted by: FreakyBoy at June 29, 2010 10:37 AM (uKraB)
Say you believe, like Kos, that anything and everything is fair when the end is a socialist utopia for all. Then you are shocked when some atheist, radical, utopian lies?
Funny that.
Posted by: anti-con at June 29, 2010 10:37 AM (s8X9y)
O/T: Breitbart is offering $100K for the full Journolist archive.
I betcha he gets it, something about honor among shitbags, or some such metaphor.
Posted by: Dang Straights at June 29, 2010 10:38 AM (fx8sm)
I'm pretty sure even acknowledging the existence of Independence Day is racist, sexist, and heteronormative...much, much more vile than torturing rape victims to death over a period of hours.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at June 29, 2010 10:39 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: awkward davies at June 29, 2010 10:40 AM (B4e7Q)
Posted by: Hey.Wheres.Barry at June 29, 2010 10:40 AM (gQLr2)
The funny thing now is they won't be able to bash Rasmussen (EVIL WINGNUTS!) like they used to.. hahahahaha.
Posted by: Al (haiku Al) Gore at June 29, 2010 10:40 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: maddogg at June 29, 2010 10:41 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Drew in MO at June 29, 2010 10:41 AM (bqKDG)
Posted by: Dave Wienertugger at June 29, 2010 10:41 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: Ooopsies at June 29, 2010 10:41 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: In before the troll at June 29, 2010 10:43 AM (P9+0W)
Posted by: spongeworthy at June 29, 2010 10:44 AM (rplL3)
Holy crap, really?
Go Breitbart!
You just know some of those shit-for-brains MSM'ers are up to their eyeballs in debt of some sort. Someone will bite.
Yep. He's offering complete protection for the source. Here's the problem: He's only going to pay for the whole archive and nobody in Journolist will come out looking good. The most likely leaker will be an IT guy or somebody who wasn't involved in the conversation.
Posted by: AmishDude at June 29, 2010 10:44 AM (T0NGe)
They tried to sucker punch us in the jimmy to support an argument that we are a threat to the United States.
Heads, Pikes, NOW!
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at June 29, 2010 10:45 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Jean at June 29, 2010 10:45 AM (Yp0Ox)
<s>crooks </s>
Protip: use the wee little buttons up there /\ instead of trying to use markup. Like this.
Posted by: Dang Straights at June 29, 2010 10:46 AM (fx8sm)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at June 29, 2010 10:46 AM (P9+0W)
Not any book."
Hmm...I hope someone more computer-and-research savvy than I will take the trouble to collect up all of Kos's renounced posts and compare them to the evidence and conclusions listed in his book.
Something tells me that "renounced" may ultimately come to mean "deleted".
Posted by: Jeremiad Bullfrog at June 29, 2010 10:46 AM (Y5I9o)
I don't know what's happened here and am reluctant to malign a company with an allegation this large (which, if true, would surely destroy the company entirely).
I'm sure they would do the same for you Ace. No, really!
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at June 29, 2010 10:47 AM (oIp16)
Posted by: LincolnTf at June 29, 2010 10:47 AM (Um3jj)
probably rise to the top of the NYT best-seller list
I don't know, kind of think it'll be discounted pretty quickly and end up at the Dollar General with Two Chakra Gore's missives.
Posted by: Dang Straights at June 29, 2010 10:48 AM (fx8sm)
Schadenfreude with awesome coulis.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at June 29, 2010 10:48 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: JackStraw at June 29, 2010 10:48 AM (VW9/y)
Global warming statistics found to be falsified and skewed. Please resubmit comments to all posts referencing the rape of Gaia.
Posted by: KOS Statistician at June 29, 2010 10:48 AM (gbCNS)
Posted by: maddogg at June 29, 2010 10:49 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Jean at June 29, 2010 10:49 AM (yGYDb)
Posted by: An inconvenient development at June 29, 2010 10:50 AM (8/DeP)
Very interesting.
I was going to object by saying that once an analysis suite is developed, new techniques for "hiding the decline" would emerge.
But at some point, this "arms race" will make it too costly to attempt to defraud.
Then, I was going to say that if this adds so much cost to reviewed publication, there will be much less publication.
But would less publication be a bad thing?
Posted by: MikeO at June 29, 2010 10:55 AM (lBmZl)
O/T: Breitbart is offering $100K for the full Journolist archive.
Hee Hee
Posted by: AmishDude at June 29, 2010 02:33 PM (T0NGe)
I'm still waiting for the magic loogy video.
Posted by: dananjcon at June 29, 2010 10:55 AM (pr+up)
But how will we guarantee ourselves positions and grants that way?
Posted by: Like-minded Academics Everywhere at June 29, 2010 10:56 AM (N/7an)
Posted by: maddogg at June 29, 2010 10:57 AM (OlN4e)
Man google searches show that Research 2000 is cited all over the place.
This should be big, but it won't be for some really weird, unexpected, unprecedented reason that I just can't seem to figure out.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at June 29, 2010 10:58 AM (fLHQe)
52 American Taliban, How War, Sex, Sin and Power Bind Jihadists and The Radical Right. Talk about a bungee jump of logic.
Yeah, well, being Left these days means hating (Christian and Jewish) religion. I don't really get the whole premise because their attitude on Jihadism is that it's OK in that multi-culti way. So are they saying that the Right isn't that bad and just has their own peculiar institutions and ideosyncratic behavior or are they saying Islamists are evil too?
The comparisons between Jihadists and Communists are precise. Both assert that ends justify means. Lying is permissible in the fighting of the cause. Existing institutions must be destroyed and civilization in chaos for the coming moral ruling class. Once they win the global struggle, there will be paradise on earth and the notion that there is actually something to be done after the imposition of paradise is not even considered. Furthermore, they believe in their theories and prophecies despite copious evidence to the contrary.
Furthermore, liberals cheer on their more honest and radical Communist brethren in secret in the way many Islamists cheer on the Jihadists.
Posted by: AmishDude at June 29, 2010 10:59 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Markos 'Kos' Moulitsias at June 29, 2010 10:59 AM (ERJIu)
I think it is sad that there isn't a way to better teach statistical analysis in schools so that Americans would stop falling for lies that are prettied up as statistics and polls and projections, etc.
I know that I used to fall victim to this until I started reading some books like "Predictably Irrational" and "True Enough" and "The Drunkard's Walk" among others that did a great job of explaining why and how statistics can lie.
Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at June 29, 2010 11:00 AM (RZ8pf)
Man google searches show that Research 2000 is cited all over the place.
It's Alinsky time. Pick, freeze, personalize, and polarize.
Posted by: MikeO at June 29, 2010 11:00 AM (lBmZl)
I guess Mr. Kos never heard of Mark Twain, who famously said "Give me stats or give me death." I tell you, those Romans really knew their stuff.
Posted by: Joe Biden at June 29, 2010 11:03 AM (XxAYS)
From a Feb, 2000 Kos post:
As I've mentioned before, I'm putting the finishing touches on my new book, American Taliban, which catalogues the ways in which modern-day conservatives share the same agenda as radical Jihadists in the Islamic world. But I found myself making certain claims about Republicans that I didn't know if they could be backed up. So I thought, "why don't we ask them directly?" And so, this massive poll, by non-partisan independent pollster Research 2000 of over 2,000 self-identified Republicans, was born.
The results are nothing short of startling.
Kos is trying to get out ahead of this, but his credibility is screwed. Read his post, along with his summaries of the poll results and corresponding snarky personal views and comments, and you'll see how screwed he is.
Posted by: MostlyRight at June 29, 2010 11:07 AM (0aCXd)
Posted by: Blue Hen at June 29, 2010 11:12 AM (R2fpr)
The price was already down to about $10.50, too. Man, is this going to suck for him!
Posted by: Dianna at June 29, 2010 11:14 AM (qrFCz)
"But I found myself making certain claims about Republicans that I didn't know if they could be backed up. So I thought, "why don't we ask them directly?" And so, this massive poll, by non-partisan independent pollster Research 2000 of over 2,000 self-identified Republicans, was born."
What could possibly go wrong?
Posted by: Burn the Witch at June 29, 2010 11:15 AM (fLHQe)
Furthermore, liberals cheer on their more honest and radical Communist brethren in secret in the way many Islamists cheer on the Jihadists.
Posted by: AmishDude at June 29, 2010 02:59 PM (T0NGe)
And both groups fabricate, disseminate and inhabit The Big Lie,
while viciously shouting down and attacking all inconvenient facts, and reality itself.
Posted by: ontherocks at June 29, 2010 11:16 AM (HBqDo)
Posted by: Jean at June 29, 2010 11:17 AM (T5t8M)
Posted by: Jean at June 29, 2010 11:20 AM (yGYDb)
81 I hope those grafters took Markos for a mint. Little weasel needed a good reaming. Nasty little drooling, slobbering dwarf troll should be living under a bridge somewhere, taking donkypunches for a quarter a pop.
... yeah, what he said.
LOL!
Posted by: 100 laundromats all along the east and west coasts at June 29, 2010 11:20 AM (9Sbz+)
Posted by: Zimriel at June 29, 2010 11:21 AM (9Sbz+)
I'd suggest an alternate theory: Kos hired R2000 to create falsified polls that would support his views, create "breaking news," and drive traffic to his site. Then three guys contacted him and told him that it looked pretty obvious that the polls were faked -- at which point, he had no good options.
If he blew off the three guys, they could go public with their analysis and cut him off at the knees; if he pretended to be "shocked, shocked!" at the revelation of faked polls, he'd have to contend with R2000 pushing back. He would have figured that making one enemy out of R2000 would be easier to manage than making enemies of everyone who bought the outsiders' analysis over his denials. By accusing R2000 of fraud, he gets to claim victimhood status and create a presumption of their guilt in the minds of his followers.
It'll be interesting to see if R2000 can come back and refute the accusations against it. If so, they may have grounds for a nice, fat libel suit.
Posted by: stuiec at June 29, 2010 11:23 AM (7AOgy)
Posted by: Zimriel at June 29, 2010 03:21 PM (9Sbz+)
Wrong brand of pudding?
Posted by: stuiec at June 29, 2010 11:24 AM (7AOgy)
I really don't know, but looking at the Amazon page, I'm seeing that the list price is $15.95; Amazon's selling it at $10.76. If there was an advance, it's shrinking by the hour.
My guess? He's going to have to pull it; if there was an advance, I hope like hell (he's married and has kids) he didn't spend it.
Posted by: Dianna at June 29, 2010 11:24 AM (qrFCz)
I know, but that movie sucked SO BAD
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at June 29, 2010 11:24 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: Ben at June 29, 2010 11:24 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: JackStraw at June 29, 2010 02:48 PM (VW9/y)
Hey, give me those back! I have a couple more rounds of World Cup action to predict!
Posted by: Zombie Goat at June 29, 2010 11:27 AM (7AOgy)
I wonder what has forced the little piece of shit into owning up to all his fabrications? Must have been busted by somebody and is trying to blunt the point.
Posted by: Dang Straights at June 29, 2010 02:24 PM (fx8sm)
This is simple. They had the proof of what R2K did. And they told him you can publish it yourself if you want, but we're going to make sure it gets out there, and we'll even remark on your not publishing it.
Posted by: buzzion at June 29, 2010 11:27 AM (oVQFe)
Posted by: Zimriel at June 29, 2010 03:21 PM (9Sbz+)
Wrong brand of pudding?
NEVER compromise on discount pudding.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at June 29, 2010 11:31 AM (P9+0W)
Posted by: Dianna at June 29, 2010 03:24 PM (qrFCz)
Take a good look at him (@ HA), if the rodent is married, it's to a pacific sea otter and they have pups.
Posted by: ontherocks at June 29, 2010 11:33 AM (HBqDo)
The publisher is Polipoint Press. Have fun!
Posted by: Dianna at June 29, 2010 03:15 PM (qrFCz) Whoa! That's mind-boggling when you consider that Kos called Polipoint Press "thieves" back in 2006! Here's the quote: ---begin quote---
"PoliPoint Press scored big in its second book, wooing established author Joe Conason to join its ranks. It seemed that the publishing house was headed toward respectability and great things. But alas, it was not to be.
"But Polipoint Press, however altruistic its founding may have been, fact is, it is now run by a den of thieves."
---end quote---
(BTW, terrible prose style there, Kos. You showed your "but" twice in a row.)
So a guy who calls a publishing house a "den of thieves" four years ago turns around and picks them for his publisher??? Could it be that maybe they were the only ones who made him an offer? Nah, he probably wanted to give them a chance to redeem themselves. That guy Kos, he's all heart.
Posted by: Mary in LA at June 29, 2010 11:37 AM (NGf/6)
Research 2000 had legitimate clients before they got into bed with Kos. I seem to recall them polling Missouri for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in 2008, though my memory may be faulty. They weren't stellar, but their polls were believable even if a little Democrat-leaning.
Then they got into bed with Kos. Which raises the ultimate question: were the Research 2000/Kos polls bunk because Research 2000 was engaged in fraudulent polling or because that's how Kos wanted them to be in order to shape the political narrative. Kos seems to be feigning ignorance, but I'd be shocked if he didn't know how his own polls would be weighted to bolster Democrats.
Posted by: cinyc at June 29, 2010 11:37 AM (Sz5NQ)
Argh! Formatting fail! Let's try this again:
@ 99
The publisher is Polipoint Press. Have fun!
Posted by: Dianna at June 29, 2010 03:15 PM (qrFCz)
Whoa! That's mind-boggling when you consider that Kos called Polipoint Press "thieves" back in 2006! Here's the quote:
---begin quote---
"PoliPoint Press scored big in its second book, wooing established author Joe Conason to join its ranks. It seemed that the publishing house was headed toward respectability and great things. But alas, it was not to be.
"But Polipoint Press, however altruistic its founding may have been, fact is, it is now run by a den of thieves."
---end quote---
(BTW, terrible prose style there, Kos. You showed your "but" twice in a row.)
So a guy who calls a publishing house a "den of thieves" four years ago turns around and picks them for his publisher??? Could it be that maybe they were the only ones who made him an offer? Nah, he probably wanted to give them a chance to redeem themselves. That guy Kos, he's all heart.
Posted by: Mary in LA at June 29, 2010 11:38 AM (NGf/6)
Both here and HotAir ran the stroy, neither one tells exactly which poll(s) was /were faked.
Oh, well, never mind, it's not like I really want to go to DK to find out his screaiming rants anyway.
Posted by: always right at June 29, 2010 11:39 AM (7GfKM)
I'm putting the finishing touches on my new book, American Taliban, which catalogues the ways in which modern-day conservatives share the same agenda as radical Jihadists in the Islamic world.
Well lets see, if this is true does that mean that the radical Jihadists all want to hunt themselves down and kill themselves? After all, that is one of the many agenda items on my conservative to do list. Exterminate them, like the vermin they are. Somehow I'm guessing though this isn't on most Jihadist to do lists.
I'm also guessing most of the Taliban could care less about whether or not we do something to control our borders, or get some kind of reasonable control on immigration. I'm also guessing they could care less how much I pay in taxes, or how I would prefer government to stay out of my business more and worry more about things like the ones I mentioned above than on whether or not my kids have a happy meal now and again.
Nope, I'm guessing the entire premise of this book is, well, total bullshit. So I guess it only stands to reason that the only "studies" he could find to base it on weren't worth they paper they were printed on either. Hmm.. go figure...
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at June 29, 2010 11:39 AM (e8T35)
Posted by: rockhead at June 29, 2010 11:39 AM (RykTt)
Whoa!
I also note that there is no Amazon page for Kos' other work - Taking on the System. This means I will have to look elsewhere to see who published it.
Posted by: Dianna at June 29, 2010 11:44 AM (qrFCz)
Both here and HotAir ran the stroy, neither one tells exactly which poll(s) was /were faked.
Rough guess, all of them. Those that weren't were skewed to a predesired result from the get go, and those that showed a result they didn't like were discarded.
You can influence the results of a poll greatly just on how you phrase a particular question, and I'm sorry but calling 300 people in New York or California and using those results to "extrapolate" the opinions of a much broader base of people doesn't work well, because if you call 300 people from Nebraska or Utah your going to get nearly opposite results.
So in the end, polls are pretty much shit. They tell you almost nothing, the only worth a poll has is if you compare it to a previous poll using the same methodology and examine the differences to reveal a trend. Otherwise, polls aren't really worth much.
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at June 29, 2010 11:46 AM (e8T35)
Every Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll commissioned over the past year or so is suspect. Research 2000 flat out blew a number of Democratic primary polls this cycle, almost always favoring the so-called "progressive" candidate. For example, their final Arkansas Senate runoff poll was an absolute joke, showing Halter with a 4-point lead. He lost by 4. That was the last straw for Kos, who fired Research 2000 shortly thereafter.
Posted by: cinyc at June 29, 2010 11:46 AM (Sz5NQ)
This means I will have to look elsewhere to see who published it.
Joe Stalin Publishing. Sorry, don't have the ISBN number handy.
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at June 29, 2010 11:47 AM (e8T35)
Now he's with a small press and that press was going to publish him in paper?
Ouch.
Posted by: Dianna at June 29, 2010 11:47 AM (qrFCz)
Posted by: TheQuietMan at June 29, 2010 11:51 AM (1Jaio)
I really love the "computers are down" excuse R2K is using. I wonder if they're using the same servers as the EACRU.
Memory hole singularity in 3...2...1...
Posted by: Burn the Witch at June 29, 2010 11:52 AM (fLHQe)
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at June 29, 2010 11:54 AM (IqfKc)
3 Awesome. We're all "American Taliban" now? Is there a secret handshake? Do we get t-shirts? - Jane D'oh
Yours will be a wet t-shirt, of course.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch says..... at June 29, 2010 12:20 PM (usS2T)
Posted by: Andy at June 29, 2010 12:39 PM (5Rurq)
Posted by: Mark Twain at June 29, 2010 02:38 PM (N7uu0)
Step aside Pal.
I'm the one who said it.
Posted by: P.T. Barnum at June 29, 2010 12:39 PM (Zi+FQ)
Suck it wingnuts, everybody knows she's stupid. She'll fall for anything. Ha, ha ha!
/s/
Dkos zombie who giggled and laughed about the "results" of the Research 2000 poll which proved what he already knew.
Posted by: jimmuy at June 29, 2010 12:55 PM (fOKRF)
by kos
-----------------------------------
Someone asked kos about his book,.. that was his response.. just strip the references! Uh huh.. R2K polls had almost nothing to do with the premise, right kos?
Posted by: ChiTown Jerry at June 29, 2010 01:26 PM (f9c2L)
Posted by: SGT Dan at June 29, 2010 01:29 PM (GgXZc)
Posted by: ChiTown Jerry"
Ohhh. He is sooooooo screwed.
He'll be lucky, after people get finished eviscerating him for this, to find a vanity publisher who will touch him.
P.S. I know that's optimistic; however, his "perceptions", when not supported by a poll or some other, more solid proof than ravings from the fringes of the internet, are not going to increase his credibility. He can kiss any hope of mainstream notice goodbye.
Posted by: Dianna at June 29, 2010 01:44 PM (qrFCz)
The left is dissolving right before our eyes
What a world, what a world.
"He'll be lucky, after people get finished eviscerating him for this, to find a vanity publisher who will touch him."
I suggest IUniverse.
Posted by: Devora at June 29, 2010 02:04 PM (156N3)
Er, that's a radical thought? He kind of makes that pretty plain.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at June 29, 2010 02:08 PM (PQY7w)
Posted by: CM at June 29, 2010 02:18 PM (70pqs)
i'm taking bets on R2000 claiming Kos asked them to falsify the numbers.
I understand "willful ignorance," but is he really THAT stupid that he wouldn't know something was fishy? (wait, don't answer that, i guess it's plausible that he is).
Posted by: LikeATimeBomb at June 29, 2010 02:36 PM (9KO34)
Posted by: Anonymous dude who was there at June 29, 2010 02:56 PM (YhZfg)
Wait.. when did this not become true?
Posted by: Xoxotl at June 29, 2010 03:30 PM (xAkdI)
Posted by: Topper Harley at June 29, 2010 07:18 PM (RtyEP)
Posted by: Topper Harley at June 29, 2010 07:19 PM (RtyEP)
Posted by: doudoune moncler at November 27, 2010 06:06 AM (eWiB6)
Posted by: True religion jeans outlet at May 20, 2011 06:15 PM (Erxyj)
Posted by: mac cosmetics at July 08, 2011 11:33 PM (G4MwB)
Posted by: Philadelphia Phillies Jersey at July 09, 2011 09:58 PM (dwhLX)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.1979 seconds, 274 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: 141 Driver at June 29, 2010 10:11 AM (LEynS)