Since about the beginning of President Obama's tenure, the Gallup poll has generally been one of the least positive polls for the Democratic party. This has prompted outrage and pressure from the left--even from presidential advisor David Axelrod.
Until, that is, this week. President Obama enjoyed a bounce in his Gallup job approval number after the Democratic National Convention, as was to be expected, but there was a twist: it did not disappear. And while Gallup on average had found Obama's job approval around 47 percent with adults through most of 2012, for the last five weeks it has been regularly above 50 percent. Yesterday, it stood at 53 percent, a number we have not really seen since 2009.
Unusual. So, what's going on? Alan Abramowitz of Huffington Post and The Democratic Strategist noticed that Gallup has increased its share of nonwhites from 27 percent the week of the convention to 32 percent last week, a nearly 20 percent boost. In other words, Gallup seemed to have tweaked its methodology with just weeks to go until Election Day to reflect the criticism that has come from the left.
I should be shocked, but I'm not, not given the history of this corrupt and somewhat fascistic administration. As someone who does models all the time, you can't just change the model midway, because your historical trends will all be gobbledygook, what you would need to do is apply that change in methodology for the history of your model to see how everything would look. Otherwise, you've just manipulated your model to get the answer that you (or your higher ups) want and that seems to be the case here. So tell me again why Jack Welch was crazy for wondering if the Chicago thugs had pressured BLS to change the numbers to their liking? If they could do this to a completely private organization like Gallup, why couldn't they do the same thing with people who actually work for them?