Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Ramesh Ponnuru complains about yesterday’s Rasmussen poll on stem cells:

The other day I commented on the poor quality of polling on stem-cell research. I’m afraid that the Rasmussen poll, cited in today’s web briefing, is no exception. Here’s the question they use: “President Obama has decided to lift the ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Do you agree or disagree with President Obama’s decision?”

Rasmussen also reports that 40 percent of those surveyed say they have followed the debate “very closely.” No estimate is given for the percentage of those respondents who are lying.

I wonder what the problem with the question is supposed to be?  In the past, conservatives have complained when pundits and pollsters talked about “stem cells” rather than “embryonic stem cells,” but the Rasmussen question is clear on that point.  Is the problem that “lift the ban” isn’t specific enough, since the Bush ban wasn’t absolute?  Beats me.  The Rasmussen question is very, very simple and neutral and avoids all the issues in Ponnuru’s previous post on the subject, so I’m not sure what the problem is.

But there always seems to be something.  Conservatives seem to be endlessly convinced that the American public would be opposed to embryonic stem cell research if only it was made graphically clear to them that this means embryos are destroyed in the process.  But there’s just not much evidence of that.  Most of us know that embryos get destroyed, and most of us don’t think that’s a big problem.

On the other hand, I sympathize with his closing paragraph.  40% is actually not too unreasonable a figure, but it’s remarkable the number of polls that ask very recondite questions and get something like a 90% response rate.  “Do you think American banks are undercapitalized and should be nationalized” will get, say, 50% in favor and 40% opposed, despite the fact that it’s a dead certainty that 80% of Americans have no idea what “undercapitalized” means and only a vague notion of what nationalization is.  But the results are taken seriously anyway.

THIS IS BIG

A generous board member just chipped in a $50,000 digital matching gift, and we need your help to make the most of it. Any donation you make online from now until September 30 will be matched dollar-for-dollar.

In an all-important election season, we’re reaching millions of Americans with fearless, kickass, truth-telling reporting.

With your support going twice as far, we can lead the way these next 60 days in showing the corporate media how to cover the unique danger that Trump represents and not make the same mistakes they did in 2016 and 2020.

Please help with a gift of any amount if you can right now. And know that it will be doubled—and that we’ll be so grateful.

payment methods

THIS IS BIG

A generous board member just chipped in a $50,000 digital matching gift, and we need your help to make the most of it. Any donation you make online from now until September 30 will be matched dollar-for-dollar.

In an all-important election season, we’re reaching millions of Americans with fearless, kickass, truth-telling reporting.

With your support going twice as far, we can lead the way these next 60 days in showing the corporate media how to cover the unique danger that Trump represents and not make the same mistakes they did in 2016 and 2020.

Please help with a gift of any amount if you can right now. And know that it will be doubled—and that we’ll be so grateful.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate