The poll was conducted by Senate Opportunity Fund, a not-for-profit 501(c)(4) organization, to test public opinion regarding congressional bill H.R.1, called The Lower Energy Costs Act. A national sample of 800 likely voters were contacted by phone during March 21 to 23, 2023, with questions regarding a number of public policy issues. Responses are shown by self-identified political leanings, and by participants located in battleground states. Note that the final question showed about 80% approval by all cohorts.
Science Matters 
The problem is, the low energy act wouldn’t actually accomplish any of those four things, and it asks those polled to presuppose that it would. So of course they’re going to approve of it. If it works as promised, of course it sounds wonderful. What if it only did one out of four of those things? Would those pllled still approve just as strongly? I doubt it. That’s what you call a push pull. The structure of it, the way the question is framed, matters. It affects the outcome of the poll, and is often deliberately not accounted for by pollsters, they just want you to look at the outcome of the poll, not how they got there… whether they are motivated by profit or (as with this nonprofit) ideology, it’s deceptive, it’s marketing disguised as “polling”. My two cents. ✌🐸
LikeLike
Yes, it’s a push poll, at long last one that pushes in the right direction.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
LikeLike
Scott Adams has observed that in all polls there are around 25% of those polled who will be against a majority no matter how logical the question. Like ‘Do we live on a spherical planet? ‘They will vote ‘no’. Note here around 25 %…
LikeLike
At least in this poll, the reason for 25% opposing energy abundance is made clear in the second slide: It’s climate change, don’t you know.
LikeLike