"From the wording of that Newsweek poll question:
“"U.S. Senate rules allow 41 senators to mount a filibuster – refusing to end debate and agree to vote – to block judicial nominees. In the past, this tactic has been used by both Democrats and Republicans to prevent certain judicial nominees from being confirmed. Senate Republican leaders – whose party is now in the majority – want to take away this tactic by changing the rules to require only 51 votes, instead of 60, to break a filibuster. Would you approve or disapprove of changing Senate rules to take away the filibuster and allow all of George W. Bush’s judicial nominees to get voted on by the Senate?”
I wonder what the numbers would have been had the question been asked thusly:
“U.S. Senate rules allow 41 senators to mount a filibuster – refusing to end debate and agree to vote – to block votes. In the past, this tactic has never been used by neither Democrats nor Republicans to prevent certain judicial nominees from being seated on a court. Senate Republican leaders – whose party is now in the majority – want to take away this tactic by changing the rules to prevent filibusters of judicial nominations and ensure them an up or down vote. Would you approve or disapprove of changing Senate rules to take away the filibuster and allow all of George W. Bush’s judicial nominees to get voted on by the Senate?”
I suspect the numbers would be markedly different.
This is why a poll should avoid making spin-worthy statements in the phrasing of the question. A much more sound phrasing than either the one used or the one suggested above would have been:
“Some of President Bush’s judicial nominees are being filibustered by the Democrats. Should all of George W. Bush’s judicial nominees to get up or down votes by the Senate?”
Gerry Daly




Bookmarks