PINAR DEL RIO


support babalú


Your donations help fund
our continued operation

do you babalú?

what they’re saying


bestlatinosmall.jpg

quotes.gif

activism


ozt_bilingual


buclbanner

recommended reading





babalú features





recent comments


  • Gallardo: And just like Benghazi (including the blaming of a stupid YouTube video), the IRS’s targeting of Obama’s opponents,...

  • asombra: It’s painful to see this kind of ambivalence, not to say equivocation, from a Cuban this late in the game. Not a good sign.

  • asombra: If the Netherlands was prepared to disgrace itself with a royal visit to Maduro, it was hardly likely to play hardball here.

  • asombra: Still, this venomous old fart could do a Chico Escuela and go “the revolution been berry, berry good to me.”

  • asombra: “Hero of the Republic of Cuba,” is he? You don’t say. Let’s ignore the “hero” bit, which is...

search babalu

babalú archives

frequent topics


elsewhere on the net



realclearworld

FIU’s Cuba Poll: Manipulations, Omissions and Contradictions

Via Capitol Hill Cubans:

FIU's Cuba Poll: Manipulations, Omissions and Contradictions

When a poll is more concerned about meeting its sponsor's expectations, than about being thorough and scientific, then manipulations, omissions and contradictions abound.

That's exactly what has happened in the 2014 edition of FIU's Cuba poll, sponsored by the for-profit "progressive" lobbying firm, Trimpa Group, which works to lift the embargo towards Cuba.

In this morning's The Miami Herald, FIU Professor Guillermo Grenier, who led the poll, admitted to manipulating the numbers.

"Grenier acknowledged his numbers reflect only those respondents who said they favored or opposed the embargo and did not include 'don’t know/no answer' replies. Including those numbers in the tally would change the percentages to 45-41 (from the reported 52-48) against the embargo — short of a majority and with 12 percent replying 'don’t know/no answer.'"

That casts even further doubt on all of the poll's numbers.

Why would an academic institution do this? Such manipulations are highly questionable.

What you’re telling me is unusual. Really unique. Very, very extremely rare," David Hill, a nationally known pollster with Hill Research Consultants in Washington D.C., said about FIU’s method.

The Miami Herald had also first noted that:

"Although only 62 percent of all the Miami-Dade Cubans surveyed by FIU said they were U.S. citizens, 90 percent also reported that they were registered to vote."

Remember -- only U.S. citizens can vote.

Could FIU have been so sloppy?

We can't say for sure, as they purposely don't disclose all of their data.

Continue reading HERE.

2 comments to FIU’s Cuba Poll: Manipulations, Omissions and Contradictions

  • asombra

    I've no doubt Trimpa was only interested in poll results favorable to its known cause, and that even if the poll had been properly done, unfavorable results would not have been made public. This is entirely predictable and even understandable, but FIU's role in this is HIGHLY suspect, not to mention disreputable--especially given FIU's track record.

  • Springlily

    Actually, not all Cuban-Americans live in Dade Cty. anymore, we are spread out into: Broward, Palm Beach, New Jersey, etc. A more truthful and valid poll would have been to take polls of CA outside of Dade, as well as inside Dade

You must be logged in to post a comment.