Those who follow Cuba and US-Cuba affairs are going to see an AP article about a recent Ipsos poll they conducted on the subject. Since I work with surveys in day job, I have a lot of confidence in these types of studies when conducted properly, meaning that they adhere to certain scientific and statistical standard. And most serious research firms (like Ipsos) conduct their surveys properly. But then there is the issue of interpretation and reporting. Put simply, there’s a lot of ways to slice the data to help you tell the story you want to tell.
For example, the linked AP piece asserts:
Despite the public’s interest in diplomacy with Cuba, 48 percent of those polled said the United States should continue its trade embargo against Cuba.
Now I was particularly interested in this since opponents of the embargo always claim that the majority of Americans want to see the embargo ended, and this article seemed to confirm that. Now I usually dismiss that kind of argument anyway because our government’s policies are not dependent on opinion polls. The current popularity of our president and the war in Iraq are testament to that. People who make this argument against the embargo are trying to imply that pro-embargo Cuban-Americans have some sort of undue influence over the political process in this country and are subverting the will of the people.
But there’s also the issue of how vested someone is in an issue. It’s easy to answer a question, on any subject matter, in an online or telephone survey when someone asks it. Who doesn’t want to share their opinion? But it’s different when you are walking into a voting booth and deciding on a candidate or an issue. You tend to be much more reflective. At least I do. And we know that the candidates that we vote for don’t have the same exact views as us. We are buying a package, of which we like a lot of the contents and may dislike some.
But I was pleasanty surprised by this new poll and the fact that such a high percentage of the respondents supported the embargo (48% is more than the percentage of Americans that voted for Bill Clinton in 1992). The story gets better though.
Whenever possible I try to look at the executive summary of the survey or the raw data because many times I find that the story that is being sold might not be the whole story. Fortunately in the case of this latest poll about Cuba I was able to find some details about the individual questions and the the data is very revealing.
1a. Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Cuban President Fidel Castro, or haven’t you heard enough yet about Fidel Castro to have an opinion of him? Is that very (favorable/unfavorable) or somewhat (favorable/unfavorable)?
Very favorable: 2%
Somewhat favorable: 4%
Somewhat unfavorable:22%
Very unfavorable: 42%
Haven’t heard enough yet: 27%
Not sure: 3%
The surprising thing here is the 30% that didn’t have a concrete opinion. This number tends to skew the other percentages for the other answers down. So a more accurate interpretation would be to calculate and report, by percentage, the opinions of the those who had opinions (excluding those who didn’t have an opinion).
In this case the 6% who had a favorable opinion (2% very favorable plus 4% somewhat favorable) represents 8.6% of those with an opinion while those with an unfavorable opinion represent 91.4% of those with an opinion.
2. Do you think the United States should or should not establish diplomatic relations with Cuba?
Should: 62%
Should not: 30%
Not sure: 8%
In this case those without an opinion are significantly fewer. 67.4% of those with in opinion on the matter said the US should establish diplomatic relations with Cuba with 32.6% say the US should not.
3a. Do you think the United States should continue the trade embargo with Cuba or should the United States end the trade embargo and permit normal trade with Cuba?
Continue the trade embargo: 48%
End the trade embargo: 40%
Not sure: 12%
Aha! While the article correctly showed the 48% in favor of the embargo it left the impression that this was a slight minority. But the fact is that those that want to end the embargo are fewer in number than those that want to continue it. In fact if we only look at those with an opinion, a solid majority of 54.5 want to continue the embargo vs. 45.5.
So next time they tell you that the majority of Americans want to end the embargo you can tell them that’s hogwash.
NOTE: As is usual with AP stories, this one about the poll is being spread like wildfire around various international news outlets. Each outlet writes its own headline. Will any of them write a headline like “Americans favor embargo with Cuba”? No, of course not silly because the story is that American “Citizens want regular relations with Cuba“. So you see the subtle way bias creeps into news reports. A more objective headline would be “Americans favor regular diplomatic but not commercial relations with Cuba.” But since Herbert Matthews penned his first piece about fidel castro in NYT more than 50 years ago we Cubans have to expect very little obejectivity in the MSM when it comes to Cuba.
In addition – what is the margin of error? It’s probably more than two percent (I seem to recall it’s usually 3-4%), meaning that 50% or more of all Americans may actually favor continuing the alleged embargo.
well… assuming that the 4% MOE is right, it would mean between 44% and 52%.
On Henry’s post, though… this is interesting stuff. I’ll be looking out for stories on this poll, but it would be cool if you could update at the end of the day with links to some of the stories that skew this data. I’m sure they’ll come up.
“There are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics.” Lewis Carroll (If I remember correctly)
The margin of error is 3%. So yes 51% of Americans could be in favor of the embargo but conceivably 45% could be.
But that’s not my point. If we did have a direct democracy (the kind that these embargo opponents seem to be advocating based on their arguments in favor of polls) then we wouldn’t count people who had no opinion. It happens all the time.
When you step into the election booth during a general election there may races that you don’t have an opinion on. So you skip that race (the equivalent of telling a pollster “I don’t know”). When the race is tabulated they don’t count these “undervotes” when they calculate the percentages for the various candidates, they only count the votes that were cast for each of the choices and calculate a percentage based on the total for all the candidates.
The margin of error is 3%. So yes 51% of Americans could be in favor of the embargo but conceivably 45% could be.
But that’s not my point. If we did have a direct democracy (the kind that these embargo opponents seem to be advocating based on their arguments in favor of polls) then we wouldn’t count people who had no opinion. It happens all the time.
When you step into the election booth during a general election there may races that you don’t have an opinion on. So you skip that race (the equivalent of telling a pollster “I don’t know”). When the race is tabulated they don’t count these “undervotes” when they calculate the percentages for the various candidates, they only count the votes that were cast for each of the choices and calculate a percentage based on the total for all the candidates.
Mr. Gomez,
You yourself say “there is the issue of interpretation”. Let’s analyze YOUR interpretation: it is based on ONE poll. Are you being biased? Maybe. Have you made your “interpretations” based from OTHER polls?
To be objective in science means that an interpretation is made based on the agreements analyzing several sources. Let’s take a look at the other polls.
At PollingReport.Com, we have this particular poll and many other polls on Cuba going back to 1998. You will see some that support the embargo and some that oppose it.
The 2000 FIU Cuba Poll found that while about 60% percent of Cuban Americans in Miami-Dade favored the US embargo (about 40% opposed), the INVERSE was seen for non-Cuban Miami-Dade residents, and a national poll.
The Gallup Organization, since 1999, has found that the majority of Americans oppose the embargo:
1999-51% in favor, 42% opposed
2000-48% in favor, 42% opposed
2002-50% in favor, 38% opposed
In 2003, Zogby International found “[m]ore than half (56%) of America’s likely voters now favor re-opening trade with Cuba, while 12% oppose the idea”
Zogby polls, currently, have been providing very accurate numbers. They predicted very accurately the presidential win by Chavez last year, while others were swayed.
Still, let us remember that EACH poll should be taken lightly, and that our interpretations should be based on a collection of polls, NOT ONE.
In 1998, a “poll released by the American Interprise Institute think tank said that 64 percent of Americans favor keeping the U.S. embargo against Cuba, while only 27 percent favored lifting it.”
In 2002, Fabrizio, McLaughlin and Associates found that “[w]hen given background on the Cuban embargo and the Bush administration’s position on it, 56%
supported the embargo, 27% said the embargo should be lifted regardless of the Castro regime’s behavior”.
These are ALL important polls to consider, not ONE.
In a study published in 1999, investigating US public opinion about Cuba, Daniel W. Fisk for the Cuba in Transition project and the Association for the Study of the Cuban Economy, found that “[i]f the issue is framed around Castro, then the public response tends to be negative”.
Also, Fisk discovered, reviewing decades of polls, that there is a general stability in US opinion on Cuba: the majority have an unfavorable view of Fidel Castro, and the majority FAVOR re-establishing diplomatic relations with the island.
It is important to consider the particular wording of the poll question too. How did the American Enterprise Institute or Fabrizio frame their question?
Gallup provides their wording:
“Suppose that on election day this year you could vote on key issues as well as candidates. Please tell me whether you would vote for or against each one of the following propositions. Would you vote… For or against ending the U.S. trade embargo with Cuba?”
These polls say many things. I believe that if Americans were shown the arguments for and against the embargo, then we would really see some revelations. But, the debate on the embargo or on Cuba is marginalized. There are only few placed to go to make an educated opinion, especially in Miami.
[The initial Gallup percentages apply to the wording provided later in my post]
He who sups with pollsters and statisticians should have a long spoon.
MW,
Your analysis is faulty because an older study by definitition gauged opinions at a different point in time. People’s opinions vary over time and in response to changes in the environment. That’s why so many polls are fielded over the course of a presidential campaign.
It’s safe to say that Cuba has been in the news a lot more in the last 6 months than it usually is. It’s also true that more people are reporting the TRUTH about Cuba.
You speculate that if Americans were exposed to the arguments that they would by and large be against the embargo. Well that’s merely your opion and happens to be the exact opposite of mine. I think if people realized the true brutality of the regime they would think that the economic sanctions were not only justified but probably not enough.
Oh and kiss my ass.
MW,
Your analysis is faulty because an older study by definitition gauged opinions at a different point in time. People’s opinions vary over time and in response to changes in the environment. That’s why so many polls are fielded over the course of a presidential campaign.
It’s safe to say that Cuba has been in the news a lot more in the last 6 months than it usually is. It’s also true that more people are reporting the TRUTH about Cuba.
You speculate that if Americans were exposed to the arguments that they would by and large be against the embargo. Well that’s merely your opion and happens to be the exact opposite of mine. I think if people realized the true brutality of the regime they would think that the economic sanctions were not only justified but probably not enough.
Oh and kiss my ass.
And besides the margins you are talking about aren’t monumental. As I said in the post Bill Clinton got elected with 41% of the popular vote in 1992. Two of the three gallup polls you cited support the embargo at a higher rate than that.
Oh and kiss my ass.
And besides the margins you are talking about aren’t monumental. As I said in the post Bill Clinton got elected with 41% of the popular vote in 1992. Two of the three gallup polls you cited support the embargo at a higher rate than that.
Oh and kiss my ass.
Mambi Watch,
Please don’t mind me jumping in…
You said, Still, let us remember that EACH poll should be taken lightly, and that our interpretations should be based on a collection of polls, NOT ONE.
You’re right. I went to pollingreport.com and averaged the statistics of the 7 polls relating to the embargo question. The average was 45% in support of ending the embargo and 46% in favor of keeping the embargo. It’s a virtual split. I don’t understand what you’re trying to point out, other than by implying that Miami Cubans are the only ones who are adamant about keeping the embargo in place. The stats show otherwise, and at best it’s evenly divided nationwide.
This other comment you made was interesting:
In 1998, a “poll released by the American Interprise Institute think tank said that 64 percent of Americans favor keeping the U.S. embargo against Cuba, while only 27 percent favored lifting it. In 2002, Fabrizio, McLaughlin and Associates found that “[w]hen given background on the Cuban embargo and the Bush administration’s position on it, 56% supported the embargo, 27% said the embargo should be lifted regardless of the Castro regime’s behavior.
When familiarized with the situation, the pro-embargo numbers dropped from 64 to 56 percent, a solid majority, while the anti-embargo numbers remained steady at 27%. Your implication that once people know the situation about the embargo that they would tend to be against it is therefore flawed, as is your notion that in Miami one cannot make an educated opinion on the embargo.
Yeah that Fabrizio, McLaughlin data doesn’t support MW’s point at all. When the issue was framed a solid majority supported the embargo.
I guess it shows the level of intellect we are dealing with here.
Yeah that Fabrizio, McLaughlin data doesn’t support MW’s point at all. When the issue was framed a solid majority supported the embargo.
I guess it shows the level of intellect we are dealing with here.
Mambi,
Your parting shot that “there are only a few places to go to make an educated opinion [about the so called embargo], especially in Miami” adds nothing to your argument. It merely shows your bias.
But, putting that aside for a moment, where in Miami do you suggest we go to get “educated” opinions about the embargo? The nest of Cuban spies and Boboliriano Youts at FIU wouldn’t be one of the places you have in mind? Would it?
The question is, what argument did Fabrizio, McLaughlin and Associates use before the embargo question was asked? The same applies to the American Enterprise Institute, who is well known to be connected to the US government.
That’s obviously important given the nature of the debate.
Henry, the analysis of the embargo over time is appropriate. The embargo is not a flavor of the week, it is a long-standing policy whose effectiveness is measured over time.
The FIU Cuba polls have shown over the years that even Cuban Americans believe the embargo has failed (43%), but still support it. When the questions become detailed, many people, Cuban-Americans in Miami, and Americans in general, OPPOSE the specific measures of the US embargo.
Robert, you made a good observation. MAYBE Americans are split on the embargo. But, notice that you based that only on pollingreport.com. There are many other polls too.
If you go to the Cuba Policy Foundation website, they say:
“Americans want to lift the embargo by a margin of 52-to-32 percent, according to a Cuba Policy Foundation poll in 2001 conducted by a nonpartisan, independent polling firm. By a 63-to-33 percent margin, Americans believe lifting the embargo would be the most effective way to bring democracy to Cuba. And by a 63-to-24 percent margin, Americans want the U.S. to start a formal dialogue with Cuba now.”
That’s another slice of the pie. Let’s also speculate on how they worded their question, but lets consider it.
Another point is about how well Americans are informed about Cuba or sanctions. As I have posted elsewhere, the most comprehensive study on sanctions was done by the Institute for International Economics. They concluded that about 20% of the time sanctions are effective. Even worse numbers for unilateral sanctions.
Even professor Antonio Jorge, writing a study for UM’s Institute of Cuban and Cuban American Studies, found that if we go by the definition of what sanctions are intended to do, then the US embargo has failed. That’s the conclusion of virtually ALL foreign policy analysts that I have seen.
If Americans were provided with this information I think it would contribute greatly. The recent coverage of events hardly touch upon the embargo, and neither point Americans to the opposition of many foreign policy organizations.
Notice too Mr. Gomez, that the Ipsos poll also asked if Americans thought Democracy would follow the death of Fidel. 54% thought not likely. Thus, they believe that the behavior of Cuba will not be changed by the embargo. Makes you wonder then why they favor it.
I believe it depends on the question. If the questions includes or mention Fidel (as the ipsos poll did), or his repression, then people will most likely favor the embargo. If the question is neutral, like Gallup’s, people will most likely oppose the embargo.
And, I think if people were aware of the overwhelming studies on the embargo, as a foreign policy failure, then they would vote in full support of ending the embargo.
In 2000, the FIU poll found that Miami-Dade residents believed that embargo was a failure, FAR MORE that the national percentages, indicating that Miami-Dade residents are more informed about the failures of the embargo.
We should consider all these findings.
You present same tired old arguments again and again. The embargo doesn’t work, blah, blah, blah. Well the Cuban government believes it works. They know it’s keeping hard currency out of their coffers. That’s why they (and you) are so adamant about removing it.
You can use the same argument about how the issue is framed to discuss whether the embargo works or not.
The embargo works because we are not rewarding Cuba’s bad behavior.
The embargo works because it protects American investors form uncompensated expropriations in which Cuba has unapologetically engaged in the past.
The embargo will be removed when Cuba makes fundamental changes. What the Fk don’t you get about that?
You present same tired old arguments again and again. The embargo doesn’t work, blah, blah, blah. Well the Cuban government believes it works. They know it’s keeping hard currency out of their coffers. That’s why they (and you) are so adamant about removing it.
You can use the same argument about how the issue is framed to discuss whether the embargo works or not.
The embargo works because we are not rewarding Cuba’s bad behavior.
The embargo works because it protects American investors form uncompensated expropriations in which Cuba has unapologetically engaged in the past.
The embargo will be removed when Cuba makes fundamental changes. What the Fk don’t you get about that?
Little Gator, I pose the same question to you: where in Miami do YOU suggest we go to get “educated” opinions about the embargo?
I’ll give my answer. You can start with the local library. Do research from all the books on sanctions or US embargo-related studies that the library can provide, and you will find MANY that consider the US embargo as a failed policy.
Go visit local experts on the matter, professors at UM, Barry, FIU or Miami-Dade. Find a local libertarian organization and ask them about freedom of trade and the question of “profits vs principles”. You’ll find that the majority of libertarians oppose the embargo. Ask them why?
Go find human rights organizations, and ask them their positions on sanctions in general, then ask about the US embargo.
Ask the Free Burma Coalition, or other grassroots organizations, why they oppose sanctions, and prefer corporate boycotts, investor and consumer activism.
Its easy. How bout you?
We have argued the effective (or lack thereof) of the embargo on this blog for a long time. That is, if you think there’s actually a true embargo.
The point of this post is to point out how statistics can be used and misused. It’s also pointed out how many Americans, about half, consider the embargo as the right thing to do, even if the execution of said embargo has failed in some aspects.
MW, you’re confusing me. You initially stated that in Miami one cannot make an educated opinion on the embargo, then present statistics (anti-embargo of course) to claim that Miamians know about the embargo’s failures. Which one is it?
Mr. Gomez,
The unilateral sanctions have failed because they do not meet the traditional definition of sanctions policy: to change the behavior of an unfavorable client (or former client) nation into a favorable one.
The definition YOU use does not apply to the traditional model, but rather to the current US administration model: no US funds to Cuba.
It has nothing to do with human rights, political prisoners, of anything. It is a line in the sand, whose meaning has changed over time.
It only “works” once a new meaning is given for its operation. The definitions you pose were not the same ones used ten years ago, or ten years before that.
Timothy Naftali, one of the leading historians on Cuba and US history, has said that the US embargo is a “cold war relic” and that it is a “strategic mistake”.
Why would he say that? Why doesn’t he think it works?
Robert, the case of becoming “educated” (I prefer informed) is a matter of what sources you are relying on, or fair exposure to opposing arguments.
Miami-Dade county residents, I believe, know well that the embargo has failed. Yet, there is an important variable to consider here in Miami: persistent arguments that we must support the US embargo nonetheless.
These arguments are based on a “moral” position. Its a good argument. It has allowed the embargo to stay with us for the past half-century.
But, there is another argument that agrees with the embargo’s failure, BUT says that we need a different approach. This argument is marginalized in Miami. Its marginalized in the sense that embargo-supporters dominate the public forums by a higher ratio in South Florida.
This can be shown if one examines the discussion of sanctions policy in our local media, and public forums.
When’s the last time you heard a member of the CATO Institute address the US embargo. How about the Council on Foreign Relations?
Or a review of such an argument in the paper, instead of it coming from politicians?
Is it just me, or has this comment thread strayed very, very far away from the original point that Henry was making?
I don’t think he was using this poll to illustrate the goodness or badness of the embargo on Cuba. I don’t even think he was trying to show that most people support or reject it. In fact, I haven’t asked Henry, but I don’t think he gives a shit what any of the people polled think.
The point he was making was that even though the poll demonstrates that most of the people who have an opinion opine that we should not do business with Cuba, reports will do one of two things:
1. Only mention that most people think we should restore “diplomatic relations” without even mentioning the fact that the numbers were very different in the embargo question and the fact that the poll makes a distinction between talking and doing business.
2. Lie in any of a number of much more blatant ways about the poll’s findings.
Case in point: The AP conducted this poll. In the AP’s OWN STORY ABOUT THIS POLL (you can find it, among other places, at the Sun Sentinel web site), the embargo question is mentioned ZERO TIMES and the headline reads as follows in the Sun Sentinel:
“Majority favors ties to Cuba, poll finds”
The AP didn’t mention the embargo question because when if they had, someone might have decided to includ it in a headline. They left no room for truth here.
Henry, since you are the expert (I’m just saying that because you say you work with this sort of statistic on a regular basis), I think you are in a soecial position to write some letters to editors of papers that published them and ask them to explain why they didn’t do some fact checking like you did. Or did they see how flawed and misleading this story was and then not give a shit?
If you do that, I’d be very interested to ready what they have to say.
Could we just not call it an “embargo”? That way, the “hypocrisy” of the efficacy of sanctions, by the traditional definitions, is negated. And we can all forget about polls and the forms of the questions and everything else…
But since we are on polls, why don’t we pose this one:
Assume a government that practiced oppression of its people, suppressing their right to criticize the government; that suppressed their right to move freely within that country’s borders; that suppressed access to its natural resources (including food, fuel, beaches, etc.) in favor of foreigners with hard currency; that pays its “employees” less than 10% of the sums for which it contracts them out to foreign firms (or governments); that has…. And, finally (AND THIS IS KEY) that has no good or service, technology, natural resource (besides its slave labor), that is not already produced domestically or abroad somewhere else; whose value as a market for U.S. goods and service depends upon economic and other price supports from the U.S.; AND that has defaulted on every credit extended to it by the international banking system since 19___.”
Question: Would you support the U.S. government extending credit, foreign aid, or any other use of U.S. taxpayer funds in support of that government?
1. Yes
2. No
I can live with the answer, whatever it is, and for whatever country it is applied to, for that matter.