POLL: Marco Rubio jumps to the head of GOP 2016 pack

 

Read >>

Encuestas y la banalización de la barbarie

Cuba Encuentro

Julio M. Shiling

El Cuban Research Institute (CRI), o Instituto de Investigación Cubano, un departamento dentro de la Facultad de Asuntos Internacionales y Públicos de la Universidad Internacional de la Florida (FIU), acaba de publicar una encuesta que pretende explicar cambios de actitudes y pensamientos percibidos dentro de la comunidad cubana en Miami. Esto encaja muy oportunamente con la misiva enviada recientemente al presidente Barack Obama por 46 personalidades, entre ellas cabilderos, comerciantes, oficiales retirados de las fuerzas armadas y funcionarios del gobierno, pidiendo implícitamente el levantamiento del embargo con el pretexto de ayudar una sociedad civil imaginaria e inexistente.

Esta “encuesta” es, para efectos prácticos, la retaguardia estratégica dentro de esta ofensiva apaciguadora, que busca destruir las barreras que impide el traslado de fondos de supervivencia a la dictadura castrocomunista.

Esta posición, no es nada nuevo para el CRI. Años antes de que el titulado “intercambio cultural” se convirtiera en frente oficial de penetración al exilio cubano. El CRI aprovechó y explotó todas las brechas legales para brindar un podio a los académicos de la dictadura aquí en Miami y en La Habana, ellos participaron “colegiadamente” en instituciones académicas censuradas, escuchando y charlando de todo lo que la dictadura le diera la mismísima gana de tolerar. Esto, por seguro, no incluyó nada expresado en público de política contestataria, de cambios sistémicos o mucho menos, de la libertad o la democracia.

Este nuevo sondeo es simplista y engañoso. Dada la seriedad del asunto y de todo lo que está en juego, este titulado “estudio” se convierte en algo vergonzoso y lamentable. El CRI ha sostenido, a través de los años, la clara preferencia por la cesación del embargo estadounidense y por la normalización incondicional de las relaciones entre Estados Unidos y Cuba comunista.

El proyecto en cuestión fue pagado por el Trimpa Group y el Open Society Foundation. Ambas organizaciones vienen cargadas con una trayectoria probada de apoyar la eliminación de las sanciones contra el despotismo comunista cubano. La investigación fue conducida principalmente por profesores amenos a la idea de una aproximación al castrocomunismo. Cuando se le añade el hecho de que históricamente, los bolsillos principales que han costeado estos proyectos del CRI han sido instituciones como el Brookings Institute, el Christopher Reynolds Foundation y el Ford Foundation (entre otros), todos comprometidos con el principio de no presionar al poder dictatorial en La Habana, no debe de constituir una sorpresa el resultado que dicho sondeo ha arrojado.

El Cuba Study Group y su vástago, CubaNow, buscando legitimar sus acciones a favor del rescata del comunismo cubano, les urgía un sondeo como éste. A la Cámara de Comercio de EEUU también le hacía falta.

Sin duda, la clase política con frecuencia tiende a impresionarse por estudios cuasi-científicos cuando lleva un emblema universitario. Lo fundamental de toda esta hazaña con adorno académico es reconocer este proyecto como un elemento más dentro de una campaña integradora que busca validar la reconexión diplomática entre EEUU y Cuba, a pesar de que la isla caribeña sigue portando el absolutismo como modelo político.

En Cuba se ha torturado y se sigue torturando; se ha encarcelado y se sigue encarcelando; se ha asesinado y se sigue asesinando. En Cuba no hay derecho a la libre expresión contestataria, ni se puede escoger entre candidatos políticos con visiones que compiten, ni hay tribunales autónomos. La barbarie, se ha cometido y se comete, en nombre y para el beneficio de un régimen tiránico. No le debe de importar a nadie que quiera para Cuba nada menos que una democracia con plena libertad, que la dictadura esté modificando su coordinación económica para así prolongar su poderío.

El problema en Cuba es político, ético y moral. Lo económico es un factor secundario y el enfocar en eso exclusivamente, sería banalizar la perversión que se ha ejercido desde el poder político en los últimos 55 años en Cuba. Cualquiera que esté proponiendo levantar las sanciones contra la dictadura cubana, sin condiciones o concesiones políticas y unilateralmente, no le debe de ofender mucho regímenes liberticidas. Dejemos a un lado sondeos que sólo rinden buhonería ideológica. ¡Concentrémonos en el problema panorámico: Cuba libre!

FIU's Cuba Poll: Manipulations, Omissions and Contradictions

capitolhillcubans

FIU Professor Guillermo Grenier

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.

But let's take a closer look.

Here is the tab for the question: Are you a U.S. Citizen?

Overall, 62% answered YES, while 32% answered NO.

According to the tab's breakdown, 14% of those not registered to vote were U.S. citizens, while 86% were not and 1% did not respond. For a total of 101%!

But then, they have a whole separate tab asking the question: Are you registered to vote?

Overall, 90% answered YES, while 10% answered NO.

Needless to say, those numbers don't mesh.

(It also shows how heavily FIU weighed the poll with non-U.S. citizens and non-voters.)

Similar contradictions are found policy-wise. Here's our favorite:

The poll asks, "do you think people living in the US should be allowed to invest in new non-governmental small businesses in Cuba?"

Overall, 60% said NO, while 40% said YES.

Yet, the poll claims these same Cuban-Americans support lifting the embargo by a 52-48% margin (or 45-41% margin).

In other words, Cuban-Americans purportedly support doing businesses with Castro's monopolies, but not with "cuentapropistas"?

Here's another one:

The poll asks, "the US Department of State [or US Government] includes Cuba on a list of four countries which the US government considers to be State Sponsors of Terrorism. This designation penalizes persons and organizations engaging in certain activities with Cuba and the other countries on the list. The other countries on the list are Iran, Sudan and Syria. Do you believe that Cuba should be kept on that list of penalized countries that support terrorism, or be taken off the list?"

Overall, 63% said YES, while 37% said NO.

Yet, the poll claims these same Cuban-Americans support lifting the embargo by a 52-48% margin (or 45-41% margin).

In other words, Cuban-Americans purportedly want to sanction the Castro regime for supporting terrorism, but do business with its monopolies?

That's rubbish.

This sloppy poll was designed for a sensationalist headline.

FIU should be ashamed of itself.

Una encuesta descartable de FIU

Diario de Cuba

Mauricio Claver-Carone

Durante más de dos décadas, la Universidad Internacional de la Florida (FIU, por sus siglas en inglés) ha realizado encuestas de actitudes cubano-americanas respecto a la política de Estados Unidos.

Y por más de dos décadas, estas encuestas poco detalladas nunca han llegado a traducirse en realidad política.

Entre otras causas porque las encuestas de FIU no son un verdadero ejercicio académico y sus resultados pueden predecirse por la naturaleza de sus patrocinadores.

Las anteriores encuestas de FIU sobre Cuba fueron patrocinadas por Brookings Institution, Cuba Study Group, la Fundación Christopher Reynolds y el mecenas internacional favorito de Mariela Castro, la Fundación Ford.

Todos estos grupos cabildean fuertemente a favor del levantamiento incondicional de las sanciones impuestas al régimen castrista.

La encuesta de este año, que fue publicada este martes, nos llega por cortesía del Grupo Trimpa y  la Open Society Foundation de Georges Soros.

Y es de todos conocidos quién es George Soros y cuáles son sus opiniones políticas.

Para aquellos no familiarizados con el Grupo Trimpa, se trata, según sus propias declaraciones, de una "consultoría progresista, una consejería para la inversión filantrópica y política, y una firma de relaciones del Gobierno".

Recientemente, el Grupo Trimpa fue contratado para dirigir la campaña de cabildeo de una ramificación de Cuba Study Group, llamada #CubaNow, que colocó anuncios en el metro de Washington, D.C. que abogaban por el levantamiento de las sanciones contra el régimen de Cuba.

En otras palabras, FIU ha pasado de tener encuestas patrocinadas por organizaciones ideológicas sin fines de lucro a tener encuestas patrocinadas por cabilderos ideológicos con fines de lucro.

Esto es, sin dudas, una mayor recaída. Así que será mejor llamar a las cosas por su nombre: esta no es una encuesta de FIU, sino una encuesta del Grupo Trimpa.

Y, por supuesto, dado el espíritu de las campañas de cabildeo del Grupo Trimpa, esta encuesta procura el apoyo cubanoamericano para el levantamiento del embargo por un margen de 52%-48%.

Además, procura el apoyo cubanoamericano a los viajes de estadounidenses a Cuba por un irrisorio margen de 69%-31%.

Ted Trimpa, presidente del grupo, es también líder del Tectonic Theatre Project, que está organizando un viaje "pueblo-pueblo" a Cuba, así que resultaba importante para su encuesta mostrar un fuerte apoyo a esa clase de despilfarro.

Compárense estos resultados con los del sondeo de la semana pasada, auspiciado por The Miami Herald —un observador más neutral— y llevado a cabo por los encuestadores democráticos Bendixen & Amandi, de ningún modo incondicionales de las sanciones a Cuba.

De acuerdo con la encuesta de The Miami Herald, los cubanosamericanos se oponen a levantar la totalidad del embargo por un margen de 56%-36%.

Mientras que se oponen al levantamiento de las restricciones de viaje por un margen de 51%-42%.

Las enormes diferencias entre la encuesta del Grupo Trimpa y la encuesta de The Miami Herald están muy lejos de los márgenes de error en estos casos.

Esas diferencias serían probablemente aún mayores si alguna de esas encuestas se hubiera ocupado de hacer consultas más detalladas, dirigidas  a los sucesos actuales en la Isla. Por ejemplo, el abrumador apoyo de las sanciones por parte de los activistas cubanos por la democracia, el incremento de las violaciones de derechos humanos, el encarcelamiento de un rehén estadounidense, el contrabando de armas con Corea del Norte, el refugio otorgado a terroristas y la subversión de la democracia en Venezuela. 

Hasta la encuesta de The Atlantic Council incluyó una consulta en relación con las violaciones de los derechos humanos por parte del régimen castrista. Y cuando se hizo referencia en esa encuesta a las circunstancias en que viven los cubanos, el presunto apoyo para normalizar las relaciones o relacionarse directamente con el régimen de Castro cayó dramáticamente, del 56% a nivel nacional y 63% en la Florida, hasta un 43%.

Visto todo lo anterior, si FIU desea conservar al menos una apariencia de integridad académica debería ser más escrupulosa a la hora de afrontar el contenido de sus encuestas y los patrocinadores que presionan a través de ellas.

Porque, tal y como ha aparecido, esta última encuesta de FIU resulta un mal chiste.

Venezuela: 64% apoya salida constitucional del gobierno de Maduro

lapatilla

Les presentamos el más reciente sondeo sobre El Clima País  de la empresa Datos correspondiente a febrero de 2014 realizado en 9 de las principales capitales de Venezuela por medio de 800 entrevistas para un nivel de confianza del 95%. El sondeo se realizó entre el 28 de febrero y el 2 de marzo.

Ante la pregunta ”Según su opinión, ¿cómo van las cosas en general en el país hoy en día?” apenas el 9,8% expresó que Muy bien o bien. El 17,4% la calificó de Mas o menos bien. El 72% tiene una opinión negativa, creen que las cosas van desde Mas o menos mal hasta Muy mal. Es decir, dos tercios cree que el país no va bien.

El desabastecimiento / la escasez y la inseguridad son los principales problemas que afectan al venezolano. A la pregunta “Por favor, ¿podría decirme cuál es el problema que MÁS le afecta a usted personalmente?” el 30,5% expresó que el desabastecimiento y la escasez mientras que el 29,1 afirmó que la Inseguridad personal y la delincuencia. El 13,4% indicó que su principal problema es el alto costo de la vida.

Sobre la gestión de Nicolás Maduro se elaboró la pregunta “Cómo calificaría la labor que el actual gobierno de Nicolás Maduro está haciendo por usted personalmente?. ¿Usted diría que es……?” el 23,6% la evaluó positivamente. El 21,3% la evaluaron neutra mientras que el 50,4% la calificó negativamente.

Ante “¿Qué tan de acuerdo o en desacuerdo está usted con que…?” se evaluó la expresión “Hay que salir de este gobierno lo antes posible, de forma constitucional” el 22% se mostró en desacuerdo, el 10% neutral mientras que el 64% expresó estar de acuerdo.

Lea a continuación el trabajo completo de la empresa Datos para febrero de 2014

Datos Presentación Clima País_Feb 2014 >>

Push-Polls and Cuba

capitolhillcubans

By Elliott Abrams of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR):

Push Polls and Cuba

You can’t always get what you want, the Rolling Stones once told us. But you can, actually, in a push poll: a poll designed to elicit a certain result and then advertised as achieving that result.

This past week the Atlantic Council released a poll it had sponsored about U.S. relations with Cuba. Here’s one key aspect of the poll: When respondents were told “Cuba continues to have a dismal human rights record. The Castro regime represses virtually all forms of political dissent through detentions, arbitrary arrests, beatings, travel restrictions, forced exile, and sentencing dissidents in closed trials,” we find that 33 percent this was a “very important” reason to keep the current U.S. policy and 17 percent said it’s “somewhat important,” for a total of 50 percent. And 43 percent the human rights abuses make it somewhat important or very important to change the policy.

Respondents were also read this statement: “Cuban-Americans support current US policy because it puts economic pressure on the Castro regime, while providing assistance to Cuban citizens. Travel and financial restrictions have already been lifted for Cuban-Americans to help their families; meanwhile we should stay tough on the Castro regime.” The poll found that 61 percent of Americans generally, 67 percent of Floridians, and 61 percent of Hispanics thought this a good reason to oppose normalization with Cuba.

So, given that the statement about human rights abuses is true, and given that 67 percent number, how about a headline saying “Majority of Americans favors keeping the embargo on Cuba.” Of course, it would have been easy to get even tougher pro-embargo results. Suppose a question had asked “Should we normalize relations when they have an American citizen named Alan Gross in prison for more than three years now, and he’s 64 and in poor health and has lost a hundred pounds in prison, and his only ‘crime’ was helping the tiny Jewish community there get internet access?” Or how about this question: “Should we normalize relations when Cuba continues to harbor an American terrorist named Joanne Chesimard, who is on the FBI’s Most Wanted list and shot and killed a New Jersey State Trooper?” We can pretty well guess what the numbers would have been in response.

The Atlantic Council poll does ask about the fact that Cuba is on the State Department’s terrorism list. It asked this: “Currently, the US State Department designates four countries in the world as state-sponsors of terrorism: Cuba, Iran, Syria, and Sudan. The State Department defines state sponsors of terrorism as countries that have repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism, and places sanctions on these nations that restrict trade, travel, and foreign assistance. In your opinion, does Cuba pose the same threat as these other countries—Sudan, Syria, and Iran—and thus belong on the list?” This biased query found that 40 percent of all Americans and 43 percent of Hispanics said yes, it does deserve to be on that list; 52 percent of all Americans and 50 percent of Hispanics said no.  Think what the results would have been had the “question” added that sentence about Joanne Chesimard!

But the Atlantic Council has a strong position against the embargo on Cuba, so it headlines the poll this way: “Atlantic Council Poll: Americans Want New Relations With Cuba.” And its web site surrounds the poll result with blogs, statements by officials, videos, and articles favoring that result. The handsome booklet the Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center published last week is entitled “Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy Change.”

Well, nice try. People who want to change the policy will find the poll useful. People who oppose change, as I do, will find the whole effort unpersuasive. And I hope that people who are still thinking about the policy, and are undecided, will find it unpersuasive too. The poll found what those who commissioned it wanted it to find. Members of Congress who must vote on Cuba policy, and administration officials who must make decisions, are too sophisticated to be influenced by this kind of advocacy masquerading as opinion research. They know too much about Alan Gross and Joanne Chesimard.

Evidence of a Cuba Push-Poll

capitolhillcubans

Last week, we noted how the The Atlantic Council's Adrienne Arsht Center was preparing a push-poll on Cuba policy.

There's no clearer evidence that this is simply a political hatchet-job than
the fact that U.S. Senators Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
have just published (on Monday) an op-ed in The Miami Herald citing figures from the Arsht poll.

(Comic relief: In the op-ed, the Senators from Arizona and Vermont lecture us about Florida politics.)

The Flake-Leahy op-ed must have been cued for days.

Yet, the Arsht poll is not scheduled for release until tomorrow (Tuesday)!

As we all know, Senators Flake and Leahy are Congress' leading advocates of unconditionally embracing Cuba's Castro dictatorship.

And obviously, The Arsht Center has colluded in this political hatchet-job in conjunction with Flake and Leahy.

Sloppy and shameless.

What You Won't Read About Arsht's Cuba Push-Poll

capitolhillcubans

The anticipated push-poll by The Atlantic Council's Adrienne Arsht Center will be released this morning.

Here's what you probably won't read in most news stories about its results.

First, the entire release is biased and agenda-driven.  No dissenting voices have been invited to participate. As we noted earlier, U.S. Senators Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Congress' biggest supporters of unconditionally engaging the Castro regime, worked hand-in-hand with the pollsters and organizers. To the point that Flake-Leahy wrote a Miami Herald oped -- citing figures from the poll -- that was published the day before its official release.

It is not a poll of voters. It's a general population poll, in which they could have polled Honey-Boo-Boo and it would have been reflected in the results.

The push-poll's "big news" is that 56% of Americans purportedly support "normalizing relations or engaging directly" with Castro. Note how broad that is. Moreover, they don't ask about the "embargo" specifically -- for they know there's no support in Congress for lifting the embargo. This push-poll is aimed at the Obama Administration. Yet, based on the results, more Americans support repealing Obamacare than engaging with Castro. And we know the Obamacare numbers don't influence the President.

Since the 56% isn't particularly moving, they ridiculously claim Floridians favor engagement by an even greater number -- 63%. Of course, there's no sampling structure or breakdown of how they polled Florida. We'd note that neither of the pollsters have any experience in Florida politics, let alone the Senators from Arizona and Vermont. Anyone that has actually won a race in the State of Florida, including the Obama Administration, knows that is silliness.

Interestingly enough, even in a push-poll, when an explanation of the human rights abuses by the Castro regime preceded the question, the number of Americans that support engagement went down from 56% to 43%. Even their Florida numbers went down from 63% to 43%. This wide swing shows that those polled knew little about Cuba, particularly those in Florida. Odd right? Not really, that's exactly who the pollsters were targeting. It's laughable to think Floridians are less aware of human rights abuses in Cuba than non-Floridians. It also shows why Castro's U.S. advocates are constantly trying to "white-wash" the regime's abuses.

*Note that the question that most accurately reflects the human rights and democratic conditions codified in U.S. law -- as prerequisites for lifting sanctions -- is the one that throws off their "engagement" narrative.

The poll purports that 64% of Miami-Dade County supports "normalization" with Castro. Once again, no breakdown of who was polled in Miami-Dade County. Yet, the fact remains every single Cuban-American elected official -- in any position -- in Miami-Dade County supports the embargo. So the facts speak for themselves.

Of course, with the push-poll aimed at the Obama Administration, they asked about the "state-sponsors of terrorism" list and were surprised that it was originally split. So they claim that after more "information" (literally telling respondents "Cuba poses no threat"), the numbers of those wanting Cuba off the list went up to 61%. This was the neatest jedi trick since Obi Wan Kenobi at the Star Wars Cantina. Needless to say, they didn't "inform" about arms-trafficking to North Korea, the harboring of U.S. Most Wanted Terrorists, the support provided to Treasury-designated terrorist groups, money laundering concerns, subverting democracy in the Western Hemisphere, etc.

Sloppy and shameless.

Poll: More Than Two Thirds of Voters Say 'Drill Here, Drill Now'

breitbart

By AWR Hawkins 

A Harris Interactive poll conducted for the American Petroleum Institute shows that 67 percent of registered voters support more offshore drilling for oil and 77 percent support more domestic production, period. 

Moreover, out of 1,002 respondents, 89 percent said that expanded on and offshore oil and gas natural gas production "could help strengthen America's energy security" while 87 percent believe increased production "could lower energy costs for consumers."

For these reasons, nearly 90 percent of Americans said more oil and natural gas production would help our economy. And 84 percent said more oil production production could "benefit federal and state budgets" through "lease payments" and "royalty fees." 

But while the American people support expanded oil and natural gas production by such large majorities, President Obama maintains a posture opposed to it. According to the American Thinker, by May 2013 production on federal lands had declined 40 percent under Obama.

Moreover, the Canadian Free Press (CFP) says Obama's production-crushing policies in the Gulf of Mexico, following the 2010 BP oil spill, so hindered oil and gas exploration that 2010 levels of production will not be seen again until "at least" the end of 2014.

All the while 92 percent of voters believe increased oil and natural gas production could do one thing Americans have not seen Obama do--create more jobs in the U.S.

O'Reilly: Are you happy with your country?

O'Reilly: The folks turning against President Obama

NBC/WSJ poll: Obama approval sinks to new low

By Mark Murray, Senior Political Editor, NBC News

President Barack Obama’s approval rating has declined to an all-time low as public frustration with

Washington and pessimism about the nation’s direction continue to grow, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

Just 42 percent approve of the president’s job performance, which is down five points from earlier this month. By comparison, 51 percent disapprove of his job in office -- tied for his all-time high.

The NBC/WSJ pollsters argue that no single reason explains Obama’s lower poll standing. Rather, they attribute it to the accumulation of setbacks since the summer -- allegations of spying by the National Security Agency, the debate over Syria’s chemical weapons, the government shutdown and now intense scrutiny over the problems associated with the health care law’s federal website and its overall implementation.

Read the full poll here (.pdf)
Keep reading on NBC/WSJ poll >>

Reportaje sobre el matrimonio en Cuba

PalenqueVision

Encuesta en Cuba sobre reformas económicas: Jodidos pero optimistas

jodidos pero optimistas, el sindrome del neokaxtrizmo funcionando.
--------------------------- 
ElNuevoHerald

Juan O. Tamayo

Los cubanos parecen cada vez más optimistas sobre las reformas económicas del gobernante Raúl Castro, mientras que grandes mayorías favorecen la elección directa de su presidente y dicen que el gobierno es represivo, según un sondeo hecho público el jueves.
La encuesta realizada por el Instituto Republicano Internacional también mostró que el número de cubanos por su propia cuenta sin licencia del gobierno creció un 9 por ciento en comparación con la encuesta del IRI del año pasado, mientras que el número de los que tienen licencias creció sólo un 3 por ciento.
El sondeo realizado entre el 20 de enero y el 20 de febrero fue la octava encuesta sobre Cuba desde el año 2007 por el IRI, una organización de Washington sin fines de lucro que aboga por la libertad en todo el mundo. Al igual que su contraparte, el Instituto Nacional Demócrata para Asuntos Internacionales, es oficialmente no partidista.
Al preguntarles cómo creen que a su familia le iría económicamente en los próximos 12 meses, el 45 por ciento de los cubanos entrevistados dijo que mejorará, y 35 dijo que se quedaría igual. Respondiendo a una pregunta similar en el 2012, 27 por ciento esperaba mejoras y el 58 por ciento no esperaba ningún cambio.
Sin embargo, el 64 por ciento no pudo citar ninguna reforma que los hubiera beneficiado personalmente, y la mayoría reportó pocas mejoras en los 12 meses previos: el quinto año del gobierno y las reformas de Castro.
En la encuesta de este año, el 66 por ciento dijo que la situación económica de su familia sigue siendo la misma con respecto al año pasado y 23 por ciento dijo que mejoró. En el 2012, el 58 por ciento dijo que se había mantenido igual y el 23 por ciento dijo que mejoró.
Funcionarios del IRI dijeron que el optimismo para los próximos 12 meses podría haber sido provocado por la flexibilización del gobierno de las restricciones a los viajes al extranjero en enero, sin lugar a dudas la más popular y visible de las reformas de Castro.
En el frente político, el 69 por ciento de los entrevistados dijo “no” a una pregunta sobre si ha hecho más fácil en los últimos dos años hablar en contra del gobierno, sin sufrir algún tipo de represión oficial.
El veinte por ciento no respondió a una pregunta sobre si el gobierno a veces reprime a su propio pueblo, pero el 53 por ciento dijo que el gobierno cubano es represivo y el 64 por ciento dijo estar a favor de la votación directa para presidente.
La encuesta también sugiere que los recortes de Castro en las nóminas del gobierno están impulsando más a los cubanos hacia trabajo por la izquierda que hacia los alrededor de 170 tipos de actividades económicas por cuenta propia que el gobierno permite, como los de panadero y barbero.
El número de personas que reportaron este año que tenían licencia para trabajar por cuenta propia creció un 3 por ciento desde la encuesta del 2012, mientras que el número que informaron que estaban trabajando por su cuenta pero sin licencia aumentó un 9 por ciento.
Sólo el 4 por ciento de los encuestados dijeron que tenían acceso a Internet y correo electrónico, y el número de cubanos que dijeron que tenían acceso a teléfonos móviles fue del 19 por ciento: igual que en la encuesta del 2012.
Quejas sobre la calidad de vida tienden a venir más de los cubanos negro, las mujeres y el 80 por ciento de los encuestados que dijeron que no reciben remesas del extranjero. Los que reciben remesas tienden a ser más positivo acerca de las reformas de Castro.
Es más, aquellos que reportaron que no se habían beneficiado directamente de las reformas de Castro tendían a ser más de la parte oriental y central de la isla de La Habana y otras partes del oeste de Cuba, según la encuesta del IRI.
El IRI dijo que sus encuestadores entrevistaron a 688 cubanos mayores de 18 años en 14 provincias. Funcionarios del IRI dicen que trabajan “discretamente” en Cuba porque el gobierno comunista prohíbe las encuestas independientes, pero no dieron más detalles.

Read more here: http://www.elnuevoherald.com/2013/05/23/1482634/encuesta-revela-optimismo-cuba.html#storylink=cpy
Full report [PDF] >>

Different attitude greeting Obama's upcoming inaugural

By NBC's Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenic Montanaro, and Brooke Brower

*** A different attitude to greet Obama’s second inauguration: Presidential inaugurations are typically a time of celebration and renewal, and that was certainly true of President Obama’s first inaugural four years ago. But as Obama is set to begin his second term on Monday, he confronts an American public that remains in a funk. According to our new NBC/WSJ poll, just 35% of adults think the nation is headed in the right direction (down six points from last month); more than seven in 10 are dissatisfied with the current state of the economy; and 60% believe the coming year will be a time to hold back and save because of harder times ahead. Much of this sour mood is explainable. After all, the country just witnessed a bitter fiscal-cliff fight right after the election, as well as a national tragedy in Newtown, CT. Also, a second inaugural is always different than the first. But it’s also true this isn’t Jan. 2009. “If 2009 was all about hope,” NBC/WSJ co-pollster Peter Hart (D) says, “2013 is about the ability to cope.”

Jewel Samad / AFP - Getty Images

Two workers adjust flags on the Capitol as preparations continue for the second inauguration of President Barack Obama in Washington, DC, on Jan. 17, 2013.

*** But Obama remains popular: Despite this sour attitude, the American public continues to like Obama. He finds himself with a job-approval rating at 52% among all adults, and majorities support his general direction on gun control and immigration reform. As for views on his qualities as president, Obama gets the best marks for being easygoing and likeable (61% give him high marks here), having the ability to handle a crisis (55%), being compassionate (53%), being knowledgeable and experienced (53%) and being a good commander-in-chief (51%). His lowest marks come on achieving his goals (44%), working effectively with Congress (29%) and changing business as usual in Washington (28%). Also, the public doesn’t have a lot of confidence in his economic stewardship: Just 36% say they are “very confident” or “fairly confident” in his ability to promote a strong and growing economy. The White House will look at these numbers and say, “Phew, at least expectations are lower this time than they were four years ago.” And that may very well be true. But the fact remains: The country wants the economy turned around; it’s the No. 1 message they want to send the president. And so far, they don’t believe he’s done it, and they are worried he can’t do it even as they hope he does.

*** The same isn’t true of the GOP, Congress: Yet just like in last year’s presidential election, Obama and the Democrats are benefitting from one important thing: They public has MUCH LESS confidence in the opposition party. According to the poll, 49% hold a negative view of the Republican Party -- its highest negative rating in the survey since 2008. (In fact, it’s been higher than 49% just once in the entire history of the NBC/WSJ poll.) Only 26% have a positive view of the GOP. By comparison, the Democratic Party has a net positive rating, with 44% holding a favorable view of the party and 38% holding an unfavorable one. And the conservative Tea Party movement, which took off in Obama’s first year as president, also finds its popularity at an all-time low in the poll, with an upside-down fav/unfav of 23%/47%. What’s more, just 14 percent of adults approve of Congress’ job (which is near the all-time low in the poll), while 81 percent disapprove (which is close to its all-time high). By the way, most of the recent negative movement for the GOP is among core Republicans. The GOP was already viewed very negatively by Democrats and indies; it couldn’t really get much worse with those two groups. So this latest shift for the GOP is due to the fact that a growing number of core Republicans were not happy with how the party handled the fiscal cliff.

*** On gun control: Also in the poll, 56% believe that the laws covering the sale of firearms should be stricter, compared with a combined 42 percent who want them less strict or kept the same. That’s the most support on this particular question since 2006, but it’s less than the 60%-70% who supported stricter gun laws during the 1990s, including when Congress passed an assault-weapons ban in 1994. But here’s the bigger challenge for the White House and Democrats: There’s a big divide between gun owners and non-gun owners. Per the poll, 55% of Republicans say they (or someone in their household) own a gun, compared with just 27% of Democrats who say that and 48% of independents. In addition, 61% of rural respondents have a gun in their households, versus 42% of suburban respondents and only 29% of urban dwellers. And nearly half of whites own guns (47%), while just 24% of African Americans, 24% of Latinos, and 34% of those ages 18-34. Bottom line: The members of the Obama coalition DON’T own guns, while those who are probably represented by a GOP member Congress DO own guns. If one were to map gun ownership in American, you’d see most of those folks living in the red congressional districts. And what does that mean? It’s unlikely the Republican House will budge on these issues because THEIR constituents will have a different view.

*** On immigration reform: Attention Marco Rubio: Finally, our poll shows that -- for the first time -- a majority of Americans (52%) favor allowing illegal immigrants who hold jobs to apply for legal status in this country. That’s the good news if you’re a supporter of comprehensive immigration reform. But here’s the bad news: There’s a big difference by party. Democrats favor this by a 70%-28% margin. But independents oppose it 54%-43%, and Republicans oppose it 65%-33%. These numbers explain why Marco Rubio has spent so much time this week trying to sell his immigration plan to conservative media. To truly speed up the politics of immigration, it’s going to take a conservative like Rubio to persuade other conservatives that this is the path forward.

*** On Organizing for Action: And First Read confirms the news that Obama's political organization “is forming an outside, nonprofit group to support the president's legislative agenda. The unprecedented move gives Obama a way to promote his agenda outside the confines of the White House and seeks to harness the energy from his re-election campaign into support for legislation. Democratic officials say the group, Organizing for Action, will be announced Friday. The nonprofit will work on key legislative battles, train future leaders and local issues around the country.” Organizing for Action will be set up as a 501c4 group, but we are told the group WILL have full disclosure of its donors (either monthly or quarterly); setting it up a 501c4 (as opposed  to a Super PAC) makes it easier to legally coordinate with the White House. But the Obama folks are conceding a big point here: They can’t do the things they want to do (like the organizing, etc.) inside the Democratic Party. If this version of OFA is successful, we’re also told then don’t be surprised if this becomes Obama’s personal vehicle post-presidency, a la Bill Clinton’s Clinton Global Initiative.

Why Romney May Win [and the pollsters]

FrontPageMag.com
Daniel Flynn

Most polls tell us about the opinions of voters. A few tell us about the opinions of pollsters.

The most recent Investor’s Business Daily/TIPP poll, at least as of this writing, shows Barack Obama with a 45-44 lead over Mitt Romney. The internals of the poll show that the pollster favors Democrats, too. A full 38 percent of those included in the survey identified as Democrats, while just 31 percent identified as Republicans. Though the researchers may not have been deliberately aiming for such an overwhelming Democratic advantage, the demographic assumptions they made predetermined which party would enjoy favoritism. This seven-point differential matches the Democrat’s party-identification advantage for 2008, when African Americans turned out in record numbers and young people opted for the Democratic candidate over the Republican by a record margin. Historic elections by definition don’t happen every four years. Counting on maximum-level support, and among the groups traditionally among those least reliable when it comes to voting, seems wishful thinking. But the Investor’s Business Daily/TIPP count, like the Obama campaign itself, supposes another Democrat “perfect storm” in 2012.

The pro-Obama bias runs deeper within the various polls of contested battleground states. In 2008, Democrats constituted 29 percent of the New Hampshire electorate according to exit polls. The latest University of New Hampshire poll, which shows the president comfortably ahead by nine points in the state, assumes a 46 percent turnout among Democrats in the Granite State in 2012. In Florida, the CBS/New York Times/Quinnipiac poll, which claims a one-point advantage for Obama over Romney, assumes that the Democrat party-identification advantage will increase from 2008’s +3 to +7 in 2012. In Colorado, the partisan PPP poll depicts a 51-47 Obama advantage. The survey anticipates that Democratic voters in Colorado will rise from 30 percent of the electorate to 37 percent. These polls seem more geared toward influencing voter opinion than reflecting it.

But even the most slanted polls aren’t totally useless. The percentage of independents that they survey differs. The attitude of the independents they survey remains consistent. In poll after poll, independent voters support Mitt Romney over Barack Obama. The Republican leads Obama 51-39 among independents in both the National Public Radio and CBS/New York Times/Quinnipiac polls. In the Investor’s Business Daily/TIPP poll, Romney’s lead among independents is 46-38. No Democrat has won the presidency during the last half century without also winning independent voters. The irony of the bitter red-blue divide is that the few “purple” voters immune to the polarization increasingly decide elections.

If this race is about, as Obama’s leading campaign surrogate once believed, “the economy, stupid,” then the contest favors Romney. In the NBC/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll, which featured a sampling bias in favor of the Democrats, respondents nevertheless favored Romney on the economy. When asked, “Who do you think is better prepared to create jobs and improve the economy over the next four years?” the polled chose Romney by 45-41. Other polls have also shown a Romney advantage on the question of the economy.

Ironically, the people pollsters have been polling are not the people most likely to show up at polling places. When CBS/New York Times/Quinnipiac most recently queried likely voters about their enthusiasm for their chosen candidate, 68 percent of Romney supporters said they were “very” enthusiastic to just 59 percent for Obama voters. In NPR’s poll, 76 percent of Republicans rated the election a “10” in terms of importance versus just 66 percent of Democrats. While the enthusiasm edge may seem marginal, so is the percentage differential between the candidates in most national polls.

So what catalyzed independents to abandon the president and catalyzed Republicans to so enthusiastically oppose him?

A political obituary, should the president lose on Tuesday, might note that he couldn’t run the country like he could run for president. He mistook the gas for the brake pedal when voters rebuked him first in Massachusetts and then nationwide in 2010. He promised change and delivered more of the same.

A candidate running on change always risks disappointment catching up to him.

Daily tracking poll shows presidential race deadlocked

Washington Post/ Jon Cohen and Scott Clement

President Obama and Mitt Romney head into the final debate still deadlocked among likely voters nationally: 49 percent side with the Democratic president, 48 percent with the Republican challenger, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

But Romney now rivals Obama when it comes to dealing with international affairs and terrorism, leveling the playing field heading into Monday’s debate on foreign policy. Romney also runs about evenly with the president as voters’ pick who is the better commander-in-chief.

International affairs generally, and handling terrorism specifically, were once Obama strong points against the former Massachusetts governor, but voters now divide about evenly between the two. At the end of September, Obama held an 11 percentage point lead over Romney as the one voters trusted on terrorism — and killing Osama bin Laden is a mainstay on the Obama campaign trail. But now, 47 percent side with Obama on the issue, 46 percent with Romney.

The new poll also shows far greater parity in a basic test of popularity: the number of voters with favorable impressions of Romney is on par with the number with positive views of Obama (50 to 52 percent). However, the president maintains the edge in “strongly favorable” ratings.

The challenger has improved on several fronts — and potentially evened the score in key swing states — the race for the White House remains nearly deadlocked among voters nationally.

Obama still has strong rejoinders. He has campaign high 11-point edge over Romney when it comes to handling taxes, a 12-point lead on Medicare and a 13-point advantage on “women’s issues.” The president has a seven-point edge when it comes to understanding the economic problems people are having, and a nine-point advantage on honesty. He is still widely viewed as doing more to help the middle class than the wealthy, while voters anticipate Romney would tip the balance the other way.

The poll also shows Obama as the perceived winner of second debate — but by a far slimmer margin than Romney’s thumping in round one. Another tilt toward the president is that — unlike in 2010 — as many voters now say the economy is getting better as say it’s still deteriorating.

The see-sawing battle for voters now has Obama with the edge on the enthusiasm front: 64 percent of Obama’s backers say they are “very enthusiastic” about his candidacy, higher than the 58 percent of Romney’s who are that engaged behind his run. Still, Obama’s popularity trails 2008 levels: At this time four years ago, 63 percent of likely voters held favorable impressions of then-senator Obama; it’s 52 percent now.

A persistent gender gap underlies the topline numbers, and is now as large as it’s been in Post-ABC national polling. Female voters break 56 to 42 percent for the president; men go 54 to 42 percent for Romney. White voters side with Romney by a 15-point margin (56 to 41 percent), while non-whites break heavily for the president, 78 to 19 percent. Among African Americans, the margin is overwhelming: 94 to 2 percent.

In the seven states designated as “toss-ups” by The Washington Post plus Ohio, it’s Romney 52 percent to Obama’s 46. That six-point margin is not a statistically significant edge given the sample size, but a reversal from where things have been, paralleling shifts in state polling over the past few weeks. The overall national horse-race is the same as it was in early September because Obama now hits 60 percent of the vote in solidly or leaning Democratic states. Romney clears 57 percent in solidly or leaning Republican states — about where he has been.

Cuba: el 89% cree que el Gobierno deterioró al país

este importante estudio -como otros anteriores- no explicita los criterios metodologicos empleados en la selección de los entrevistados, que permita evaluar el nivel de representatividad de la muestra tomada, lo que lo hace facilmente vulnerable a los cuestionamientos y descalificaciones.

-----------------------------------------

En conclusión, los ciudadanos opinan que:

1        No se realizan los cambios que requiere el país.

2        Debe permitirse la pequeña y mediana empresa de producción industrial y agrícola.

3        Que es necesario para el trabajo por cuenta propia:

• Bajar los impuestos.
• Crear mercados mayoristas.
• Dar licencias a los profesionales

4        El gobierno debe ratificar los Pactos de las Naciones Unidas.

5        Que es su derecho la libertad de:

• Información.
• Expresión.
• Asociación.

6        Los que invierten, en un negocio por cuenta propia, tienen que recibir las facilidades y beneficios que les corresponden.

Eugenio Leal

Coordinador Nacional del Grupo Veritas

El informe completo de la encuesta esta disponible en: http://vocescubanas.com/veritas/ultima-encuesta-del-grupo-veritas/

NeoKaxtrizmo, Encuestas y Kubishes [Preliminares]

Los cinco mayores problemas de Cuba:

1. Salarios Bajos/ Alto Coste de Vida: 51%
2. Doble Moneda: 16%
3. Alimentacion: 13%
4. Falta de/ Deterioro de Vivienda: 1%
5. Falta de Libertades/ Sistema Politico Equivocado: 1%

¿Cree Usted que el gobierno actual logrará resolver ese problema en los próximos años?: No [70%].

4 de las 5 principales preocupaciones de los cubanos residentes en la isla se asocian a condiciones de vida, mientras solo el 1% de los 787 encuestados cuestionan el sistema politico. Incongruente???; no, aberrante es que sin embargo el 70% considera que el regimen no resolvera los problemas. 

--------------------------------------

The International Republican Institute [IRI] 

Washington, DC – IRI ha publicado hoy los resultados de la última encuesta (PDF) y análisis (PDF) de opinión pública cubana (versión en Inglés).  La encuesta se realizó en Cuba del 29 de Febrero al 14 de Marzo de 2012.  Un total de 787 adultos cubanos fueron encuestados con preguntas que incluían desde el acceso a Internet y el uso de telefonía móvil hasta la actuación del gobierno actual de Castro y las expectativas de cambio.   La encuesta del IRI también preguntó a los cubanos acerca de las reformas económicas, que han sido ampliamente anunciadas en los medios de comunicación internacionales. 

Mientras que la información sobre reformas del gobierno cubano – incluyendo la compraventa de casas y las limitadas licencias para tener negocios por cuenta propia – continuan generando amplia cobertura en los medios,  la encuesta del IRI muestra que el 85 por ciento de los cubanos no es capaz de señalar ningún efecto que las reformas hayan tenido en su vida personal.

La encuesta fue realizada en 14 provincias cubanas, tiene un margen de error de +/- 3.5 por ciento y un nivel de confianza del 95 por ciento.  Esta encuesta ha sido la séptima de este tipo realizada por el IRI en Cuba desde 2007.

El IRI, una organización no partidista y sin fines de lucro, promueve la libertad y la democracia en todo el mundo mediante el desarrollo y fomento de partidos políticos, instituciones cívicas, elecciones libres, gobernabilidad democrática y el estado de derecho.

Obama vs. Romney on the economy

The Enterprise Blog/

 

More >>