A couple of weeks ago I pointed out, via James Taranto, that the Washington Post used this terrible question to measure public support for the nuclear option (last link is PDF):
Would you support or oppose changing Senate rules to make it easier for the Republicans to confirm Bush's judicial nominees?
The Post didn't provide any context about the filibuster and how it requires 60 votes to be ended. Unsurprisingly, most voters said they opposed the change, a useless result that liberal groups have been touting ever since.
Now we have a bad question tilted in the other direction. Rasmussen Reports (of Hillary Meter fame) has published the following result:
57% of Americans say that "Senate rules should be changed so that a vote must be taken on every person the President nominates to become a judge."
But no one is proposing that a rule requiring that a vote be taken on every person the President nominates. The rules change would require only 50 votes to end debate on nominees approved by the Judiciary Committee. Does Scott Rasmussen even understand the issue he's polling about?
(For my ever-lengthening list of posts on the nuclear option clown show, click here.)
Comments