Why not just ask, "In order to reduce the price of gas, should we elect John McCain who wants drilling offshore -- did we mention that would reduce the incredibly high price of gasoline that you are paying?" How about somebody do a poll where the question is: "In order to risk our precious coastlines, which provide great economic value to the country, should we allow offshore drilling even though the Bush administration projects that would not significantly change oil production or prices through the year 2030 and beyond?"

If you base a question on a false or leading assumption, your poll results are meaningless. Offshore drilling would probably never have a significant impact on oil production or prices according to the Bush administration's own economic and energy analysts, as I have blogged (see EIA to McCain: Drop offshore (drilling)).

Not surprisingly, in what is the equivalent of a push poll, after a question from the pollster that strongly implies offshore drilling would reduce gasoline prices, Rasmussen then absurdly asks:

If offshore oil is allowed, how likely is it that the price of gas will go down?

What a shock -- 64 percent say "very likely" or "somewhat likely."

And yet Rasmussen puts this in the headline:

67% Support Offshore Drilling, 64% Expect it Will Lower Prices

Given how the poll was conducted, I actually view these numbers as remarkably low and a sign that one third of the public can't be bullied around by pollsters.

For another take on the pointlessness of drilling as a solution to high prices, see here.

This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.