Connect with us

Newsweek/Daily Beast Poll On Angry Americans: Fact, Fiction, Or Fraud?

Published

on

This week you’ll read a great deal about the latest Newsweek/Daily Beast poll (also, embedded below,) titled, “America the Angry,” “Angry Americans,” “Anger In America,” or even, “Anger In America: Could The Arab Spring Happen In The U.S.?” And you should immediately discount it as a work of, if not fiction, then arrogant media wrangling. This, surely, is what Sarah Palin means when she says, “the lamestream media’s gotcha journalism,” right? Shame on you, Newsweek/Daily Beast Editor Tina Brown and shame on you, Douglas Schoen, author of the article and presumably the one responsible for the so-called “poll.”

By the way, the title, “Anger In America: Could The Arab Spring Happen In The U.S.?” comes from reading the URL of the page the “poll” is published on. Obviously, given all the different names, it looks like some Newsweek/Daily Beast editor was just dying to grab some Google traffic off of “anger,” angry,” “America,” and “Americans” keyword searches, with “Arab spring” thrown in for good measure.

Schoen introduces his “poll” by setting you up with the “fact” that “reality is beginning to break down Americans’ normally optimistic attitude. Three-quarters of our respondents think the country is on the wrong track. A majority say the anxiety wrought by this recession has caused relationship problems and sleep deficiency. Two-thirds even report being angry at God,” Schoen claims.

I say “Schoen claims,” because while he writes in his Daily Beast article, “two-thirds even report being angry at God,” somehow that “fact” doesn’t even show in his “polling data” he embeds on the site (also, below.) Curious, no?

Schoen, to be fair, is a political analyst for Fox News, and got his start in his extensive polling career working for Dick Morris in high school. Schoen also is a founding partner in the political polling firm of Penn, Schoen & Berland. And (big surprise!) Schoen just wrote a book with Scott Rasmussen (as in the notoriously right-wing slanted Rasmussen polls that the Tea Party and Fox News love so much) titled, “Mad As Hell: How the Tea Party Movement Is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System.” Schoen did not respond to a request for comment on this article Sunday evening.

All this said, a couple of points first you probably already know about polls.

First, any reliable pollster will publish the complete results of a poll.

Second, any reliable nationwide survey generally will poll at least one thousand respondents, especially if it is a broad poll where anyone who answers the phone — if that’s the contact method they used — is a fit respondent.

Third, any reliable nationwide poll will publish not only the answers to the poll, but the exact questions asked, with any variations, and in what order asked.

Fourth, any reliable nationwide poll will publish complete methodology, including who they polled. Americans? Likely voters? Registered voters? Age ranges. Political affiliations. Sometimes religious affiliations…

Fifth, any reliable nationwide poll generally will reach an odd number of respondents. 600, for example, is a strange number to reach, especially over a period of four or five days.

Sixth, any reliable nationwide poll will tell you how they got responses: telephone? Landline? cellular?Email? Internet?…

I suppose I could go on, but all I need to do at this point is to tell you that the latest Newsweek/Daily Beast poll on “Angry Americans” does none of the above.

All Doug Schoen (again, presumably the one responsible for the poll,) does is offer some nice graphics (actually, not really even that nice, but they are in color!) and frame the results without telling you the question. Nice work if you can get it.

Schoen’s “poll” says “This survey was conducted with a representative sample of 600 American adults across the country on April 29th – May 1st, 2011.” What is “a representative sample of 600 American adults?” He doesn’t say.

Schoen claims, “By almost four-to-one, Americans say government is not solving our economic problems.” Really? Is government supposed to solve our economic problems? What was the question asked that brought Schoen to this realization? I don’t know, do you? How was it phrased? Who answered it?

Schoen says, “Respondents say our economy is not delivering the jobs we need by 81% to 12%.” News? Not at all. But the number spread there looks great! (Makes it sound like a lot of Americans are really pissed! That should get The Daily Beast a lot of hits!)

Schoen’s polls proclaims, “while Americans are very concerned about the economic and fiscal issues facing the country, they do not feel that neither President Obama nor the Republicans are addressing these issues.” Huh? So, Americans do feel Obama and the Republicans are addressing these issues? Who writes like that? And what Republicans? House? Senate? Local? State? And why don’t we know how Americans feel about Democrats? What was the question, Mr. Schoen?

Schoen continues: “They say Obama does not have a real plan to cut the deficit, 55% to 33%, and that he does not have a real plan to cut spending, 46% to 42%.” So, 42% of Americans believe Obama does have a plan to cut spending, is that what this says? That’s actually pretty impressive.

More: An actual question! “Do you think that Obama has a real plan to cut the deficit, or does he not have a real plan?” Wait. I take that back. That was a question? Doug, you picked up the phone (well, I assume these people were contacted by phone, and this isn’t some World Net Daily online poll…) and asked 600 people, “Do you think that Obama has a real plan to cut the deficit, or does he not have a real plan?” I amazed they answered and didn’t hang up on you.

Gotta love that “real plan” language, implying there is a fake plan that maybe Obama has…

Did anyone ask these 600 people if the deficit was important? What order did this question come? What questions did you ask before it? Were they, “Is the deficit out of control and responsible for the huge and unprecedented unemployment numbers we are seeing under President Obama after two years in office?” Was there a question in the poll about Obama’s birth certificate too? I wouldn’t be surprised…

Schoen writes, “Given that Americans are concerned about the country’s economic issues and feel that neither party is adequately addressing these issues, it makes sense that they feel frustrated and upset.” How do we know this? Where’s the data? And when have Americans not been “concerned about the country’s economic issues,” and when have Americans not felt “frustrated and upset?”

Schoen continues: “Over half (52%) say their personal economic situation makes them nervous. 48% say it makes them anxious, 44% say it makes them upset, and 30% say it makes them angry.” Really? Is this normal? Can you compare it to a year ago, a month ago? A decade ago?

How about this priceless example of putting words in people’s’ mouths?

“Generally speaking, does your personal economic situation make you nervous, anxious, upset, angry?” (Based on the graphic, we assume this was the question, but have no way of knowing because Schoen did not publish the question or the order of questions.)

How about including, “happy,” “hopeful,” “enthusiastic,” “calm?” Could Schoen lead the jury any more that this?

Or let’s look at this one: “70% of Americans are nervous about their retirement because of their personal economic situation,” and “45% are nervous about being able to put their children through college, 31% are nervous about starting a family, and 29% are nervous about being able to afford to buy a home.”

So of course we know that all 600 of Schoen’s respondents have two or more children, based on the answer to the unidentified question. Oh wait, but then we see that some of them haven’t started families yet… And do they even want to? Look at the home-buying portion and make your own deduction. Do 81% of Schoen’s respondents already own a home? Do they want to?

Schoen “finds” that 42% of Americans answered “no,” to the question, “Would you say that you feel stagnated in terms of your income?” I’m amazed it was that low. Who doesn’t feel “stagnated in terms of your income?” This is America! “More, more, more!” is our rallying cry!

But seriously, again, that’s an actual question? Leading, much? Same goes for Schoen’s “Do you feel like you don’t make enough money to live your life the way you want to?” Amazing that only 44% said “yes.” What’s more amazing is the way the data is presented: “54% disagree.” Really? That means that a majority of Americans — despite being asked a leading question, in a poll clearly designed to obtain negative responses — feel that they do make enough money to live their lives the way they want to!” Given the level of unemployment, underemployment, and people on welfare and food stamps, that’s news! But they way it’s presented is simply sleazy and shameful.

How about, “27% say their family’s economic situation has impacted their health, and 26% of those married say it has impacted their marriage”? So, were all 600 married? How many are married? What percent? We have no idea.

Let’s look at this one: “Of those who say they are angry about their personal economic situation, 13% say their anger has impacted their sex life. 78% say it has not.” America the angry? Really? only 13% of Americans say money — assuming lack thereof — is negatively impacting their sex life? This is America! Americans are pissed whenever anything gets in between them and sex! 13%? The title of this “poll” should be, “America — getting enough, thank you very  much.”

There’s this little thing called journalism that is under attack in America. Journalism, and facts, and fairness. Let’s be honest. I’m about as liberal as they come. Despite the fact that Schoen is a political analyst for Fox News, Schoen, has worked for many Democrats. Schoen, you should know, was named Pollster of the Year in 1996 by the American Association of Political Consultants.

I could easily parrot this study and write about something else an hour from now. But what America thinks is really, really important to me. Presenting facts and reality properly and accurately is really, really important to me. Thst’s why Sarah Palin sends me into a tailspin. So does Fox.

Perhaps Americans are really just angry about being lied to, and having “facts” presented with such slant and arrogance that they are not meaningless but so meaningful as to tell people what to think, not what they are thinking?

Like I said, there’s this little thing called journalism. It’s a little too near and dear to my heart to let it suffer any more without my speaking out once in a while. Doug Schoen, this “poll” is irresponsible and in my opinion, has zero credibility. And Tina Brown, shame on you! Hand in your press pass — you just lost all rights to it.

Angry Americans FINAL

http://d1.scribdassets.com/ScribdViewer.swf?document_id=57045221&access_key=key-ybj0jbcto8msou7arql&page=1&viewMode=list

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case centered on the question, can the federal government require states with strict abortion bans to allow physicians to perform abortions in emergency situations, specifically when the woman’s health, but not her life, is in danger?

The 1986 federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), signed into law by Republican President Ronald Reagan, says it can. The State of Idaho on Wednesday argued it cannot.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, The Washington Post’s Kim Bellware reported, “made a clear delineation between Idaho law and what EMTALA provides.”

“In Idaho, doctors have to shut their eyes to everything except death,” Prelogar said, according to Bellware. “Whereas under EMTALA, you’re supposed to be thinking about things like, ‘Is she about to lose her fertility? Is her uterus going to become incredibly scarred because of the bleeding? Is she about to undergo the possibility of kidney failure?’ ”

READ MORE: Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Attorney Imani Gandy, an award-winning journalist and Editor-at-Large for Rewire News Group, highlighted an issue central to the case.

“The issue of medical judgment vs. good faith judgment is a huge one because different states have different standards of judgment,” she writes. “If a doctor exercises their judgment, another doctor expert witness at trial could question that. That’s a BIG problem here. That’s why doctors are afraid to provide abortions. They may have an overzealous prosecutor come behind them and disagree.”

Right-wing Justice Samuel Alito appeared to draw the most fire from legal experts, as his questioning suggested “fetal personhood” should be the law, which it is not.

“Justice Alito is trying to import fetal personhood into federal statutory law by suggesting federal law might well prohibit hospitals from providing abortions as emergency stabilizing care,” observed Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis.

Paraphrasing Justice Alito, Kreis writes: “Alito: How can the federal government restrict what Idaho criminalizes simply because hospitals in Idaho have accepted federal funds?”

Appearing to answer that question, Georgia State University College of Law professor of law and Constitutional scholar Eric Segall wrote: “Our Constitution unequivocally allows the federal gov’t to offer the states money with conditions attached no matter how invasive b/c states can always say no. The conservative justices’ hostility to the spending power is based only on politics and values not text or history.”

Professor Segall also served up some of the strongest criticism of the right-wing justice.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

He wrote that Justice Alito “is basically making it clear he doesn’t care if pregnant women live or die as long as the fetus lives.”

Earlier Wednesday morning Segall had issued a warning: “Trigger alert: In about 20 minutes several of the conservative justices are going to show very clearly that that they care much more about fetuses than women suffering major pregnancy complications which is their way of owning the libs which is grotesque.”

Later, predicting “Alito is going to dissent,” Segall wrote: “Alito is dripping arrogance and condescension…in a case involving life, death, and medical emergencies. He has no bottom.”

Taking a broader view of the case, NYU professor of law Melissa Murray issued a strong warning: “The EMTALA case, Moyle v. US, hasn’t received as much attention as the mifepristone case, but it is huge. Not only implicates access to emergency medical procedures (like abortion in cases of miscarriage), but the broader question of federal law supremacy.”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Published

on

Hours before his attorneys would mount a defense on Tuesday claiming he had not violated his gag order Donald Trump might have done just that in a 12-minute taped interview that morning, which did not air until later that day. It will be up to Judge Juan Merchan to make that decision, if prosecutors add it to their contempt request.

Prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office told Judge Juan Merchan that the ex-president violated the gag order ten times, via posts on his Truth Social platform, and are asking he be held in contempt. While the judge has yet to rule, he did not appear moved by their arguments. At one point, Judge Merchan told Trump’s lead lawyer Todd Blanche he was “losing all credibility” with the court.

And while Judge Merchan directed defense attorneys to provide a detailed timeline surrounding Trump’s Truth Social posts to prove he had not violated the gag order, Trump in an interview with a local television station appeared to have done so.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

The gag order bars Trump from “commenting or causing others to comment on potential witnesses in the case, prospective jurors, court staff, lawyers in the district attorney’s office and the relatives of any counsel or court staffer, as CBS News reported.

“The threat is very real,” Judge Merchan wrote when he expanded the gag order. “Admonitions are not enough, nor is reliance on self-restraint. The average observer, must now, after hearing Defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well. Such concerns will undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself.”

Tuesday morning, Trump told ABC Philadelphia’s Action News reporter Walter Perez, “Michael Cohen is a convicted liar. He’s got no credibility whatsoever.”

He repeated that Cohen is a “convicted liar,” and insisted he “was a lawyer for many people, not just me.”

READ MORE: ‘Old and Tired and Mad’: Trump’s Demeanor in Court Detailed by Rachel Maddow

Since Cohen is a witness in Trump’s New York criminal case, Judge Merchan might decide Trump’s remarks during that interview violated the gag order, if prosecutors bring the video to his attention.

Enter attorney George Conway, who has been attending Trump’s New York trial.

Conway reposted a clip of the video, tagged Manhattan District Attorney Bragg, writing: “cc: @ManhattanDA, for your proposed order to show cause why the defendant in 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘷. 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 should not spend some quiet time in lockup.”

Trump has been criminally indicted in four separate cases and is facing a total of 88 felony charges, including 34 in this New York criminal trial for alleged falsification of business records to hide payments of “hush money” to an adult film actress and one other woman, in an alleged effort to suppress their stories and protect his 2016 presidential campaign, which experts say is election interference.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

Published

on

Minutes before Donald Trump addressed his MAGA crowd at the Ellipse on January 6, 2021 his daughter-in-law, Lara Trump spoke to his supporters, vowing to “take our country back” because the Trump “family didn’t get in this fight for just four years. We are in this fight to the bitter end.”

Fast forward to April, 2024.

Lara Trump is now co-chair of the Republican National Committee, after Donald Trump’s efforts to install her and his hand-picked RNC chairman, Michael Whatley. Whatley is a North Carolina Republican who served on George W. Bush’s Florida recount team for the 2000 presidential election that was decided at the U.S. Supreme Court. Years later Whatley declared, “it was really the first time that Republicans got down into the trenches and fought,” and claimed, “if we were not there, they were going to steal it.”

Now both Michael Whatley and Lara Trump are leading the RNC, and with Donald Trump as the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, they are continuing the ex-president’s focus on “election integrity.”

Tuesday night Lara Trump served up some insight into what they’re planning.

READ MORE: Trump Complains He’s ‘Not Allowed to Talk’ as He Gripes Live on Camera

“We now have the ability at the RNC not just to have poll watchers, people standing in polling locations, but people who can physically handle the ballots. We want people all across this country –” she said before host Eric Bolling interrupted her.

“I want to hear this, this is really fascinating to me,” Bolling said. “You have 100,000 people who are, I think I saw paid at one point, but whatever – irrelevant, but, so they will be stationed inside polling places? I didn’t even know you can do that. Tell us about it.”

Trump replied, “there was a moratorium for about 40 years on the RNC actually training people to work in these polling locations in the tabulation centers where the mail-in ballots come in. And last year, the judge who implemented that passed away, so that was lifted, and that gives us a great ability as we head into what I assume everyone understands is the most important election of our lifetime.”

Bolling went on to ask, “Will these people, will they be allowed to physically handle the ballots as well, Lara?”

“Yup,” Trump replied. “And that means Eric that they should know and they can count how many ballots come in, and how many ballots should go out of every single polling location.”

READ MORE: ‘I’m Not Suicidal’: Kari Lake Pushes Hillary Clinton Murder Conspiracy Theory

She went on to say if anyone cheats, “we will prosecute you to the full extent of the law.”

“It is not worth it to cheat in a federal election, that is a crime my friends you do not want to commit.”

Bolling was referring to the more than 100,000 attorneys and volunteers the RNC reportedly has lined up to monitor vote counting. In a joint statement the Trump campaign and the RNC called it, “the most extensive and monumental election integrity program in the nation’s history.”

Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele blasted Lara Trump.

“Lara, you know why there was ‘a moratorium on the RNC for 40 years’? Because the RNC was caught cheating. The RNC was placed under a 1982 Consent decree for voter caging. Voter caging hinders an eligible voter’s ability to vote. The process involves efforts to identify and disenfranchise improperly registered voters solely on the basis of undeliverable mail. It often leads to the unwarranted purging of election rolls of otherwise eligible voters.”

“So,” Steele continued, “given the continued lies about the 2020 election and your daddy-in-law claiming if he loses in 2024 it’s because the election is rigged, you’re planning to have your people ‘physically handle the ballots’–and we’re supposed to think that’s a good idea?”

NYU professor of history Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a scholar on fascism, authoritarianism, propaganda, and the protection of democracy, also served up strong criticism.

“What does this mean, they will have thugs to physically take the ballots to make sure they are marked for Republican candidates?” Ben-Ghiat asked. “Sounds like a perfect authoritarian election plan to me.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: Biden Campaign Hammers Trump Over Infamous COVID Comment

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.