If these poll results were accurate, support for the war should be about negative 3,000 percent by now. The public would have stormed the White House, seized the president and flogged him to death.
Here's a sample of New York Times headlines on stories discussing poll numbers since before the Iraq war began in March 2003:
— Poll Finds Most in U.S. Support Delaying a War (2/14/03)
— Opinions Begin to Shift as Public Weighs Costs of War (3/26/03)
— World's View of U.S. Sours After Iraq War, Poll Finds (6/4/03)
— Study Finds Europeans Distrustful of U.S. Global Leadership (9/4/03)
— Despite Polls, Pataki Backs Bush on Iraq All the Way (10/3/03)
— Poll Finds Hostility Hardening Toward U.S. Policies (3/17/04)
— Support for War Is Down Sharply, Poll Concludes (4/29/04)
— Rising Casualties, One Falling Poll (5/2/04)
— Polls Show Bush's Job-Approval Ratings Sinking (5/14/04)
— Bush's Rating Falls to Its Lowest Point, New Survey Finds (6/29/04)
And then — despite the fact that every single man, woman and child in America opposed the war in Iraq and despised George Bush — a few months later, Bush won re-election against well-respected war hero John Kerry.
Immediately after the election, public opinion polls showed Americans turning once again against the war and against George Bush, according to the Times:
— Americans Show Clear Concerns on Bush Agenda (11/23/04)
— Public Voicing Doubts on Iraq and the Economy, Poll Finds (1/20/05)
— Bad Iraq War News Worries Some in GOP on '06 Vote (8/18/05)
— Support for Bush Continues to Drop as More Question His Leadership Skills, Poll Shows (9/15/05)
— Iraq's Costs Worry Americans, Poll Indicates (9/17/05)
— Most Americans Find Cindy Sheehan Attractive, Interesting (2/8/06). OK, I made that one up. The rest were made up by the Times.
The media are constantly telling Americans what they believe: You are dissatisfied ... You are getting more dissatisfied ... You are slowly becoming utterly dissatisfied ... Your dissatisfaction is now reaching a fever pitch!
News coverage of public opinion polls is barely justifiable in an election year. When there's no horse race, these cooked-up polls are nothing more than the mainstream media's long, monotonous brainwashing of the public.
At least the old subliminal ads for popcorn in movie theaters operated by stealth. Today's mainstream media engage in open conditioning of the public in a fantastical scheme to shift public opinion.
Noticeably, there's always an odd disconnect between what the polls say and what people actually do.
Despite the fact that — according to the polls — the "American people" are fed up with the war Iraq, only a few hundred anti-war protesters showed up in New York City last weekend. The naked cowboy in Times Square gets a bigger crowd than that.
Despite the fact that 70 percent of the public thinks Bush is doing a lousy job, when they had a chance to put someone else in the White House a mere 15 months ago, they decided to keep him.
There is, however, one poll taken by millions of Americans every day, year in, year out. Based on plummeting viewers, circulation numbers and ad rates, we can say with some certainty, the American people are beginning to loathe the liberal media.
Sunday, March 26, 2006
Ann Coulter on Polling data
Posted by The Game at 3:09 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Ann Coulter thinks about dead people when she's making love.
My favorite line of the year so far is, "Most Americans Find Cindy Sheehan Attractive, Interesting (2/8/06). OK, I made that one up. The rest were made up by the Times."
LOL!
"If these poll results were accurate, support for the war should be about negative 3,000 percent by now."
Game must be handling the statistic representation, over there.
No one has been able to refute her point..the media does whatever it can to drum up opposition to things...they make people think they are not normal if they do not like a certain way, because the polls say EVERYONE hates Bush and the war...simiple minded people change their minds after reading that stuff
Judging by this post, Bush must have dropped in the polls again.
When the polls, all of them, show your hero tanking, attack the polls.
When the media, all of them, show that things aren't going the way the administration thinks they should or SAYS they are, attack the media.
Once again, it smells of desperation.
You can't stop thinking about Bush and thinking we all worship him.
Ann did a PERFECT job showing how the media is biased in their reporting. How can every story say polls are dropping, everything is terrible, yet Bush won?
Anytime you want to stop using your lame ass excuse that everything that is pointed out that correctly defines the media and the Left as despiration, go head...it shows you have no response to the charges.
When Bush "won", his poll numbers were above 50%. Now they're not.
You are often citing polls showing how much better Republics are than Democrats and that Democratic ideas are not in the "mainstream".
Now all the polls show that the following things are MAINSTREAM ideas:
Bush is not doing a good job
The war in Iraq is not going well
Bush is not doing a good job fighting terrorism
The results of the war in Iraq is not worth the cost
Removing Saddam was not worth the cost
The US should have stayed out of Iraq
The president does not have the legal authority to authorize wiretaps without a warrent to fight terrorists.
But obviously, it's the media's fault that people feel this way. Because without the media, the only source of information would be the administration itself, and of course the administration is always the best source for complete and truthful news, isn't it?
So, you wanted us to refute Oral Annie? No prob. I'll get started. She is always easy cuz her facts are always shot. Its how she buttresses her faulty logic.
I love how you hate Bush so much you can't even type that he won without quotes..
Stop saying I hate Bush. That is a false accusation. I very much dislike MANY of the things he has done. But I don't hate him. I don't know him.
It is a Republic ploy to equate any disagreement with Bush's policies with "hating" Bush. It's an attempt to characterize that disagreement as crazed and irrational. Disagree with Bush and you are a "Bush-hater."
On the other hand, you and most Republics actually do and did HATE Bill Clinton. You couldn't really debate his policies, but you hate him viscerally and irrationally.
yep it is funny how he won those elections huh? Many of us were wondering the same thing. Funny how your curiosity turns off at that point.
Dude, I could do a google search and come up with as many headline that said the opposite. This is no argument.
Post a Comment