Comment on this article |
Email this article |
News :: Media : Politics
Designed to Demoralize?? Seven Reasons *Not * to Trust Presidential Polls..
20 Oct 2004
Sick of the daily bombardment of polls showing Kerry running "neck-and-neck" with Bush? Feeling demoralized? Don't be! Most of the polls are a bunch of baloney. Here are seven reasons not to trust the polls -- along with some insights into why Big Media chieftains oppose and fear the Kerry/Edwards ticket. (Did you know that John Kerry and John Edwards OPPOSE media consolidation?)
It doesn't make any sense.
No matter what happens, polls from "respected" polling organizations keep "showing" that Bush and Kerry are running "neck-and-neck," with the nation's voters almost evenly divided between the two candidates.
No matter how hellish the news from Iraq, how many millions of new Democrats register to vote, or how high oil prices climb; no matter that GOP-endorsed outsourcing has proved to be a miserable way to produce flu vaccines, and no matter that more than 50 million Americans witnessed the Presidential debates -- the polls keep "showing" the same thing: neck-and-neck, evenly divided, an incredibly close race, etc., etc., etc.
What a bunch of baloney!
But what a perfect way to discourage all of us who are working to make sure Bush gets ejected, not elected, on November 2. What a clever way for Big Media -- which conducts most of the polls, and whose chieftains oppose (and fear) Kerry/Edwards -- to distract us from actual news while paralyzing us into inaction. (And what a nice setup for vote rigging; after all, if we knew on November 1 that Kerry was polling at 70% and Bush at 25%, what chance would there be for a last-minute "upset"?)
DON'T BE DISCOURAGED. DON'T BE DEMORALIZED. BUT DO NOT TRUST THE POLLS!
Here are seven reasons not to trust the polls (the first three are excerpted from a September 20, 2004 article by Michael Moore, entitled "Put Away Your Hankies," which you can read at http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-09-):
1. They are polling "likely voters." "Likely" means those who have consistently voted in the past few elections. So that cuts out young people who are voting for the first time and a ton of non-voters who are definitely going to vote in THIS election.
2. They are not polling people who use their cell phone as their primary phone. Again, that means they are not talking to young people.
3. Most of the polls are weighted with too many Republicans, as pollster John Zogby revealed last week. You are being snookered if you believe any of these polls.
4. Most of the polls are conducted by the same corporate media giants whose deceptive non-journalism enabled us to be misled into war. How can we trust their polls to be more reliable than their "journalism"?
5. John Kerry and John Edwards OPPOSE media consolidation, and most of the polls are conducted by Big Media corporations. When the U.S. Senate last summer voted to overturn the FCC's proposed rules allowing unprecedented media consolidation, guess who co-sponsored the Senate resolution? Senators John Kerry and John Edwards, among others.
Here's what Kerry told The Nation's John Nichols: "I'm against the ongoing push for media consolidation. It's contrary to the stronger interests of the country." Diversity of media ownership and content, Kerry explained, "is critical to who we are as a free people. It's critical to our democracy." To learn more, check out Mr. Nichol's article, "Kerry on the Media," in the August 9, 2004 issue of The Nation (available at http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0809-04.htm).
6. The Chairmen/CEOs of most Big Media conglomerates -- including Sumner Redstone (Viacom/CBS), Dick Parsons (Time-Warner/CNN/Headline News, etc.), and Rupert Murdoch (NewsCorp/FOX) -- are actively supporting Bush.
At Forbes magazine's annual Global CEO Conference in Hong Kong in September, Mr. Redstone told the audience "I look at the election from what's good for Viacom. I vote for what's good for Viacom. I vote, today, Viacom" and "...from a Viacom standpoint, the election of a Republican administration is a better deal. Because the Republican administration has stood for many things we believe in, deregulation and so on." (As reported by The Asian Wall Street Journal, in a September 24, 2004 article entitled "Guess Who's a GOP Booster?")
Also, the LA Weekly reports that Jeffrey Immelt, Chairman/CEO of General Electric (NBC, MSNBC, CNBC -- as well as a major manufacturer of weapons systems), is "as right-wing as they come"; he's also an appointee to Bush's Commission on Social Security. And don't forget Disney (ABC), whose chief lobbyist is a Republican who formerly worked for Rupert Murdoch -- and whose former CEO, Michael Eisner, pulled the plug on distributing the film "Fahrenheit 9/11." (For more on all this, see the article "When Might Turns Right -- Golly GE, Why Big Media is Pro-Bush" in the October 1-7, 2004 issue of the LA Weekly, available at http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0930-14.htm)
7. Given the climate of fear and intimidation in some parts of the U.S., it wouldn't be surprising if some who intend to vote for Kerry (or a third-party candidate) are refusing to ADMIT their intentions when the phone rings and a stranger's voice asks: "Do you plan to vote for President Bush or for Senator Kerry?" or "I notice you're registered as an independent; can I assume you'll be voting for our President, George W. Bush?"
SO...IGNORE THE POLLS, TAKE HEART, AND KEEP WORKING FOR CHANGE ON NOVEMBER 2.
As Michael Moore wrote: "WAKE UP! The majority are with us! More than half of all Americans are pro-choice, want stronger environmental laws, are appalled that assault weapons are back on the street -- and 54% now believe the war is wrong. YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO CONVINCE THEM OF ANY OF THIS -- YOU JUST HAVE TO GIVE THEM A RAY OF HOPE AND A RIDE TO THE POLLS. CAN YOU DO THAT? WILL YOU DO THAT?"
One more thought. Last Saturday's "New York Times" reported that "People who identify with the religious right make up 12.6% of the population." If that figure is even close to accurate, it's intriguing to realize that Bush's core voting bloc is only one-eighth of the population.
P. S. You can learn a lot about a poll by reading the details on the polling organization's website. For example, on March 18, 2003, CBSNews.com reported that a CBS poll showed 69% of Americans approved military action against Iraq. Nearly the entire world of Big Media quickly parroted the CBS poll report. You probably read or heard the reports. And the bombing of Baghdad began a few days later.
According to the CBS News website at the time, the March 18 poll consisted of telephone interviews with a nationwide "random" sample of 483 adults. But the website went on to explain (on a separate, linked page) that the results from the so-called random sample had been "weighted" to make sure they matched U.S. Census Bureau breakdowns on age, sex, race, education, and region of the country. But what about "weighting" to match census breakdowns on a few other relevant factors, such as political party, religion, military/veteran status, or income? The website was silent on those subjects.
Draw your own conclusions.
This work is in the public domain