L.A. Times: We Mention Only the Negative Polls
Filed under: Dog Trainer, War — Patterico @ 11:05 am
The other day, the L.A. Times told us that Bush’s recent speech on Iraq was “part of a major weeklong public relations offensive by an administration struggling to bolster sagging support”; that “polls have shown that many others doubt that the effort to install a stable new government in Iraq will protect the United States”; and that “[p]olls have been indicating support for the war is at its lowest level since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.”
And that was in one article alone.
Apparently, the editors considered negative polls a significant enough issue to mention three times in one story. Discussing the story, I noted:
Interesting that, where the L.A. Times sees “sagging support,” the Washington Post finds that “a majority of Americans — 53 percent — now say they are optimistic about the situation in Iraq, up seven points from December.” And where the L.A. Times says “polls have shown that many others doubt that the effort to install a stable new government in Iraq will protect the United States,” the recent Washington Post poll says:
A narrow majority — 52 percent — believes that the war has contributed to the long-term security of the United States, a five-point increase from earlier this month.
It’s all in the spin, baby.
Since then, a new Gallup poll has emerged showing still more positives for Bush. Captain Ed recently reported:
Gallup announced yesterday that it had taken a snap poll after the speech given by George Bush on the war in Iraq from Fort Bragg. The poll showed some movement bolstering support for the war. In fact, it showed Bush picking up ten points on whether we are winning in Iraq (up to 54%), twelve points on keeping troops in Iraq until the situation improves as opposed to setting an exit date for their evacuation (now at 70%/25%), and seven points on whether Bush has a clear plan for handling the war in Iraq (up to 63%/35%).
I have searched the L.A. Times in vain for any mention of either the Washington Post poll or the most recent Gallup poll. Perhaps they were reported and I am just missing them? If negative polls were worth mentioning three times in one story, surely two separate polls with significant positives for Bush are worth mentioning somewhere . . . right??
Right???
patterico.com |
