Mea culpa, you probably will. But I'm trying to clean up my act. Just attacking the source gets nowhere in getting at the truth.
So I guess my lesson is: deal first with the message, then deal with the messenger if he's shown to be generally unreliable. I seriously doubt that you can show Huffingtonpost is unreliable in most of their articles.
Haven't you been paying attention? A lot of people on your side are certain the GOP is going to sweep 2010 just because Fox News viewership is up. And that's just the righties here in ET.
Haven't you been paying attention? A lot of people on your side are certain the GOP is going to sweep 2010 just because Fox News viewership is up. And that's just the righties here in ET.
Note the dives on⦠everything, really, except immigration issues: the GOP increased its lead in 9 out of 10 categories since last month. But particularly note the Health Care, Social Security, Economy, and Taxes numbers. Does the Democratic Party feel like demonizing their opponents on health care rationing some more? - because I think that the GOP can somehow manage to find the strength to keep bearing up under the Democratsâ scorn."
Is the WaPo Stuffing Its Own Ballot Box for the 'Public Option'?
By Tim Graham
October 21, 2009 - 07:51 ET
The Washington Post touted a new poll on Tuesday that popular support is increasing for a government-run "public option" health care system â just as liberal Democrats try to push that into the Senate Finance Committee bill. The headline was "Public option gains support: Clear majority now backs plan." So itâs not surprising, as Ed Morrissey found at Hot Air, that the Post is stuffing its poll sample with a few extra Democrats:
The sampling comprises 33% Democrats, as opposed to only 20% Republicans. That thirteen-point spread is two points larger than their September polling, at 32%/21%. More tellingly, itâs significantly larger than their Election Day sample, which included 35% Democrats to 26% Republicans for a gap of nine points, about a third smaller than the gap in this poll. Of course, thatâs when they were more concerned about accuracy over political points of view.
The Postâs poll (illustrated by a chart) found respondents favored a public option "to compete with" private insurance by a margin of 57 to 40 percent. But even with the polling sample tilted toward the Democrats, some less favorable findings werenât in the headline, as Dan Balz and Jon Cohen reported:
Overall, 45 percent of Americans favor the broad outlines of the proposals now moving in Congress, while 48 percent are opposed, about the same division that existed in August, at the height of angry town hall meetings over health-care reform.
Not only that, but what if the public favors liberal reform, but not the means to finance it?
But if there is clear majority support for the public option and the mandate [to buy private insurance], there is broad opposition to one of the major mechanisms proposed to pay for the bill. The Senate Finance Committee suggested taxing the most costly private insurance plans to help offset the costs of extending coverage to millions more people. Sixty-one percent oppose the idea, while 35 percent favor it.
The Post suggested their sample size, with 20 percent of Republicans, is merely a sign of GOP weakness. Morrissey dissented:
Remember when I wrote that poll watchers need to remember the recent Gallup poll on party affiliation? Gallup polled 5,000 adults and found that the gap between Democrats and Republicans had closed to the smallest margin since 2005, six points, and had been reduced more than half since the beginning of the year. [That included leaners toward either party.] For the WaPo/ABC poll, though, their sample gap has increased almost 50% during that time.
