Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
CNSNews.com - New York Times Poll Showing 72% Support for Obama's Health Care Plan Was Stacked With Obama Supporters (http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=49999 - broken link)
CNSNews.com - New York Times Poll Showing 72% Support for Obama's Health Care Plan Was Stacked With Obama Supporters (http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=49999 - broken link)
CNS News is run by RWer Brent Bozell and his RW Media Research Center...they have a specific agenda and cannot be trusted to give an objective account of anything.
CNS News is run by RWer Brent Bozell and his RW Media Research Center...they have a specific agenda and cannot be trusted to give an objective account of anything.
CNS News is run by RWer Brent Bozell and his RW Media Research Center...they have a specific agenda and cannot be trusted to give an objective account of anything.
So because someone you dont like is saying something, you automatically conclude its untrustworthy? I think you need to focus on what is said, rather than who is saying it.
After reading the article it does appear that the sampling in this poll favored Obama. However, the poll administrators maintain that the sampling was random, and random samplings by the very fact that they are random do sometimes end up being weighted. I think Conway's characterization:
Similarly, the Times/CBS poll said 48 percent of respondents had voted for Obama, versus 25 percent for McCain, a nearly two-to-one advantage for Obama supporters.
Had those results been reflected in the November presidential election, Obama would have garnered 66 percent of the vote to McCain’s 34 percent, Conway, president & CEO of “the polling company,” told CNSNews.com.
This extrapolation of the sampling is also an unfair characterization of the poll, and an attempt to spin it. Conway simply drops the 27% in the poll that evidently didn't vote for Obama or McCain from her characterization as if they don't matter in an opinion poll on a national matter. That 27% contradicts her partisan claims regarding this poll. More than that, those 27% represent the opportunity available to Republicans. Those are the potential voters that could have changed the outcome of this last election, and could change the outcome of the next. Conway shouldn't be brushing those people aside, she should be doing her darndest to figure out how the Republicans can appeal to them.
So because someone you dont like is saying something, you automatically conclude its untrustworthy? I think you need to focus on what is said, rather than who is saying it.
That's pretty much how it works, then you don't have to acknowledge the facts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
