Matthews, O'Donnell misrepresented, cherry-picked NBC poll as favorable for GOP
SUMMARY: On Hardball, Chris Matthews touted a poll showing Bush's approval rating climbing two percentage points -- to 42 percent -- over the course of two weeks, leading him to assert, "If they keep doing that, they're up to 50 percent by Election Day." In fact, the two-point increase occurred over seven weeks. On the same show, Norah O'Donnell cited the poll's finding that more Americans would vote for a candidate who supports maintaining current troop levels in Iraq over one who supports immediate withdrawal while ignoring another poll finding showing majority support for a candidate advocating gradual redeployment -- the plan most Democrats support.
On the September 14 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews misrepresented, and chief Washington correspondent Norah O'Donnell cherry-picked, a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll to portray it as favorable to President Bush and Republicans. Specifically, Matthews touted the fact that Bush's approval rating had climbed two percentage points -- to 42 percent -- over the course of two weeks, leading him to assert, "If they keep doing that, they're up to 50 percent by Election Day." In fact, the two-point increase documented by the NBC poll occurred over seven weeks. Meanwhile, O'Donnell cited the poll's finding that more Americans would vote for a candidate who supports maintaining current troop levels in Iraq over one who supports immediate withdrawal, but ignored another poll finding showing majority support for a candidate advocating gradual redeployment -- the plan most Democrats support.
During the show, Matthews repeatedly cited the uptick in Bush's approval rating found in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll conducted September 8-11. "The president is picking up in the polls -- picked up a couple of points," Matthews said, adding, "If he keeps doing this, what he has been doing the last two weeks for the next eight weeks, he is going to be back to 50 percent." Later in the show, Matthews again noted that the White House "picked up two points in two weeks. If they keep doing that, they're up to 50 percent by Election Day." Indeed, the poll found that Bush's approval rating had increased to 42 percent from the 40 percent found in the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. But contrary to Matthews's claim that this two percent increase occurred over a two-week period, the last poll was conducted July 21-24 -- seven weeks ago. Further, even if Matthews's premise is accurate, his extrapolation is dubious. By his logic, Bush's approval rating could improve to 90 percent by September 2007 and to 120 percent six months thereafter.
While Matthews misrepresented NBC News' polling to claim a recent upward trend in Bush's approval rating, O'Donnell cherry-picked the most recent survey to cast the Democrats' strategy on Iraq as "dangerous." She noted the poll's finding that respondents favored a Republican candidate who "says the United States should maintain its current troop level in Iraq" over a Democratic candidate who supports "an immediate and orderly withdrawal of troops from Iraq." O'Donnell then conceded that most Democrats do not, in fact, support "immediate" withdrawal from Iraq, but nonetheless said: "[T]hat's a sign to Democrats that the cut-and-run message, immediate withdrawal, even though that's not what they -- a lot -- many of them are proposing, is a dangerous one for them."
But rather than cite the finding that compares the Republican position on Iraq to a policy that -- as O'Donnell conceded -- most Democrats do not advocate, she could have cited a more relevant question from the poll. The survey also juxtaposed a hypothetical Republican candidate who supports maintaining current troop levels with a hypothetical Democratic candidate who "says the United States should reduce the current troop level" -- the policy advocated by most Democrats. When faced with this choice, respondents favored the Democratic candidate by a 53-40 percent margin.
From the September 14 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, which also featured author and former Clinton adviser Douglas B. Sosnik:
MATTHEWS: Let me talk politics for a second. The president's picking up in the polls -- picked up a couple of points -- but the real change in direction in the polling. Wrong direction, right direction? People are a little more happy with the way things are going right now. If he keeps doing this, what he's been doing the last two weeks for the next eight weeks, he's gonna be back to 50 percent. Do you know that? Fifty percent in the polls, which means -- which means he doesn't have to worry about losing the House anymore.
SOSNIK: What The Wall Street Journal said was "slight bounce." And if you look at the polling for the last year and throw out a few upticks and a few downticks, his polling's basically been steady. The American public has tuned him out, and I don't think you are going to see much change.
MATTHEWS: I wonder if they've tuned him out.
[...]
O'DONNELL: But again, here is the major issue that's going on. Democrats want the political debate to be focused on Iraq.
MATTHEWS: Good.
O'DONNELL: Bush wants it to be focused on terror.
MATTHEWS: And Rummy's the root to Iraq.
O'DONNELL: And that's -- [Defense Secretary Donald H.] Rumsfeld is the proxy to sort of do that. What's really interesting in our NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, one of the questions that was asked was, would you rather vote for a Republican who would keep the same number of troops in Iraq, or would you vote for a Democrat who wanted to immediately pull troops out? They overwhelmingly favored the Republican. So that's a sign to Democrats that the cut-and-run message, immediate withdrawal, even though that's not what they -- a lot -- many of them are proposing, is a dangerous one for them.
MATTHEWS: In other words, people would rather change the leadership than the policy right away.
O'DONNELL: Right. They -- American people do not support immediate withdrawal.
MATTHEWS: You know what I'm afraid of? Afraid of -- I'll tell you what's gonna happen. We're not gonna have a real election debate between somebody who's on one side and somebody on the other. What'll probably happen is the next Republican candidate will be smart enough to be the change agent.
[...]
O'DONNELL: Well, it was interesting that Republicans today were tooting their horn that they think they could actually hold onto the House, even though our NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows it's still tough for them.
MATTHEWS: You know why? It's the math. They picked up two points in two weeks. If they keep doing that, they're up to 50 percent by Election Day. I think that's what they're gonna do -- keep the president on television, keep him arguing, giving long speeches. By the way, every time the president gives a speech longer than a half-hour, it's on the front page the next day.
O'DONNELL: That's right.
MATTHEWS: They must have figured that one out. This is quite a conversation here. Quite revealing among you people.
Thank you Media Matters for clarifying this. The right wing media has been manufacturing comebacks for Bush since the 2004 election. It usually starts from some right wing source and filters through to the "mainstream" media. Let's hope this "comeback" peters out by the midterm elections. (A la Cavuto I put the title in quotes.)
From the AP today...
- President Bush and Republicans have gained some ground in their bid to hold onto Congress as a sustained GOP effort to portray Democrats and Iraq war critics as appeasing terrorists has swayed voters.
"Democrats are good for the people, but I don't think they're that good on terrorism," said Alice Davis, 59 and a Democrat from Cleveland who epitomizes the challenge Democrats face — convincing even members of their own party that they are tough on terrorists. -
If Alice Davis feels that way, who are we to disagree.
Also from today's news:
"Bush fights GOP revolt over terror bill" AP
The Senate Armed Services Committee voted 15 to 9, with 4 Republican Senators breaking rank with Bush, to join 11 Democratic Senators to defy GWB's treatment of prisoners. Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs and Secretary of State Colin Powell has also voiced support for the vote.
Just one example of the air-headedness on this show: "So that's a sign to Democrats that the cut-and-run message, immediate withdrawal, even though that's not what they -- a lot -- many of them are proposing, is a dangerous one for them."
With Tweety and Ms. Hearty-Laugh filling the studio with so many straw men, an arcing fault in the lighting or any other open flame would have been disastrous.
Oh no, not more "surge of momentum" noise from these hacks now?
Geeze, I've seen this before... I feel like I know the script...
Next they'll be telling us how they've never seen the president in better spirits; he's got a new and real bounce to his step...
"Why, we had a Texas-stlye BBQ just this afternoon, on the South Lawn... the mood couldn't have been better!
All were gabbin and laffin and thoroughly enjoying the bounce in the polls, the second wind, the SURGE OF MOMENTUM...
even the vice-president was feelin good... of course, he was slammin em down, in a two-fisted fashion... but still, all was well...
...right up to the point when he spotted a squirrel on the South Lawn, and went to the trunk of his car for his 30-06...
And the Secret Service had to wrestle him to the ground, before he blasted anybody in the face...
Man O Man, was the Boss ticked!
He immediately ordered both an end to the picnic, and a blackout of the news...
Don't want to see those two points in the polls just evaporate now, do we?"
I really like that show, huh? *spitting out tobacco*
...is that it's now coming from sources who were always examples of the supposed "liberal media": Katie Couric, Disney/ABC, Chris Matthews, etc.
Even the people thought to be the most liberal members of the media, like Couric and Matthews, now peddle right-wing talking points on a daily basis, or slant the news to support Bush and Republicans.
What they should have done for entertainment value is to play these interviews to the Patsy Cline Hit " Dreamin."
I find the polls to be worded in favor of a Bush favorable out come. The Pew Poll Survey I got last was a bizarre poll indeed with the questions needing a double take to be sure you were voting for the unfavorable vote of Bush/Cheney.
The Fear in the air in palatable and the Rethugs think fanning it will heat-up their chances.
Whooooopppppsssss!
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
If Bush continues to climb 1 point per week, he will be at over 150% approval by the end of his term! Let's see a cut-and-run dem president beat that approval rating.
I think the two weeks (from 7 to 5) was subtracted because a lot of people take summer vacation and don't think about politics.
Weekends either, so take off 10 more.
4th of July Labor day, minus two more. that's only 23 days, or about 3 weeks
take off another 2 1/2 weeks, because Bush really likes vacation, and with this booming economy of his,everybody probably took an extra couple of weeks this year.
So actually his ratings went up 2 points in about two days.By election day, according to this trend, everyone in the universe will be a Republican zombie, including imaginary people, dead people and human-animal hybrids.
Everything's finally gonna be great.
Rasmussen...the most accurate polling source in the 2004 presidential election...reported on 9-14 that Pres.Bush had an approval rating of 47%...a 6 point bounce in the last two weeks.
A dubious report by mmfa...uncritically failing to include all of the polling data...lol.
The topic here is that Matthews made a false statement and dubious extrapolation with respect to an NBC poll. Your reference to another poll isn't relevant.
You can go back to sleep now.
Rasmussen's daily poll for today (9/15) has Bush back at 45%. If this trend of 2 points per day continues, he will be at -35% by election day, according to Matthews.
Then Down 1
Up 3 then Down 2....Up 4 then Down 3... and so on. So go the Polls daily-weekly-monthly.
I don't pay much attention to Polls OR to those that interpret them, NOR do they INFLUENCE how I'll vote myself.
Matthews has PROVEN to be GOP friendly so he'll read 'em the way that makes him happy.
Bush has had a SLIGHT boost. It's PROBABLY temporary. And it means zip.
I'm sure Democrats/Liberals read the SAME Polls and see a different trend. Again it means zip.
Matthews & O'Donnell REAL CRIME here [since they OBVIOUSLY think MORE of Polls than I do] was their IGNORING the Poll numbers involving gradual troop redeployment. That's cherry-picking and that's MIS-information.
...because they don't split into just "approve" and "disapprove". They split into four categories; strongly approve, somewhat approve, strongly disapprove, and somewhat disapprove.
Their most current poll shows only 23% strongly approving of Bush, while 38% strongly disapprove. It's only when you throw in the "somewhats" that Bush's approval looks better (but it's still very negative, and he just dropped 2 points in their most recent poll).
When you look at other polls, Bush isn't close to 47% (or even 45%) approval.
[link to www.realclearpolitics.com]
Wesley so nice to see you loosen up and fantisize that way.
It might help for a while, but like Bush/Cheney, the reality seems to allways catch-up.
I'll be facinated to read your posts after the November elections.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
Rasumussen Sept 14 approve disapprove 50 Sept 15 approve 45 disapprove 53 so thats a two point drop in ONE DAY with a three point surge in dissaproval in ONE DAY. There is no good news for Bush in the polls.
[link to www.rasmussenreports.com]
47% is still "less than average". Hundreds of millions hate him. He's had us at war now for four years with NO victory and all the intel points to a worsening of the situation. Bush is batting 0.
And just had to laugh. What other polls do the Republican apologists plan to pull from their hinders?
"When asked would you vote for a Republican who would cut your taxes vs. a Democrat that would raise them, people overwhelming voted Republican."
No s**t. Who would vote for a tax increase on THEM, especially since the majority of those polled are bound to be Middle Class families who are probably scraping by as it is? But if the SAME question were phrased to reflect the REAL Democratic position on taxes, rolling back the portion of the capital gains tax cut that goes to the richest Americans in order to reduce the deficit and install fiscal responsibility THEN undoubtedly the poll would favor Democrats. Who in their right mind is going to argue that this spend and borrow Republican government is acting the best interests of ANYONE except the ultra-wealthy? In a recent poll, 60% of the respondents said the economy is going in the wrong direction, based on, what else, personal experience. The economy to most Americans is their standard of living, here and now, not some aggregate statistical abstraction for the Republican robber barons to tout as "progress" and "growth", which perhaps is true when you AVERAGE in all the redistribution of wealth to the wealthy. As for the rest of us? It’s Hoover Flags all around, a deserved reference when you consider that 2005 was the first time since the Great Depression (1932) that real wages went DOWN.
get to make up the questions.
what's with you and your deep seated flaming hatred of Bush. And America. and everything good and pure.
I started hating everything that is just and good when Bush started likening himself to everything that is just and good. I'm subversive that way.
Having been involved in political campaigns, always look for what a poll doesn't tell you. First, what are George Bush's negatives? Even Rasmussen, a GOP pollster, shows Bush's disapproval numbers holding steady. That's the number that's important. Secondly, the poll was released and taken during the 5 year anniversary GOP celebrations of 9-11 along with the gas price drop. Let's face it, there are only two groups of people who celebrate with glee 9-11: Al Queda and the GOP. Oh my God! Did I just compare the GOP to AlQueda? How outrageous! The Bushies have been doing a big push this week, which started out with the Path to 9-11 and speeches and culminating today in Ney's admission of guilt. Thirdly, was this a Wall Street Journal poll? These are the same guys that had Bush winning by 8 point in the general and capturing both Pennsylvania and New Jersey in 2004 a week before the election. They had bush up 54%, when he barely got 50%. Look at the agenda here folks. Push the promotions, have the parades and celebrations about not killing Osoma Bin Laden and cap the week off with a bogus poll showing you went up 2 percent. Forget the polls. Even if the Dems win the senate and house back, expect an editorial in the WSJ entitled something like: Bush Pulls Off Victory! Then Brian what's his name can get on the tube and declaim: Bush wins and he's still our president!
Nowhere in this edition of Hardball...as cited by mmfa...does Mathews quote the NBCnews/Wall St poll as his source.
A real fantasy by Kalven.
Wesley, note this exchange...
Now...to what poll do you think Matthews was referring?
Please implement a new system for comments. This one stinks.
Cordially, CD
typo
MATTHEWS: Well, let‘s talk about how precisely people are looking at things. We have got a new NBC/”Wall Street Journal” poll
[link to www.msnbc.msn.com]
typo
- On Hardball, Chris Matthews touted a poll showing Bush's approval rating climbing two percentage points - mmfa
No where in this edition of Hardball does Mathews make this quote. More sloppy fantasy by Kalven.
an overwhelming urge to prove yourself as being right about such irrelevant things?
which Mathews did say is usually considered to be 2. Are you OCD or just really annoying?
I was not referring to " a couple". I was making the point that Kalven made up the entire quote.
For homework...watch the tape or read the transcript...the statement by Kalven is no where to be found.
It might be irrelevant to a junior high student with ADD or someone unconcerned with the facts.
What exactly did he quote Matthews as saying?
facts?! Are you kidding me? Since when have conservatives cared about facts? We're the ones living in the real world Lesley, er Wesley. If that's your real name. Gimme a break. Do you know what a "quote" is? Can you determine that Mathews probably meant "2" when he said a couple. Only a neocon trying desperately to change the subject would make such a ridiculous argument as yours.
This from the transcript from MSNBC website:
[link to www.msnbc.msn.com]
MATTHEWS: Let me talk politics for a second. The president is picking up in the polls, picked up a couple of points, but there‘s a real change in direction in the polling. Wrong direction, right direction? People are a little more happy with the way things are going right now. If he keeps doing this, what he has been doing the last two weeks for the next eight weeks, he is going to be back to 50 percent. Do you know that? Fifty percent in the polls, which means he doesn‘t have to worry about losing the House anymore.
Matthews clearly said Bush picked up a couple of points in the polls and that if he continued the trend over the next 8 weeks he would be at 50%. Are you actually holding MMFA accountable for equating 'Two' with 'Couple' ? Is that what you are complaining about? If so, that is completely sad....
The answer is nope...and nope.
Please show the actual quote by Mathews...he does not cite the NBC/Wall St poll as his source OR declare that Pres.Bush had any kind of bounce or otherwise in the polls. His reply was to O'Donnell about republicans retaining control of congress.
MMFA never quoted Mathews, they never put any quotation marks on anything he said, and they never claimed to quote him. All it takes is a little reading comprehension to see that what MMFA stated what Mathews did on his program is what actually happened. I really don't understand what you are splitting hairs about, and I don't see what point you are trying to make. Seems you are focusing on irrelevance...
on purpose or are you trying to just cheese people off? I'm trying to figure out your motive. You've been succesful at taking us all off topic, maybe that's it. I can think of no rational explanation for your wholly false argument. When something is surrounded by these little things "...." it's a quote. MMFA says he touted which is accurate. Are you sniffing glue?
among other things funded Lech Walesa in Poland and the solidarity movement that kicked the commies out of their. George Soros is a hero and dilligent fighter for freedom around the world. Of course he is for freedom and neo cons are for control, he makes the perfect enemy. Don't worry Wentley, when we get the country back will protect your right to misdirect your animosity.
Soros is anything but about freedom.
He wants people to be slaves to an international government.
Your whole life would be controlled by a global big daddy.
He is the antithesis of freedom.
What is your purpose in the world? Are your beliefs guided by anything other than that which is the opposite of your opponent? If you are merely trying to appear clever you pull up short. If attention is what you crave you need not simply be obstinate, you can contribute positively even in disagreement.
You may think that raising the ire of lefties is fine sport. It may make you feel superior, but isn't it a short lived gratification?
Bring something that makes people think, then we can all benefit from your perspective. This contrary ethic you practice only stultifies your development as a contemplative human being.
Did you decide that simply denying reality was a successful tactic. You are flat out wrong as the transcript shows.
[link to www.msnbc.msn.com]
Karl Rove has the media in his pocket. The Republicans have endless supplies of money. The Republicans won't hesitate to cheat again in this election. The Democrats seem reluctant to mount an all-out offensive against the worst President in modern history. The people who aren't paying attention are going to let the Republigoons scare them once again with lies and distortions...I predict that one-party rule continues for the foreseeable future.
"He wants people to be slaves to an international government.
Your whole life would be controlled by a global big daddy." (Leatherhelmet on Soros)
Wingnuts, MARCH!
This is typical of how Mathew the bozo runs his program. His constant, but not too subtle digs at democratic party, show him to be a partisan republican hack. O' Donnell is simply following in his footsteps. The problem with this country is that the corporate media has been taken over people like Mathews and O'Donnel who are there simply to picth the GOP talking points. Thats how these people make money, similar to another world's oldest profession.
The "couple of points" in Bush's favor was within the margin of error. In other words, no, Chris, he didn't pick up squat. (And there are still sheep out there who'll defend anything the Fuhrer says. Any culture, even the GOP knows that! So he's not likely to lose many more points--not that that would be possible.)
Note that Dubya's approval ratings are less than half of what Bill Clinton's were when he was impeached!
Every time Bush speaks for more than a half hour it's on the front page the next day? Yeah, Dubya is so eloquent. As covered here on MMFA, his Rose Garden extravagnza showed a tongue-tied idiot without a script. He didn't answer questions; he changed the subject. He was even, frankly, rude because of his inability to answer questions.
Tune him out? I never tuned Dubya in! He needs to be impeached, tried and convicted. And the media figures who've played the Rove card again and again--are you among them, Chris?--need to be punished by the same standards, like Goebells would have been had he not committed suicide first.