Slate's Dickerson claimed both Democrats and Republicans are using deceptive push-polling, but provided only GOP example
In an October 30 article documenting Republican "push-polling," in which political campaigns make phone calls purporting to conduct surveys but in fact push a particular viewpoint and often smear an adversary, Slate.com chief political correspondent John Dickerson baselessly suggested that Democrats are "no doubt using the same tactics but haven't been caught doing it as flagrantly yet." In his article, Dickerson provided no examples or reports of Democrats using push-polling, while providing the transcript and audio link for an automated push-poll phone call on behalf of Tennessee Republican Senate candidate Bob Corker. As Media Matters for America has documented, ABC News and NBC News have similarly suggested that both Democrats and Republicans have engaged in "mudslinging" and "dirty tricks," respectively, while providing only Republican examples of such behavior.
From Dickerson's October 30 Slate article:
Help, I've been push polled and I can't get up! During this final week before Election Day, the usual hue and cry has been raised about automated phone calls interrupting the dinner hour. The robotic voices ask questions as if they're conducting a genuine political survey but then deliver talking points favorable to the Republican candidate. (Democrats are no doubt using the same tactics but haven't been caught doing it as flagrantly yet.)
[...]
My bet is that the push polls are as effective as hurling fistfuls of leaflets from your car window. We'll see after Election Day whether the races targeted with these appeals show an increase in Republican turnout, and whether these techniques contributed to that. But early signs are that indiscriminate calling is firing up Republican opponents.
First this was used regarding political advertisements from the Republicans, now it's being used regarding push-polling. John Dickerson cannot even cite any evidence and just says that Democrats are doing it as well. It's obvious that even these journalists know that its basically only the Republicans doing things on this level, and they have to report on it, but they constantly and consistently include the "Democrats do it as well" lines without any evidence because they are deathly afraid of the troglodytes. There may be other reasons as well. If this was happening to the Republicans, they would be screaming bloody murder.
THANK YOU. njguy93@yahoo.com
Q: Do you agree with the president that the U.S. must "win" in Iraq?
Q: Would you still agree the U.S. must "win" in Iraq, knowing that "winning" means the fantasy of an impossible and unending task of achieving a "Democratic Iraq , at Peace with it's Neighbors"?
Q: Would you still agree the U.S. must "win" in Iraq, despite the fact that a "Democratic Iraq" has absolutely nothing to do with the National Security of the U.S.?
Q: Are you comfortable with the fact that so far 2,816 U.S. Troops have been killed in Iraq, in an operation that has absolutely nothing to do with the National Security of the U.S.?
Q: Are you eager to see your loved ones (or yourself even) killed in Iraq for the greed and profit (and lies!) of the Bush administration and all those who blindly support it?
Thank you for taking this survey.
Please do not allow these questions to influence your vote in anyway next Tuesday.
[link to www.usatoday.com]
THANK YOU USA TODAY for destroying MMFA's ANECDOTAL evidence. Thank you for a scholarly study.
thank you
Gee, Art: Want to know why that study says what it says? Not because of any media bias one way or the other, but because almost all of the scandals emanating from DC are from the Repubs, and the media are finally covering it.
That's not what the study showed. It showed that recent news coverage, which for a while focused heavily on the Foley scandal, is having the effect of helping Democrats. That doesn't mean the coverage itself is biased. The Democrats can't help it that the Republics keep screwing up so publicly.
for legitimizing all of Media Matters' studies on bias based on the number of times the media has covered an issue or had guests of certain political affiliations - the same basic methodology as the study you cite: count things and come up with a conclusion.
Of course, USA Today doesn't come to your conclusion - you did that all on your own. The article you cite does NOT mention bias. Rather, it indicates that such coverage has HELPED (no mention of intent, just result) Democrats. It doesn't actually look at HOW those articles covered the issue - Who was quoted? Who wasn't? What ideas were advanced, based on what evidence? (That's what MM actually asks). Of course, you take that as bias, because somehow the "liberal" media decided to "help" the Democrats by covering Foley, Cunningham, Abramoff, etc. Never mind that the Republicans are always calling for "responsibility" and in all of the cases above did the Republicans attempt to deny any real responsibility for illegal/unethical/immoral/disgusting actions.
Also, you must, based on your post, then agree that the media was biased for Republicans during the Clinton scandal based on the number of articles that produced and biased for Republicans during the run up to the war based on the number of articles explaining/defending the justificationd for the war. Don't you agree? Hello?
Your claim is silly and lacking in both context and broader analysis. You just want to find some way that your beloved right wing is not actually responsible for their own actions. Pathetic.
One article does not prove LMB. In fact, I'm surprised to see USA today report this at all. This is not 'liberal paranoia' just a reasonable assessment based upon review of countless articles over the past 6 years...
In my mind, i find it impossible that the outrageous activity of the GOP isn't plastered all over every newspaper from dawn till dusk. Now, that would be LMB... but still factual.
I got my first ever push poll "survey" call yesterday. I was asked if I planned on voting for Ben Cardin or Michael Steele to which I responded Ben Cardin. I was then asked if I preferred to have my taxes lowered or raised and then asked if I wanted to keep "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance. I responded to the two questions with the answer for them to stop the push polling. The "survey" was abruptly terminated after that. Apparently they only wanted to survey morons.
but I played the game. Afterwards, based on the questions asked, I'm pretty sure it was a D survey. Can't be 100% sure, but in thinking about the questions, it appears that it well could have been. Did it influence my vote, no because it went into the mail three or four days before.
engage in sleazy underhanded campaign ads and techniques. We have early voting here so the polls have been open for about a week. The judicial races are non-partisan so there are no mentions of the candidates' party affiliation on the ballots or in their campaign material. Today there was a report about a girl stopping people entering the polling place and asking which party they were going to vote for. When someone answered "Democrat", she would say, "Oh good, here is a list of the judges you should vote for". The only problem is that they were all republican candidates. The county Democratic Party headquarters sent out a sample ballot this week with all the Dem candidates listed so one man challenged her. Later a news person asked her why she was asking voters about their party choice and she replied that she was just curious.
evidence to support it, I guess I should just assume the Dems are doing the same thing, right?