About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

NY Post, Fox News touted flawed GOP poll to claim "America Says Let's Win [Iraq] War"

February 21, 2007 8:30 pm ET

Trouble viewing clip? Download: QT | WMV

SUMMARY: The New York Post and Fox News touted a poll that found that "57 percent of Americans supported 'finishing the job in Iraq' -- keeping U.S. troops there until the Iraqis can provide security on their own." But neither the Post nor Fox News noted that the company that conducted the poll considers itself a "Republican polling firm" and that poll questions apparently were, according to the head of a different Republican polling firm, "designed to register certain responses."

24 Comments

In a February 21 article, headlined "America Says Let's Win War," the New York Post touted the results of a Public Opinion Strategies poll on the Iraq war -- which has been reportedly dismissed by a Republican pollster as "designed to register certain responses" and conflicts with recent nonpartisan national polling -- to declare that "[i]n a dramatic finding, a new poll shows a solid majority of Americans still wants to win the war in Iraq -- and keep U.S. troops there until the Baghdad government can take over." The Post reported that the "poll found that 57 percent of Americans supported 'finishing the job in Iraq' -- keeping U.S. troops there until the Iraqis can provide security on their own." The question to which the Post referred asked respondents to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: "I support finishing the job in Iraq, that is, keeping the troops there until the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for its people." The Post also similarly highlighted responses to several of the poll's other loaded questions.

Similarly, during the noon ET hour of Fox News Live, anchor Gregg Jarrett pointed to the poll during a discussion with Fox News military analyst retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney to suggest that the poll shows "that Americans have perhaps a deeper understanding of what is happening in Iraq than, you know, maybe some members of Congress and even some journalists give them credit for." McInerney agreed and stated "they asked the right questions in that poll. ... Americans want to win."

According to blogger Greg Sargent, Republican pollster David E. Johnson, CEO of the Strategic Vision polling firm, criticized the poll as, in Sargent's words, "leading and designed to elicit the answers they got." Johnson also stated, according to Sargent, that "this poll is not the quality we've come to expect from national polling firms." Specifically, Johnson pointed to the question asking if respondents agreed with the statement "I support finishing the job in Iraq" as problematic. Johnson said the question was "designed to elicit a positive response by putting respondents in the position of saying that they don't support 'finishing a job.' ... It's not a straightforward wording at all. It's also put in the first person to personalize it. In polling when you use the first person you generally get a more positive response." Johnson also asserted that the "wording" of the poll's statement "Victory in Iraq, that is creating a young but stable democracy in Iraq and reducing the threat of terrorism at home, is no longer possible for the US" was "completely unprofessional" because"[i]t's designed to confuse the respondent. People are being asked whether two different things can be accomplished -- establishing democracy in Iraq and reducing the threat of terrorism at home -- and doesn't clarify which one people are talking about."

The Public Opinion Strategies poll, conducted February 5-7, asked respondents whether they agreed or disagreed with a series of politically charged statements. The weblog The Carpetbagger Report described these as, "basically the White House's carefully-worded talking points" that are "designed to register certain responses." For instance:

  • Even if they have concerns about his war policies, Americans should stand behind the President in Iraq because we are at war. (56 percent agreed, 43 percent disagreed)
  • The Democrats are going too far, too fast in pressing the President to withdraw the troops from Iraq. (53 percent agreed, 46 percent disagreed)
  • I support finishing the job in Iraq, that is, keeping the troops there until the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for its people. (57 percent agreed, 41 percent disagreed)
  • The Iraq War is a key part of the global war on terrorism. (57 percent agreed, 41 percent disagreed)
  • A stable Iraq is the best way to protect America from the nuclear threat of Iran. (47 percent agreed, 49 percent disagreed)
  • Victory in Iraq, that is creating a young but stable democracy and reducing the threat of terrorism at home, is no longer possible for the US. (43 percent agreed, 53 percent disagreed)
  • Losing the war in Iraq would mean that the United States is no longer a superpower, but just another power. (31 percent agreed, 66 percent disagreed)
  • I don't really care about what happens in Iraq after the US leaves, I just want the troops brought home. (25 percent agreed, 74 percent disagreed)

The poll also asked respondents, "Which one of the following statements regarding the US involvement in Iraq do you MOST agree with": a) "The US should immediately withdraw its troops from Iraq." b) "Whether Iraq is stable or not, the US should set and hold to set a strict timetable for withdrawing troops." c) "While I don't agree that the US should be in the war, our troops should stay there and do whatever it takes to restore order until the Iraqis can govern and provide security to their country" or d) "The Iraq War is the front line in the battle against terrorism and our troops should stay there and do whatever it takes to restore order until the Iraqis can govern and provide security to their country." The Post characterized these statements as giving respondents "a choice of four policies" and concluded that "an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops was the least popular" policy option.

But recent nonpartisan polls yielded results that conflict with the Public Opinion Strategies results. For instance, a CBS News poll conducted February 8-11 asked respondents: "Should the U.S. increase the number of U.S. troops in Iraq, keep the same number of U.S. troops in Iraq as there are now, decrease the number of U.S. troops in Iraq, or remove all its troops from Iraq?" Twenty-six percent of respondents said the U.S. should "increase" troops; 17 percent said the U.S. should "keep the same number" of troops; 23 percent responded that the U.S. should "decrease the number" of troops in Iraq and 28 percent said they favored "remov[ing] all" U.S. troops from the country. The CBS poll also asked respondents if they "agree[d] or disagree[d] with the following statement: Even when they have some objections or reservations, Congress should cooperate and support President George W. Bush's legislative proposals in order to give them a chance"; 54 percent of the respondents disagreed, while 39 percent agreed.

Additionally, a Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey, conducted February 7-11, asked respondents to indicate whether "the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized" or "bring its troops home as soon as possible." The majority, 53 percent, responded that the "U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible." The Pew poll also asked: "Do you think the war in Iraq has helped the war on terrorism, or has it hurt the war on terrorism"; 47 percent indicated that they believed the Iraq war has "hurt the war on terrorism." Further, the Pew poll found that 55 percent were more "concern[ed]" that "the U.S. will wait too long to withdraw its troops from Iraq," rather than "leave Iraq before a stable democracy is in place." According to the Pew poll, 47 percent of respondents said that the United States will "probably" or "definitely fail in establishing a stable democratic government in Iraq," versus 44 percent who said they thought the United States would "definitely" or "probably succeed."

Further, neither the Post nor Jarrett noted that Public Opinion Strategies is a Republican polling firm. Indeed, following the November 2006 midterm elections, the firm issued a press release that described itself as a "Republican polling firm" and carried the headline, "Public Opinion Strategies Mourns Republican Losses, Congratulates Many Individual Winners in Tough Races."

According to a February 19 article in the Chattanooga Times Free Press, "Davis Lundy, owner of the Chattanooga-based strategic communications and public affairs firm The Moriah Group, commissioned the Public Opinion Strategies survey" because Lundy did not believe the Democrats won control of Congress due to a "mandate on Iraq." Instead, the Times Free Press reported, Lundy believed there "was a clash between the extremes in both parties over Iraq that dominated the news but didn't represent the true will of the American people." Lundy founded the Moriah Group, according to the firm's website, when he "took on the successful political campaign for U.S. Congressman Zach Wamp [R-TN]."

From the 12 p.m. ET hour of the February 21 edition of Fox News Live:

JARRETT: You know, General, there's a new poll just out by Public Opinion Strategies. A solid majority of Americans, 57 percent, support finishing the job in Iraq. And a similar majority believe victory is still possible in Iraq. And here's the most surprising part, General, only 17 percent want an immediate withdrawal of troops. Does that poll suggest to you that Americans have perhaps a deeper understanding of what's happening in Iraq than, you know, maybe some members of Congress and even some journalists give them credit for?

McINERNEY: I think it does, Gregg. And, as a matter of fact, they asked the right questions in that poll. A lot of the time they don't ask the right questions. They asked the right questions. Americans want to win. That was the deciding factor in the election in November. The president has put in a new strategy. And, by the way, I talked to Major General Bill Caldwell in Baghdad this morning and -- along with some other news analysts. The fact is, there are a lot of very positive signs pointing out that the battle for Baghdad that we've now started on, led by the prime minister, [Nuri Kamal al-]Maliki, is bringing some very favorable results. It's not there yet. I don't want to give you a happy face, but the point is it's a very encouraging sign. [British] Prime Minister [Tony] Blair said 80 to 90 percent of the activity in Iraq is within a 30-mile radius of Baghdad. That's the center of gravity.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by tex (February 21, 2007 9:27 pm ET)
         

      Good Lord. These people are shameless.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by redking75687 (February 22, 2007 1:24 am ET)
           

        They enjoy the killing. They absolutely love it. One huge cult of death and war, lies and deceit, bigotry and racism, hatred and anger. The best word to describe them is satanic.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by BLR (February 22, 2007 10:30 am ET)
             

          Only if you have a knee-jerk reaction to the word Satanic.  I personally know Satanists who find this kind of this abhorrent.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by lindenbully (February 22, 2007 12:45 pm ET)
             

          I don't know if I would call them Satanic, but certainly devilishly ignorant.

          It seems to me that the media has become the grieving widow to the (former) Republican congressional majority, the President and to the Iraq (Mission Accomplished) war strategy. Unfortunately the bitter irony is that Mr. Bush's policies have left thousands of actual grieving widow(ers)s in their wake.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by conleytgwinn (February 22, 2007 7:13 pm ET)
               

            "It seems to me that the media has become the grieving widow to the (former) Republican congressional majority, the President and to the Iraq (Mission Accomplished) war strategy."

            What an apt formulation of the role of the S.C.U.M.* in this immorality play!

            So-Called Unbiased Media courtesy of Easy To Refute Wingnuts

            Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (February 21, 2007 9:43 pm ET)
         

      Sample FOX News poll question:

      "Considering that the failure to finish our mission in Iraq may likely result in the cancellation of Christmas are you in favor of our troops retreating from Iraq  like the Democrats want, or are you in favor of winning the war?"

      Report Abuse
      • Author by therick (February 21, 2007 10:17 pm ET)
           

        Being a Democrat, I can't tell you how surprised I was to find out that my party leaders have been hoping that the terra-ists would win.  But they're smarter than me, so I gotta think they know what they're doing.  ;-)

        Report Abuse
    • Author by princeofwheels (February 21, 2007 9:44 pm ET)
         

      WHAT ARE WE GOING TO WIN????

      MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.....

      CUT AND RUN BRITS don't want to be around when the Shia get nasty after BushCo bomb Iran.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by DorisRussell (February 21, 2007 10:21 pm ET)
         

      No FOX and NY Post and GOP

      America says "we have lost in Iraq because of Bush and his cronies , its time to leave before one more innocent life is lost"

      Of course however the GOP talking machine refuses to listen and they keep saying the same crap over and over again.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by loonz (February 21, 2007 10:36 pm ET)
         

      Should U.S. troops be bogged down in Iraq with Iraqi citizens picking them off one by one, all while bin Laden remains free?

       

      [YES] or [NO]

      Report Abuse
    • Author by loonz (February 21, 2007 10:45 pm ET)
         

      Here's Arianna Huffington smacking down the poll.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (February 21, 2007 10:49 pm ET)
         

      In my opinion, any poll that doesn't ask whether Vice-President, Dick Cheney, deserves to be impeached is fundamentally flawed.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by sfcretired (February 21, 2007 11:39 pm ET)
         

      Public Opinion Strategies made me think of another acronym from 36 years ago.

      CReEP http://americanhistory.si.edu/maroon/crp_frm.htm

      Just more lies for the bleating sheep of the Repub party and Faux Nuance Creations to present as "facts" for the nodding Ditto heads on the right.

       

       

       

      Report Abuse
    • Author by cannibalicious (February 21, 2007 11:55 pm ET)
         

      fox scares me.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (February 22, 2007 12:03 am ET)
           

        Great link, SFC, warm memories of CREEP.I was 9 years old in '71, and had just moved to Orange County from L.A. I was amazed at the re-elect the Prez. crowd I found here, even in 5th grade I smelled the BS, and I'd never been on a farm in my life.

        The half of me that didn't come from New York Mick came from South Dakota Dane, and my moms family (who devolved into conservatives in their doddering years) were all working on the McGovern campaign,that sure seems like a long time ago.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by redking75687 (February 22, 2007 1:29 am ET)
           

        You should be afraid. They're out to rule the world.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by sasami (February 22, 2007 1:45 am ET)
         

      The 'Fox Facts' subtitle on the news report was all you needed to know.

      (Boy, there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one..)

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Icedog (February 22, 2007 9:35 am ET)
         

      I don't trust any polls. People are too quick to believe poll results that match their own feelings, but completely disregard those that don't.  Anyone who has taken a course in Elementary Statistics can tell you...it's very simple to get whatever results you want.

      Loonz, fyi, using Huffington as a source of information will greatly harm your credibility.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by pete592 (February 22, 2007 10:13 am ET)
         

      This isn't a poll! 

      This is leading the witness!

      'Flawed' is too generous of a term to describe this steaming pile of ****.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Brian in FL (February 22, 2007 11:46 am ET)
         

      These kind of phony, guided polls are a double-edged sword.

      The fact is, the American people are no longer behind the Iraq War. Believing in fake polls like this one will only make the right-wing appear even more out of touch with the people.

      I think that is a large reason why Republicans were swept out of Congress back in November; they were piling on the BS, but the American people were no longer buying it.

      Republicans would be much better of politically if they faced the realities of how the American people are feeling right now, instead of clinging to false polls and pretending the American people still support the war.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Dem02020 (February 23, 2007 12:32 am ET)
         

      Everybody's heard of that old illustration of trickery in questioning, where an attorney asks "are you still beating your wife?"

      Somewhere somebody is under the mistaken impression that you have to answer that question yes or no.

      You don't have to answer that, or any other question posed to you, whether in court during a trial or anywhere else, by simply saying yes or no.

      You have to answer the question, you must satisfy the inquiry, especially in a legal proceeding... but you may chose your own words in doing so.

      To the question "are you still beating your wife?", you may answer:

      "I am not not now, nor have I ever, beaten my wife."

      Isn't that a true and satisfactory answer to the question? Doesn't that response satisfy the inquiry?

      "Your Honor I protest! The witness is refusing to answer my question yes or no! Please your Honor, instruct the witness."

      "Ummm... I think the witness did answer the question Counsellor... I think we have the truth, and that the inquiry was satisfied, no? Did you miss it? Should the Court Stenographer read back the witness's response?"

      The point here is, that the truth may not be found, by simply saying yes or no (or agreeing or disagreeing) to a question (or statement)... especially the "loaded" question (or statement).

      And it's just as true, that only idiots and children, and sometimes dogs and horses too, simply nod or shake their heads in response to the things their superiors say, and in so doing think themselves to have said something (although I don't guess that dogs and horses, having nodded or shaken their heads, ever think they have said something themselves, as a result... only idiots and children think that).

      The ridiculous (but crafty) statements listed above as part of some sort of "poll", when prompted to someone who is then told he or she may only agree or disagree with what's been said, is in no way any indication to what the respondent really thinks...

      ...is in no way any indication of the truth, no more than is a yes or no answer to the "wife beating" question any indication of the truth of the matter.

      I don't know anybody myself, who discourses on matters of National Policy, by simply agreeing or disagreeing with the statements of others.

      Of course maybe I would know of those who simply agree or disagree with the National Policy statements of others, and then think that as a result they had actually said something themselves...

      ...if I were in the habit of discoursing with idiots and children, and maybe dogs and horses too.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Dem02020 (February 23, 2007 12:58 am ET)
         

      If we think that the crap and gas that Fox Noise Channel passes, is meant to manipulate the opinions of the American People, then we'd be only sometimes right... and then only about a slender minority of the American People, who believe that crappy gas.

      Would you believe such noise is meant sometimes for our agents in Congress, our Senators and Representatives?

      I do.

      Above we have a hack saying, about the fixed poll:

      "Does that poll suggest to you that Americans have perhaps a deeper understanding of what's happening in Iraq than, you know, maybe some members of Congress and even some journalists give them credit for?"

      ...which of course is what was said, right after that same hack said "A solid majority of Americans, 57 percent, support finishing the job in Iraq."

      It makes my stomach turn, to think that even one of our agents in Congress, even one Senator or one Representative, would ever weigh in the least any word ever said on the Fox Noise Channel...

      There's such a slender minority (and getting slimmer all the time) of the American People who believe any of the crap and gas that Fox Noise Channel passes...

      ...for any Congressperson to consider that crap and gas, over and above the voices of their own conscience, and the TRUE opinions of the American People...

      Well, the mere thought of it turns my stomach... it's as perverse a thing as bill o'reilly is.

       

      Report Abuse
      • Author by jeffro (February 24, 2007 3:29 pm ET)
           

        Dem, Thanks for these posts, as they are very important to understand how hannity operates. Also you have caused me to really want to call my reps and ask them: Do you still watch Fox as part of your daily study of the news cycle?

        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.