A 2013 study—a poll—found that three out of four Americans suspect polls of bias. Presumably, there was far greater distrust among the people who refused to take the survey.
New Yorker 11/16/15
Is it not well-accepted on this site that in order to evaluate trustworthiness of a position that one is well-advised to FOLLOW THE MONEY surrounding the person or organization making a particular statement?
Everyone is, of course, entitled to their own opinion once they take a look at what facts are discernible, but I believe we owe it to ourselves to take a good, hard look if we imagine ourselves to be ‘reality-based.’
FACT: The PPP National Survey Results last night indicated that the polling was prompted by Correct The Record (see image above).
PDF of full results including this statement: www.publicpolicypolling.com/...
I believe conducting the poll ‘on behalf of CTR’ strongly suggests CTR paid money for them to do said polling. If I am incorrect, please show proof.
I believe that since the polling was commissioned, the contract from CTR likely designed -at least in part- the content of the questions and how the people polled were selected — this is how those contracts work. Any business commissioning polling would provide such guidelines to produce the polling they felt supports their position. This is not corruption, this is business as usual in this country. This does not necessarily make this sort of exchange corrupt, but there may be some who would want to be fully aware of what was contractually agreed-to in the polling to weigh the evidence. In my opinion, short of a law suit or FEC investigation, this information is unlikely to be available to poll-readers.
I have been accused to potential CT, so I will state my position again:
Polling firms conduct polls to make a living — this does not make them corrupt, per se, if they conduct a poll for partisan purposes, it means they are doing the job they are paid to do, like any business. There is no law which says polling houses must answer to a higher calling (or be more unbiased) than other businesses.
That said, I believe that before accepting poll results as absolute fact, poll-readers should consider whether the poll from last night may have contained bias. I happen to believe the poll was likely biased and likely designed to be so by Correct The Record. Bias is not illegal and it’s not necessarily even a questionable business practice.
* * *
For the first time in American History, a candidate running for the Democratic nomination has a SuperPAC designed SPECIFICALLY to attack her primary opponents — the mission of CTR is to attack (David Brock says ‘to show contrast’ with) the others in the primary race. I gather many Kossacks do not have a problem with a SuperPAC (with no restrictions on how much money it can collect) going after others in our party. I don’t like it — I think it’s slimy. Is it illegal? No. Is it unethical? Perhaps. Is it the will of party members for our party politics to proceed this way into the future? We shall find out in 2016. Should it be mentioned that this is a new way of business which hasn’t yet been vetted by the public? Absolutely.
If a diary is going to proclaim that the PPP poll from last night demonstrates that Secretary Clinton won the debate, it is incumbent upon the diarist to mention that the poll making this claim was contracted to conduct that poll by a pro-Clinton SuperPAC.
* * *
For those as yet unfamiliar with Correct the Record, you may want to take a look at this organization changing the way Democrats do politics. Here’s David Brock discussing Correct The Record on Bloomberg Politics from September as he describes his ‘due diligence’ and ‘drawing some contrast’ and ‘doing the media’s homework for it:’
Here’s their initial press release — you’ll note it claims an intention to coordinate with the campaign and the party: