archive.stlimc.org : http://archive.stlimc.org
archive.stlimc.org

Commentary :: Military

Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

Washington Post and ABC News just released a poll of U.S. public opinion on Iraq. But the Post's numbers in their print version (in the body of the article) underestimates the "Out Now" position by more than 3 times. One has to look at their actual numbers (Poll Data) to see that support for "staying the course" is much smaller than the article suggests.
The Washington Post has published the results of their joint survey with ABC News on the front page today under the heading "Survey Finds Most Support Staying in Iraq - Public Skeptical About Gains Against Insurgents" by Richard Morin and Dan Balz.

The article is available online at:
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/27/AR2005062700270.html

The first two paragraphs read:

"a new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds that most Americans do not believe the administration's claims that impressive gains are being made against the insurgency, but a clear majority is willing to keep U.S. forces there for an extended time to stabilize the country.

The survey found that only one in eight Americans currently favors an immediate pullout of U.S. forces, while a solid majority continues to agree with Bush that the United States must remain in Iraq until civil order is restored -- a goal that most of those surveyed acknowledge is, at best, several years away."

The article misrepresents the actual numbers as published under "Poll Data" which can be accessed through the article's webpage:

Poll Data (PDF):
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll062705.pdf

Question #7 under "Poll Data" reads: "Do you think the United States should keep its military forces in Iraq until civil order is restored there, even if that means continued U.S. military casualties; OR, do you think the United States should withdraw its military forces from Iraq in order to avoid further U.S. military casualties, even if it means civil order is not restored there?

Keep forces = 58%
Withdraw forces = 41%
No opinion = 2%

41% is just over two out of five, not "one in eight" (12.5%) as the second paragraph suggests. And 8% over half is not a "solid majority" for "staying the course." It would be more accurately described as a "slim majority!

I have studied the Poll Data, and I don't know where the Post gets "one in eight" for immediate pullout.

The graph on the website that reads "Just your best guess, about how much longer do you think the United States will need to keep U.S. military forces in Iraq?" (Question #15) shows just 6% support "pull out now," which is not "one in eight;" it's less than half that: one in sixteen. But Question #15 can be understood as a strategic and not a political question, and so it is not as reliable question of U.S. support for continued occupation vs withdrawal as question #7.

If this was an accident, it was a pretty sloppy one.
 
 

Comments

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

It's the Jews stupid
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

It's the Jews stupid
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

Think they're disconnected from reality?
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

Who reads the Washington Post anymore. Certainly you will not find much balance or objectivity when the topic concerns the Bush Administration
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

cb,

So much for the tolerance BushBaby talked about tonight.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

wow
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

What else can we expect from the now corporatized Bob Woodward?
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

Actually, the Post is right if you look at the poll a certain way. There were two questions about pulling out the troops: [1] Do you think the U.S. should keep its military in Iraq or pull out? (answer: 58% keep, 41% pull out) and [2] Should all the forces be withdrawn immediately or should they be decreased? (Answer: 34% withdrawn immed. 66% decreased). So if you multiply 41% by 34% you will get 12% or 1 in 8 who think that the troops should be withdrawn immediately.

This is somewhat misleading given that the second question implies "Should we run away or retreat in an orderly fashion?" Most people want an ordered retreat... duh!
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

My only bone of contention is your characterization of a "slim majority". In fact, if it is over 55%, it gets called a solid majority, just as any election with win margins over that point are considered 'landslides'. Slim majority would be 50-55%. Over 60-65%, it generally gets termed a supermajority, and over 70-75%, a "vast majority".

So, I accept your argument on the data figures, but not on the way they framed/termed the support for "staying the course".
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

The 13% is seen in the last graphic where waPo splits out the 41% into 13% immediate withdrawal and the remainder for "gradual" withdrawal. Regardless, its a misleading lead that appears to be groping for pearls in the swill.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

Actually, the 12% is correct.

It is based on question 13 and the follow-up question 14 (which was only asked of the 38 percent who answered "Decreased" to question 13.

To make it clear: 38% said the number of US military forces in Iraq should be decreased. Of these, 34% said they should be withdrawn immediately. 34% of 38 is about 12% (actually nearer to 13%).

So calm down, folks!

Bush is still a liar, of course. And personally I think the US should withdraw immediately. But the Post isn't doing a Jeff Gannon on this one.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

It wasn't an accident!!!!! Don't read there crap!
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

Several of the replies to the validity of the presented data in this article have no mathmatical basis and are therefore incorrect. Unless stated, polled data is representative only of the question asked. In this article, all questions are consideded to represent a unique and uncoupled questions which are required for appropriate sampling.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

America deserves George! After all you voted for him!
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

As I remember, through out history, one cultural institution, that claims Whoopie Goldberg and Tom Lantos are the same race, is the only culture that seems to go through cycles of feast and famine in the eyes of humanity. It's not the Catholic, not the inuits, not ethopeans, not indians of the andes - it's the Jew. Most Jews are people,some are are nice, some are ass-holes - they play the providence game just like evangelical christians or agnostics. But most Jews are with humanity.

So why do some Jewish alpha males seem to beleive that providence has given them license to "choose" over others? Is it providence or is the victim motiff just a place for treachery and hate to hide behind as they collect their blood money? Vampires.

The last cycle, there have been others before for sure, began with Trotsky I guess, where Judeo secret police murdered millions of christians. Followed by a down cycle whereby the good Nazi ship Tel Aviv took zionists with pockets full of Nazi marks off to kill palestinias leaving the diaspora to be fed the gestapo.

Then Israel([search]) - a high point in the cycle - now blood in kindegarden in gaza([search]), intelligence ops in irag, the USS liberty, Lavon, and mossad bombers in mexican parliment a few days after 911.

Is the down cycle beginning again or do the zionist in the DOD and banks of NY and bomb makers going to try and beat trotsky's kill rate before someone is forced to put a stop to it with extreme prejudice?

Is this how the cycle starts again - are the bad apples giving rise to a distrust and maybe hatred of all Jews? Judeo - stand up and take back your culture and let it be our time that ends, for all time, this eternal cycle of hate and retribution.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

The estimate seems to come form questions 13 and 14 put together.

13. Do you think the number of U.S. military forces in Iraq should be
(increased), (decreased), or kept about the same?

38% said decrease

BASED ON THOSE WHO ANSWERED "DECREASED" IN Q13
14. Should all U.S. forces in Iraq be withdrawn immediately, or should they be
decreased, but not all withdrawn immediately?

34% said widthdraw immediately

34% of 38% comes out too 13% or 1/8 of the total.

but to use that number is deliberately misleading, 38% of the total are still saying we should leave, the only difference is between pulling out graduly or all at once.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

As others have doubtlessly mentioned, it's from a couple of other questions, #13 and #14 (followup to #13). In the summation of the two, approx 13% favor IMMEDIATE withdrawal.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

Thanks to Nick W, dee arnall, gandhi, Theo and Anonymous Poster for pointing out how the Washington Post arrived at the 1 in 8, and obviously, to Mike Rivero for reposting my brief and obviously superficial analysis.

I had the same thought as I was falling asleep last night. Guess I should have waited to write my analysis. It has been too long since I studied polling, but I think DesMondu is correct that each question should be considered independently.

I dispute Jeremius's contention that anything over 55% is "solid majority," despite the broad use of that terminology in regards to elections. A shift a few percentage points, which could happen in just a month's time, could bring this majority into minority, especially with a margin of error of 3-4%.

I still stand by my #1 claim - that the WashPost is underestimating support for withdrawal - but I'll have to add the caveat that it's somewhere between 12.5% and 41%.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

The one in eight figure would appear to correspond to the bottom graph on the first page of the online article. Of 38% who thought US forces should be decreased, 13% favored immediate withdrawal.
See the reply to Q. 13/14 NET at:
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll062705.pdf

As to the 58% figure. In politics, that's a landslide.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

More propaganda and spin from the people who were cheerleading the war effort from the beginning. I agree with DesMondu, that subversively linking questions to produce taylored data is , well, par for the course for WashPostCo.

It's just more slime from the sh_t monsters! Open up and enjoy, if you like that kind of thing.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

The longer we stay in Iraq, the more dangerous it will be. Iraq provides the best motivation for Muslims in the world to kill Americans, and it provides a place for them to learn how to improvise killing devices for killing Americans in urban environments.
 

counterpunch picked up this story up

 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

While multiplying 41% by 34% gives you a percentage roughly equivalent to 1 in 8, the comment by DesMondu is right that it is not acceptable statistical practice to link questions or report an answer to a question not explicitly asked to all in the sample. My graduate school professors would have raked me over the coals for such a sophomoric mistake. Further, what makes this post additionally problematic is following the 1 in 8 figure with the statement about a clear majority. While 58% is a decent majority in a society that has been conditioned to only care about what 50% plus one have to say, the issue I have is that by not stating the 58% percent in this paragraph, they leave the reader to believe that the clear majority is something closer to 87.5% (100% less 1 in 8). This is VERY sloppy reporting at best, and if I didn't know better (wait...I don't know better) I'd think they were trying to intentionally mislead us.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

It's not sloppy reporting. This article is sloppy. This is standard polling data. I hate it when either side, especially mine (liberals) doesn't read carefully enough and goes ahead with their idealogical arguements. In our case giving ammunition to conservatives. The 13 percent is for withdraw immpediately the 38 is for decrease. The 41% number is close to the 38 in a similarly general question showing relative consistency in peoples answers. They're doucebags all on their own merits, we don't need to help.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

It's not sloppy reporting. This article is sloppy. This is standard polling data. I hate it when either side, especially mine (liberals) doesn't read carefully enough and goes ahead with their idealogical arguements. In our case giving ammunition to conservatives. The 13 percent is for withdraw immpediately the 38 is for decrease. The 41% number is close to the 38 in a similarly general question showing relative consistency in peoples answers. They're douchebags all on their own merits, we don't need to help.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

I just want to make a comment about the "solid majority" (56%) that rejected withdrawal. It's remarkable enough that 41% supported withdrawal, given the national media climate. It's even more remarkable in light of the bias in the phrasing of the question. The question asked whether troops should stay until civil order is restored or should go even if that goal is not reached. There's an extremely questionable assumption there. Nowhere in the poll is there a question about whether the US military presence in Iraq is reducing the chaos or creating it. It's a question that the media isn't asking either.

Imagine if that question was asked in the poll alongside the question about withdrawal, with the assumption about civil order removed. I for one am going to write to the authors of the poll (I have one email address, morinr (at) washpost.com) and suggest that the questions be asked this way in future versions of the poll.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

I sent the following suggestions to Richard Morin, one of the authors of the WP poll. The question numbering is that of the poll data document linked in Mike's article.

(a) Questions 13 and 14 are not rationally paired. As I wrote in my letter [to the editor], "There is no contradiction between wanting the troops to come home now and wanting troop levels to be adequate." The linking of 13 and 14 may therefore underestimate (or, conceivably, overestimate) the real level of support for immediate withdrawal. Questions 7 and 14 would make a more rational pairing, since they are both about withdrawal, whereas question 13 is about troop levels.
(b) Question 7 is not a neutral measure of support for withdrawal vs. staying in, because it argumentatively links US military presence in Iraq with civil order in Iraq. It assumes, and encourages respondents to assume, that
(i) civil order can be achieved with US military presence
(ii) civil order can only be achieved with US military presence
(iii) US military presence is conducive to civil order
The part about civil order should be removed from the phraseology, as it tends to bias respondents toward saying "stay," at least those who care about Iraqi civil order.
(c) A question about the relationship between civil order and US military presence should be added, modeled on propositions (b)(i) - (b)(iii) above. Then question 10, which is flawed in a similar way to question 7, would no longer be needed.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

Askk all of those who want the troops to remain if they would go to Iraq themselves to help restore civil order.
 

Re: Washington Post Underestimates "Out Now" opinion

Ask all of those who want the troops to remain if they would go to Iraq themselves or send their children to help restore civil order.
 

Account Login

Media Centers

Quote-of-the-Moment

An inglorious peace is better than a dishonorable war.
-- Mark Twain
Source: "Glances at History" (suppressed)
 

This site made manifest by dadaIMC software