Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

CNN lets GOPer lie about CNN poll on CNN

By Charlotte Innes . Posted May 9, 2007.


How much 'balance' can you take?

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Atheism and Diversity: Is It Wrong For Atheists To Convert Believers?
Greta Christina

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Don't Fear the Deficit Bogeyman
John Miller

DrugReporter:
The War on Weed: Marijuana Is Basically Harmless -- The Monumentally Stupid Drug War Is Not
Jim Hightower

Environment:
White House Garden Won't Make Up for Obama's Nomination of Pesticide Lobbyist for US Chief Agriculture Negotiator
Jill Richardson

Food:
Don't Be Scared of Food: Are We Being Needlessly Hysterical About Food Safety?
David E. Gumpert

Health and Wellness:
47,000 Women Could Die As a Result of the New Mammogram Guidelines
George Lakoff

Immigration:
Lou Dobbs, Eyeing Public Office, Endorses Policy He's Long Spun as "Amnesty for Illegals"
Joshua Holland

Media and Technology:
The Memory Scrub About Why Ft. Hood Happened Is Almost Complete ... If It Weren't for Archives
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
Disney Apocalypse: Why 2012 Sucks
Alexander Zaitchik

Politics:
White House's Ties to Health Care Industry Deeper Than Visitor Records Show
Daniela Perdomo

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Can't We Look Away From Sarah Palin?
Vanessa Richmond

Rights and Liberties:
Whatever Happened to the CIA Black Sites?
David Corn

Sex and Relationships:
Hot Mormon Muffins and Models for Jesus: What's With All the Sexy Christians?
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Poseidon's Financial Shell Game: Why Is a Private Desalination Plant Asking for Public Money?
Peter Gleick

World:
Is Obama Following in the Footsteps of Bill Clinton?
Jeff Cohen

More stories by Charlotte Innes

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

From Talking Points Memo:

Wolf's guest, GOP operative Rich Galen, said the following about CNN's numbers on support for withdrawal timetables:

"Sixty-one percent in that same poll said that they -- they disagreed with a timeline. They agreed with benchmarks. But 61 percent of the American people disagreed with them...when it comes down to the crunch, paying for the soldiers, paying -- paying the bills to continue this war against terrorism, that's 61 percent of the American people."
Wolf didn't challenge this in any way.

Wolf! The man is deceiving your viewers about your own network's poll. After all, CNN's survey showed that 57% support withdrawal timelines. Galen says 61% opposes them. But 57 plus 61 equals 118. My rudimentary understanding of mathematics tells me that the maximum number for a percentage is 100.

In reality, the poll actually found that 41%, not 61%, opposes timetables. The 61% Galen was referring to was the number that backs an approach that uses benchmarks without timetables, as Galen also pointed out. But it emphatically does not refer to the number that opposes timetables -- again, 41% -- when people are directly asked about them. The overarching political reality that there's solid majority support both for an approach that uses timetables (57%) and for an approach that uses only benchmarks (61%). Galen, for obvious reasons, was trying to obscure this reality. That's why he conflated the numbers the way he did.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: gop, polling, cnn, talking points

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement