Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Politico's Ben Smith leaves out context of his Obama's-bad-poll-number item

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-02-09 08:48 AM
Original message
Politico's Ben Smith leaves out context of his Obama's-bad-poll-number item
Edited on Wed Sep-02-09 08:51 AM by babylonsister
I'm really tired of politico getting so much attention when they are so clearly r/w hacks. :grr:


http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909020006


Politico's Ben Smith leaves out context of his Obama's-bad-poll-number item

September 02, 2009 9:41 am ET by Eric Boehlert


First, only at Politico do writers hype as news events that might happen:

Historically, Obama's fall is fast


Here's the lede {emphasis added}:

President Barack Obama's approval ratings, once seen as historically high, could soon be among the worst early poll numbers for a modern American president...

The Gallup Organization — whose polls show Obama at just 50 percent approval rating less than eight months into his first term — says only two modern presidents, Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton, saw their approval ratings drop below 50 percent by this time in their presidencies. Ronald Reagan is the next in line, with his numbers dipping after 10 months, while Jimmy Carter retained positive approval numbers for more than a year.


Could Obama's ratings soon become the worst in history? It's possible. Could they soon become the best in history? Also equally possible. (Do you see how pointless this exercise is?)

There are other problems in the Politico report, though. For instance, when readers follow the link to Gallup daily tracking poll, they discover that Obama's approval rating actually stands at 52 percent, not "just 50 percent," as Smith claimed in his report. (The 50 percent mark was hit briefly last week.)

But here's the missing context: In June of 2001 George Bush's approval ratings, according to Gallup, had fallen to 52 percent, just five months into his first term. But for some reason in an item about how Obama's "fall" may be "historically" "fast," Smith forgets to mention that Bush fell faster (by two months) than Obama did.

But no matter. For Smith, the item was a success because last night Karl Rove was tweeting about how Obama's ratings had fallen "faster than any president in modern history." The claim is completely false, but it sure seemed to be on the one Politico wanted to push.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blogslut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-02-09 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. Good old Ben Smith
Pissing in the pool again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-02-09 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
2. Gawd, I can't stand Politico. They are bald-faced dramatists. Hacks.
And far too many people here take their spin as gospel.

and then...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-02-09 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. Politico was established to do the same thing Fox does....
spew propaganda for the right wing. Talon news only updated, imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC