Thursday, February 22, 2007

New poll claims American public wants to win the war in Iraq

Over at Talking Points Memo, Josh Marshall has a great analysis of a New York Post poll claiming that 57 percent of Americans want the United States to win the war. So lets get into this New York Post poll:

February 21, 2007 -- In 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.

Strong majorities also say victory is vital to the War on Terror and that Americans should support President Bush even if they have concerns about the way the war is being handled, according to the survey conducted by Public Opinion Strategies.

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. Forty-one percent disagreed.

By 53 percent to 43 percent they also believe victory in Iraq over the insurgents is still possible.

Despite last November's electoral victories by anti-war Democrats, the survey found little support among voters for a quick pullout of U.S. forces.

Only 25 percent of those surveyed agreed with the statement, "I don't really care what happens in Iraq after the U.S. leaves, I just want the troops brought home." Seventy-four percent disagreed.

The survey was conducted before last week's House of Representatives resolution repudiating Bush's war policies.

It does seem ironic how this one poll contradicts the multitude of poll results that have come out showing the American public against the Bush administration's escalation of the war. The irony here is that this poll was created by a Republican polling firm, where the questions were designed to elicit the responses that the firm wanted to report. Talking Points Memo Greg Sargent has the story on this:

The poll -- which was done by the big GOP firm Public Opinion Strategies and ran under the glaring headline "America Says Lets Win War" -- is being promoted heavily by wingnut talk show hosts, bloggers and others. They are aggressively using it to pump up GOP morale and to undermine Dems' resolve in advance of a showdown between Congress and the White House. Rush Limbaugh said that it's going to "shock the Democrats," while PowerlineBlog's Paul Mirengoff sagely observed that it shows that "the Democrats' defeatist approach to Iraq may not be a winning political strategy." Some liberal bloggers have already started to debunk the poll -- don't miss Steve Benen's skillful skewering of the survey right here.

But guess what: I've just asked another Republican pollster who says he originally supported the war -- let me repeat that, a Republican pollster who says he supported the war -- to analyze the poll. His take? He basically says the poll's a crock. The pollster, David Johnson, the CEO of the GOP firm Strategic Vision, tells me that some of the key questions were leading and designed to elicit the answers they got. "This poll is not the quality we've come to expect from national polling firms," Johnson tells me.

In other words, this is a push poll.

Now Sargent goes into some very specific details on how this push poll was created, which includes critically examining the actual questions here. The question I'm asking here is why was this poll created?

The first, obvious answer to this question is that the poll was conducted by GOP polling firm Public Opinion Strategies. But there is more here. First, some background information. According to Raw Story, Public Opinion Strategies 'was responsible for the "Harry and Louise" ad in the early 90's that scuttled Clinton's health insurance proposals. In 2001, it was charged with violating Virginia's polling disclosure laws, and it has also been accused of using push polls to influence elections.' One possible example of Public Opinion Strategies using push polls to influence elections could be found in this Baltimore Examiner story, which showed Republican governor Robert Ehrlich tied with Democratic challenger Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley, for the Maryland governor's race, at 41 percent each with 15 percent undecided. This was unusual, since statewide polls were showing O'Malley leading Ehrlich by around 11 percentage points. The election results show that O'Malley beat Ehrlich by 6.8 percentage points. What is even more interesting is that all the polling organizations showed O'Malley leading Ehrlich from April 2006 until Election day, with the exception of Public Opinion Strategies 41 percent tie. One more bit of information here. According to The Baltimore Examiner, "Ehrlich is known as a longtime client of Public Opinion Strategies...." More examples of Public Opinion Strategies use of push polling can be found here. It is interesting how Public Opinion Strategies was willing to publish both the national poll showing American support for President Bush's Iraq war, and the earlier Maryland governor's poll showing support for Republican governor Ehrlich--even as both Public Opinion Strategies' polls contradicted the numerous national polls results for both Bush and Ehrlich.

And that is exactly what they are doing. This entire Public Opinion Strategies poll, as published in The New York Post, was designed to provide some type of quantitative support for the Bush war in Iraq. Right after this poll was reported in the NY Post, it caught on in the right-wing blogosphere, and the right-wing propaganda machine. Among the right-wing blogs that picked up this story are Right Wing Nuthouse, Daily Pundit, Powerline, Q and O, Blue Crab Boulevard, Lucianne.com, Free Republic, Sister Toldjah, The Mudville Gazette, and finally, The Drudge Report. This poll gives the right wing their own numbers to cite as evidence of support for the Bush administration's war in Iraq--and all the other polling data from the national polling organizations are wrong! It is why this poll was conducted by a Republican polling organization to prop up support for the conservatives on this war. Consider the Public Opinion Strategies' press release on this poll:

(Alexandria, VA) February 20 -- In the wake of the U.S. House of Representatives passing a resolution that amounts to a vote of no confidence in the Bush administration's policies in Iraq, a new national survey by Alexandria, VA-based Public Opinion Strategies (POS) shows the American people may have some different ideas from their elected leaders on this issue.

The survey was conducted nationwide February 5-7 among a bi-partisan, cross-section of 800 registered voters. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent. The survey was commissioned by The Moriah Group, a Chattanooga-based strategic communications and public affairs firm.

"The survey shows Americans want to win in Iraq, and that they understand Iraq is the central point in the war against terrorism and they can support a U.S. strategy aimed at achieving victory," said Neil Newhouse, a partner in POS. "The idea of pulling back from Iraq is not where the majority of Americans are."

The survey was conducted two and a half weeks ago, but it has only now been released after the Senate Republicans were able to block the Democrats vote on the non-binding resolution on Iraq. The timing on the publication of this poll result gives a PR-sense that the House Democrats are out-of-touch with the American people in passing these non-binding resolutions rebuking President Bush's troop surge, while showing that the Senate Republicans are protecting this country from a Democratic Party that is allied with the al Qaeda terrorists.

Also in the Public Opinion Strategies' press release:

"How Americans view the war does not line up with the partisan messages or actions coming out of Washington," said Davis Lundy, president of The Moriah Group. "There are still a majority of Americans out there who want to support the President and a focused effort to define and achieve victory."

It is rather ironic how Public Opinion Strategies is practically claiming how they are on the side of the American people, showing the out-of-touch, partisan, Washington establishment really what the American people want--support the president and achieve victory in Iraq! However, Opensecrets.org reports that the Public Opinion Strategies received over $1.54 million from 1/19/2005 to 9/30/2006 by the National Republican Congressional Committee for its 2006 election cycle. Public Opinion Strategies was ranked number 8 out of the top 50 companies that the NRCC paid expenditures out for the 2006 election cycle. So there is a serious PR-spin game going on here.

But it is not just a PR-spin game to attack the Democrats. This is a spin game to maintain conservative Republican support for this Bush war in Iraq. This Public Opinion Strategies poll was specifically designed to show American support for this Iraq war. Its questions and answers were easily debunked through Talking Points Memo, The Carpetbagger Report, No More Mr. Nice Blog, The Horses Mouth, and other liberal blogs. This poll was meant to convince conservatives to continue supporting President Bush's war, even as the disaster grows with the British troops now pulling out of Iraq. This Bush administration cannot afford to see its support with the conservative and Republicans erode further below the 30-35 percent mark that is reported in the national polls. It is a strategy to keep dissatisfied Republicans in line with the president. It is a strategy to keep this Republican Party from fracturing itself over this war in Iraq.

Update: After cross-posting this on The Daily Kos, Blue South provided a comment regarding the 2006 North Carolina's 8th Congressional District race between Republican congressman Robin Hayes, and Democratic challenger Larry Kissell. According to BlueNC, the Hayes campaign paid Public Opinion Strategies $500 for political services (If I'm reading this FEC form correctly. The BlueNC site also includes an interesting October 18, 2006 memorandum between Public Opinion Strategies Gene Ulm and Congressman Robin Hayes regarding a poll conducted by P.O.S for Hayes. In this memorandum, P.O.S reports that Hayes leads Kissell 49% to 33%, and that Kissell has a greater unfavorable rating than a favorable rating. BlueNC questions whether this was a push-poll, reporting that there is no methodology or questions released regarding this poll--only the results were published. BlueNC also notes that:

[All] of the four principals of POS who are listed at SourceWatch - Glenn Bolger, William D. McInturff, Neil S. Newhouse and Gene Ulm - have given generously to Republicans and a couple have given to TOMPAC, Together for Our Majority Political Action Committee. This is the leadership pack for embattled RNCC leader Tom Reynolds....


BlueNC reports that Reynolds has contributed to Hayes "to the tune of at least $30,000 over the last 3 cycles through his TOMPAC" committee. So there is a lot of back scratching going on between the Republicans and even P.O.S. A very interesting twist on this story.

Update 2: I went over to the Center for Public Integrity's site, and found that Robin Hayes paid Public Opinion Strategies $33,250 for "research" for the 2003-2004 campaign. The Center reports that Public Opinion Strategies received over $6.8 million for the 2003-2004 campaign. There is no information yet regarding the 2006 campaign. The Center also provides a profile of P.O.S. here. It is also an interesting connection showing the relationship between Public Opinion Strategies and the Republican Party.

No comments: