January 21, 2004
Punch Pinch, Please
 An
unnamed but "seasoned Republican analyst" sent blogger Andrew Sullivan (www.andrewsullivan.com) the
following explanation for what Mr. Sullivan called "the somewhat dismal
polling for the president" in Sunday's New York Times: "In the most recent Gallup poll, the party ID was 37 percent GOP and 37 percent Democratic. In the AP/Ipsos poll, the party ID was 42 percent GOP and 45 percent Democratic. And in the CBS/NYT poll on Sunday, the party ID was 34 percent GOP and 47 percent Democratic. Is it any wonder the numbers were what they were? This is more evidence, in my judgment, why you shouldn't trust the NYT polls. (In their last poll, the NYT had a 10-point advantage for Democrats in the party ID.)"Said Mr. Sullivan: "That strikes me as a pretty devastating indictment of the polling at the New York Times. Is the skewing deliberate? The Washington Post poll [yesterday] shows some similar down-draft on domestic policies, but is far more favorable to Bush than the NYT's analysis. Can we even trust the NYT polls any more?" - Inside Politics Last night Brit Hume pretty much asked the same thing by comparing two TIMES editorials. This, on the recess appointment of Judge Pickering ... "... Mr. Bush's decision to bypass the Senate in this manner is 'a finger in the eye' for all those seeking fairness in the nomination process."... and this after President Bill Clinton's end-run appointment of Roger Gregory (not to mention Bill Lan Lee): "By appointing Roger Gregory to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit while Congress is in recess, President Clinton rightly moved to address two related problems--the shameful failure to integrate that appeals court and the refusal by Congress to consider judicial nominees with reasonable dispatch."We're talking major filthiness here folks. |
Comments
Post a comment