471 Comments

The media like to generate “clicks” and so they will say anything these days in order to do so. An example: the NY Times is no longer All the News that’s Fit to Print (substitute the word OPINIONS for “News”). And Polls — Schmolls… they are sheer malarkey.

This is what I said in response to your piece last night immediately following the SOTU Address:

Tonight’s State of the Union address was nothing short of brilliant. I think Biden made the Republicans squirm as far as Social Security and Medicare go, and has more folks on board to “finish the job” he was elected to do than most people realize. He proved that he has gotten so much done already which is why I think virtually all of the polls are about as real as fake crabmeat (and I am a Marylander!) I am so proud to be a Democrat, and know how well I sleep every night with Joe Biden at the helm. Bravo, Mr. President.

A.🌻 Love your illustration, Professor.

Expand full comment

Well said Anne!

I have heard opinions from some of my smartest and most knowledgeable friends and my sister, a newly retired DOJ attorney who leans toward Bernie gave him (President Biden) rave reviews too. Yea, I am stepping with higher expectations today.

👏🏻🎶🤗

Expand full comment

Thank you Jean(Muriel)

I speak from the heart. I think President Biden does, too.

A.🌻

Expand full comment

Enjoy the afterglow while it lasts.

Expand full comment

I know Gary, I am too old not to know the “afterglow” fades fast!

Expand full comment

And when republicans up their attacks.

Expand full comment

Anne, I totally agree with U about the polls & I never look @ them. Also, I have been called 1 time about a poll for an election in KY but never any National polls. I also believe most people don’t answer their cell phone if they get a call from an unrecognized number for fear it’s another scam call or marketer. Fortunately for me Verizon screens my calls for me, silences the ring & sends it to my phone so the caller can leave a voicemail message & I love it!

I also feel like many young families & retired folks do not feel like they are better off even though they are working because inflation is eating them alive. So who will they blame automatically? The President of course. And of course the Retrumplicans are loving that Dems & Biden are being blamed for high gas & food prices knowing full well this would be happening even if they (the Repubs) were still in power! The Media has NOT been repeating the causes for crippling inflation enough to drill it into people’s heads! Biden & his PR team should be doing it instead bec too many young folks don’t listen to news programs but find their info in all the wrong places, Social Media! I have been disappointed that nothing got done about voting rights, codifying Roe, or rectifying brutal policing in cities primarily bec of Manchin & Sinema. I feel like Congress gets too many long breaks in their calendar that keeps them from working to pass the many bills that never got brought to the floor. I wonder what happens to all those bills? Do they get shredded when a new Congress takes over or can they be brought back out to be negotiated on or rewritten?? Seems to me like they have to start over & usually something else comes up to get in the way so we always end up with a dysfunctional Congress. With Retrumplicans in charge of the House, I believe they will waste as much time as possible the next 2 years on frivolous investigations & the people not on oversight committees will be taking lots of naps &/or working on their re-elections instead of writing bills like the Democratic House of the last Congress did in large numbers. Many passed in the House & died in the Senate bec of the 2 outliers of Manchin & Sinema. I’m glad she became an independent bec she doesn’t act like a Dem at all! Manchin should do the same but he probably has a secure following of Dems that elect him now & wouldn’t if he changed his stripes! I’m sure it’s maddening for Sen Schumer that he can’t get those 2 to fall in line. Makes one wonder if they have been paid off to cause disruption in the Senate??

It’s my guess that Biden needs to hire a better equipped PR team that can travel around the country to host town halls or rallies to praise the Biden administration’s accomplishments! Biden certainly doesn’t have the time! They are going to have to learn how to repeat their messages over & over like TFG’s crew on Fox News did. That’s the way lazy poorly educated people in this country remember & learn stuff! Polls are pretty much useless & just not believed by very many folks. We could use a guy like Jordan Klepper to make UTube videos of him interviewing attendees @ the town halls like he did @ DJT rallies! He was great & is still attending those rallies! Hire him & we will soon find out just what middle America is believing & talking about when they attend town halls!

Expand full comment

I disagree with you about polls. I always look at them. They can be very helpful to voters, candidates, and financial contributors.

In regard to Biden, I think he has done a pretty good job. If he is the D nominee, I will probably vote for him in the general election. However, I believe he should take himself out of the running around November 1, this year. I think he would lose in a race against DeSantis, so we need a strong candidate who can defeat DeSantis.

Expand full comment

Polls are not "sheer malarkey." They are better than any other estimate of the current preferences, intentions, and values of the populace. Your mere opinion is not better. The opinions of political analysts are not better.

Expand full comment

Gary Whittenberger ; Depends on the poll, and whether it has been bought. Some are for sale.

Expand full comment

Yes, you can buy polls which are likely to give you the results you want, but to me those are mostly worthless. It is best to use the most current scientific methodology to discover the truth.

Expand full comment

And what is that "Scientific Methodology"? In the 2020 election there were 153,000,000 Registered Voters. What in you view is a 'scientifically significant sampling? 1%? That's 1,530.000 voters. Are you satisfied with 0.01%, that's 153,000 voters. As a scientist I felt 10% was too low a sampling for accuracy. and now you're suggesting that 0.00001% is good enough?

Expand full comment

FR: And what is that "Scientific Methodology"?

GW: In the case of polling scientific methodology is a set of procedures which increase the likelihood of obtaining reliable and valid results. Predictability is higher when scientific methodology is followed.

FR: In the 2020 election there were 153,000,000 Registered Voters. What in you view is a 'scientifically significant sampling? 1%? That's 1,530.000 voters. Are you satisfied with 0.01%, that's 153,000 voters. As a scientist I felt 10% was too low a sampling for accuracy. and now you're suggesting that 0.00001% is good enough?

GW: Statisticians know what the proper sample size is for drawing conclusions within a particular range of prediction.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
February 9, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Good for your wife, I taught chemistry, physics, and astronomy - occasionally biology. She is correct, One of the lessons you learn in college science questions is always review the sampling size. The fewer the subjects the less accurate the result. Another lesson, is if you test with a preconceived notion your results are skewed. I wish some pollsters would adhere to these methods too.

Expand full comment

And what are polls, if not opinion? They claim statistical significance but do they show the actual sampling numbers? Do they even tell you in which States they sample. Question, don't believe.

Expand full comment

Yes; question authority.

Expand full comment

two thumbs up Laurie

Expand full comment

FR1: And what are polls, if not opinion?

GW1: At best polls are the collection, compilation, and summary of the attitudes, intentions, preferences, opinions, and other cognitive dispositions of a sample of people, in a scientific manner. They are much more reliable and valuable than your solitary opinion.

FR1: They claim statistical significance but do they show the actual sampling numbers?

GW1: Usually those numbers are available.

FR1: Do they even tell you in which States they sample.

GW1: That information is usually available. The sample should represent the population of interest.

FR1: Question, don't believe.

GW1: Always question, but believe when warranted, when reasonable to believe.

Expand full comment

Ok, on your last statement I agree, sometimes we have to accept on faith. For me personally, I have zero faith in small samplings applied to an enormous group, especially humans, with their differences in cultures, religions, amount of education, gender, sexual preferences, political preferences. Do you sample one of each? And on what basis do you select that one person to represent that culture. This is the same problem I have with generalizations (even when they are my own). For instance, I have a prejudice against greedy, wealthy, white men. But how is that fair? Just because Elon Musk is an ah of the nth degree, is he representative of all greedy, wealthy, white, men. Absolutely not. Bad reasoning, Fay!

Expand full comment

FR1: Ok, on your last statement I agree, sometimes we have to accept on faith.

GW1: I disagree. We should not accept any belief, opinion, conclusion, or claim on faith. Faith is a vice, not a virtue. Use reason instead.

FR1: For me personally, I have zero faith in small samplings applied to an enormous group, especially humans, with their differences in cultures, religions, amount of education, gender, sexual preferences, political preferences.

GW1: Don’t rely on faith. Rely on reason. There are experts who know exactly how large the sample needs to be. Your intuitions about this don’t count.

FR1: Do you sample one of each?

GW1: One of each what? This question makes no sense, IMO.

FR1: And on what basis do you select that one person to represent that culture.

GW1: For scientific sampling, you select a random sample from the population in which you are interested. (I have some expertise in this area since I have a PhD in psychology.)

FR1: This is the same problem I have with generalizations (even when they are my own).

GW1: Generalization is very useful when it is neither over nor under, but just right.

FR1: For instance, I have a prejudice against greedy, wealthy, white men. But how is that fair?

GW1: It depends on how you define “prejudice,” how you develop it, and for what decision it comes into play. Be careful that you don’t overgeneralize about prejudice. One definition of “bias” or “prejudice” is “an unjustified or unreasonable attitude, either favorable or unfavorable.”

FR1: Just because Elon Musk is an ah of the nth degree, is he representative of all greedy, wealthy, white, men. Absolutely not. Bad reasoning, Fay!

GW1: He may be representative or he may not be. At any rate, you don’t need to date him.

Expand full comment

Thank you. I still disagree on polls, but I defer to your greater knowledge of psychology. A fascinating subject but I only took two classes it, my degrees are more in plain science, biology chemistry and physiology. And I base my distrust of polls on knowledge of statistical sampling. Thank you very much for your reasoned answers.

Expand full comment

Fay Reid ; Not bad at all, when you question your reasoning, like you obviously do. But how soul searching is the typical poll? Good point! Polls don't have souls.

Expand full comment

LOL! Great points, Laurie! Polls, like trump. have no souls and hence no conscience. (:-)

Expand full comment

GW ; when it is warranted ; is this a guarantee? Who determines what is reasonable to believe?

Expand full comment

As I have said, there are standards and tools for rational thinking, which are sound, stable, and reliable. You should learn and adopt them so that you will make good decisions in voting and other areas of your life.

Expand full comment

G W : "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics" Question Authority.

Expand full comment

And there are truths, wonderful truths, and statistics. Question authority always, but accept justified conclusions and reject unjustified ones.

Expand full comment

GW ; There are Wonderful truths : You wonder what's in them! As opposed to not wonderful or even crappy truths?

Expand full comment

GW ; I value my 'solitary opinion' and my ability to make decisions to vote intelligently. Suggestions that polling data is superior to what I can read, experience, see and hear is concerning to me. like who has the right to determine what a 'justified conclusion' is? 'Group think'can be unhelpful, to say the least!

Expand full comment

Gary Whittenberger ; Our votes are better than opinions, and they have told a better story than many polls. Yes, there are some polls, like Quinnipiac University's, with 82 % of recent elections called correctly. But the recent midterms and the last presidential election spoke the unvarnished truth. The losers support the big lie, and buy elections and weaponize 'Justice'.

Expand full comment

Agreed Laurie, but is it pure luck that Quinnipiac's polls have been successful. What is the size of their sampling?

Expand full comment

Fay ; I'm no expert on polling at a University. Students are, no doubt, taught the best practices. As far as size of sampling, I recently read that their polling does not end in Central MA. It is nationwide. It has a good reputation for a reason.

Expand full comment

Our votes reflect our opinions about the candidates. Polls are used to predict our votes. In fact, they are the best tool we have to predict our votes.

The unvarnished truth is that some politicians hire polling firms to find what the politicians want to be found. These are the disreputable firms.

Also, some politicians lose because they do not hire competent, scientific, unbiased polling firms.

Expand full comment

Gary Whittenberger ; Why the obsession with broadcasting poll results? Let the voters have verifiable facts and go vote without being influenced by a pool that can suggest how 'everyone else' is voting? They want to swing the election in a certain way, it seems. The same principle is defended against before selecting jurors to avoid having prejudiced or biased juries.

Expand full comment

LB: Why the obsession with broadcasting poll results?

GW: There is no obsession with this. The broadcasting frequency is just right, IMO.

LB: Let the voters have verifiable facts and go vote without being influenced by a pool that can suggest how 'everyone else' is voting?

GW: Poll results, collected scientifically, are verifiable facts. There is nothing wrong by being influenced by them. In fact, you should use poll results to help you make voting decisions.

LB: They want to swing the election in a certain way, it seems.

GW: They may be true for some politicians and pollsters, but not for most.

LB: The same principle is defended against before selecting jurors to avoid having prejudiced or biased juries.

GW: That analogy doesn’t work. The kinds of decisions being made are very different. Poll results are the kind of information which voters should have before they vote. In fact, I can conceive of jury situations in which having some poll or survey results would be valuable.

Expand full comment

Elections have consequences. Money influences things like polls. Voters definitely need good information before voting, I agree. But how does a voter determine which ones are trustworthy? Who 'polices' them? It's a crapshoot that has very high stakes INHO

Expand full comment

It is not wise to ignore proper scientific polls.

Expand full comment

Many, MANY "proper scientific polls" have been glaringly wrong for at least six years now. If not longer.

Expand full comment

You're right, BUT they are anything but, "proper scientific polls" Their samplings are woefully small, their wording is leading. What happened to the generation who never trusted 'the Establishment'?

Expand full comment

Trusting the establishment is irrelevant to trusting polls. You should trust polls to the extent that they follow scientific methodology, and it is best to trust to the extent that poll results are AVERAGED.

Expand full comment

Many, MANY "proper scientific polls" have been glaringly right for at least six years now also. You can't just count the misses and ignore the hits. The best analytical companies will average many polls. Also, the best polling companies improve their methods after they have a bad miss.

When all is said and done, scientific polls are still the best method of assessing the beliefs, intentions, values, and attitudes of the people.

Expand full comment

Let me add a few thoughts of my own.

First, let me stress my belief that Joe Biden has been an exceptionally good president. The only reason I bring up his low ratings is to try to understand why, despite his achievements, most of the public doesn’t seem to share my view.

Opinion polls are notoriously inaccurate, as we’ve all witnessed in the last major elections. Yet Biden’s consistently low ratings across almost all polls — and the bizarre fact that he’s polling no better than Trump did at this point in Trump’s presidency — can’t be blamed simply on inadequate polling methods.

Many of you blame the media — both Fox News and its radical right imitators, as well as the mainstream — for minimizing Biden’s achievements and exaggerating his inadequacies.

I largely agree. Fox News and other rightwing outlets continue to poison America. As to the mainstream media, as to anyone who reads this letter knows, I’ve been deeply concerned about its “two-sides” ism and absurd attempts to draw moral equivalence between Republicans and Democrats.

That said, only a small fraction of the public is exposed to Fox News or to the New York Times or the Washington Post. The media alone can’t account for Biden’s low ratings.

I want to suggest to you three other culprits that to my mind are playing a larger role.

First is the legacy of Trump, along with the deeply cynical and angry divide he has spawned in America. Even if George Washington were president right now, some 40 percent of the public would likely despise him.

Second is social media, which has become a cauldron of ever more extremist rage. Under Elon Musk, for example, Twitter has become less of a “public square” than a hell-hole of hate. No national leader is immune to such relentless battering.

Third and perhaps most importantly is the continuing crises that most Americans find themselves in. Some two-thirds of us are living paycheck to paycheck. Almost no one has job security. Adjusted for inflation, the median wage continues to drop. COVID is receding but “long” COVID is taking a devastating toll. Fentanyl and related drug poisonings continue to rise.

Joe Biden and his administration have made important progress. Their legislative victories are important. The American Rescue Act helped millions survive the pandemic. But most Americans are still hurting. Hopefully, by the fall of 2024, the hurt won’t be nearly as bad.

Expand full comment

Thank you Robert. I too think the biggest reason is that most are still hurting and see very few results of anything that is being done. And the phone that demands more and more of one’s time is wearing us out further!

Even getting to see a doctor is a huge endeavor because we , the general public are doing all the work! Everything done by computer( patient portal-potties) taking up our time and our mental health.

This reminds me of when Credit Cards started. It was fixed so more and more of us had to use them... now it’s the phone. Carry it always and be on call for every minute of your day?!

Good God.

Expand full comment

Just saying, but my cell phone stays home unless I am expecting a particular call, or I am going away from home for more than a day. My cell phone is a tool, not a lifeline. I mean no disrespect, but unfortunwtely I am in a very tiny minority -- those who don't think they are so impirtant they must be reachable every second of every day.

Expand full comment

You are absolutely correct in leaving it at home. I too am going to practice that freedom.

Well said!

Expand full comment

I guess I am really talking about our young people who are literally on their phones a majority of the day.

My Father did not allow having a television in our home until I was out of college.

Expand full comment

I see all kinds of "older adults" learning from their children to have their phones tied to their faces. I see them at grocery stores, chatting merrily away while blocking aisles and not paying attention to what they are doing, or talking on the phone while driving. I don't drive as often as I used to because of it. (Which may be a good thing, as I pollute the air less!)

Expand full comment

IMHO if pollsters address issue by issue,,80% support Democratic positions.

Expand full comment

For a short time, I worked as a market research interviewer. I called voters across the country ahead of the 2022 midterms. I was totally shocked at how many people responded negatively against President Biden and how strongly they supported Rethug candidates. I wonder if we would have had better balanced results if Gen Z and older Democratic voters didn't hang up on us before completing the survey. I also believe mainstream media is biased against President Biden. It's not just Fox News.

Expand full comment

IMHO about 25% of the population has a racist collective subconscious that makes them predisposed against "the other" and we represent the other. They happen to be vocal and are demagogued by big money interests that want limited government that only favors their economic well being.

About 15% are people easily swayed by advertising.

About 15% are hard core Republicans.

I had some of the same reactions when I made calls However I found that If I can speak to them about their personal problems, i.e. benefits, they may be more open. The vast majority, even the racists do not want to lose Social Security, Medicare, VA benefits, etc. This is not covered by any media except maybe Midas Touch and Free Speech TV, and a couple of magazines. .

Expand full comment

I agree with you about the racist collective who are afraid of the conspiracy "great replacement theory" and it makes them absolutely rabid. It wasn't easy staying impartial at some of the comments they made. I had an easier time as a volunteer phone banker speaking with undecided or non-voters about issues.

Expand full comment

I agree. The WP is owned by Bezos who influences most of its writers, still runs George Will and has added several Radical columnists (Olsen, Thiessen). Lest he be thought biased, the WP also runs several liberals. None I can point to at the moment would I label Progressive....but at least they are sane. A big problem with the WP though is quantity. Bezos has flooded the Opinions page with over 50+ (without counting) different columnists plus their own editorials (which I can't read). Essentially its no longer informative and I can't believe middle america really cares about the WP anymore.

The NYT is a waste. For a while I took both the WP and NYT but found myself not reading the Times just the headlines. So I stopped.

One of my biggest complaints though is the misleading headlines the editors put on what decent stories there are. I guess for click-bait reasons?

I guess I expect newspapers to be better than they are. I read them to be informed about the issues and events. But too often I find the reporter is writing about something of which they have no background/training (esp Economics) and are too lazy to do the research. Plus there's the inevitable distortion of letting in one's own partisan bias. Am I wrong or have newspapers always been this bad?

Expand full comment

I still subscribe to both NYT and WAPO. Despite what you say, NYT is still the newspaper of record. At least they give Biden headlines. They recently broke the story on Barr and Durham. WAPO's The Fix is usually pretty accurate.

I also read small town papers. They generally spread right wing propaganda.

Expand full comment

And don't forget the A.P..

Expand full comment

I understand. And I admire the reporters that don't let their egos get in the way ....that can't be bought. But at the end of the day, they all have to pay the mortgage and put food on the table. Simply too much going against them.

Expand full comment

I agree with you. I used to subscribe to and read WaPo regularly, beginning with Woodward & Bernstein's coverage of Watergate. I have noticed a major shift to the right and I stopped reading it. I don't read the NYT nor do I read the Philly Inquirer. Now I get my news from Huffington Post, National Memo, 1440, and Crooked Media. Except for the latter (I love its snarkiness), I feel like I get a balanced picture of things. I also read the columns by Robert Reich, Dan Rather, and Heather Cox Richardson.

Expand full comment

The Guardian and LeMonde have become mainstays. I want to see how others see us. I keep the WP just to keep an eye on how much the Radicals have warped our information sources. Heather and Bob are irreplaceable. Their intelligence, ethics and objectivity are irreplaceable.

Expand full comment

I think Robert, Dan and Heather do terrific jobs of spreading the truth….but how to get them and their work into the hands of the population at large? That’s the quandary. I read Heather’s letters from an American every morning for $5 a month. So well worth it! I also subscribe to the NYT, but I agree with Terry Franzman, their headlines rarely match the the decent content. It’s almost like they never want to give Biden full credit for the good he’s doing this nation and it infuriates me!

Expand full comment

I share their columns on Twitter and Facebook. Sometimes when I blog on something they've written about, I cite the link back to them. Wish I could domore.

Expand full comment

I also subscribe to multiple YouTube channels to monitor the ongoing UK crisis as well as Ukraine. There are many good news channels on YT. DW news (German), SKY news, WION,(India) euronews (the EU), TRT world (Turkiye), France 24, MSNBC, CNN, John Flannery, AFP, Sinn Fein, TVP (Polish) and Al Jazeera Hard to get good YT channels for South America.

Expand full comment

Not to mention the fact that Guardian seems to be the only one that publishes Reich.

Expand full comment

You might also want to check out Robert Hubbel's "Today's Edition" on Substack.

Expand full comment

Do you really think that many people read the WP and NYT to justify blaming them for the masses having uninformed opinions? I wish it were the case. The much bigger problem is that most people don't read any paper or have critical thinking skills.

Expand full comment

Both are issues that need resolving. But to imply an absolute cause and effect between the two because they're happening simultaneously is above my pay grade although I'm sure there is some relationship.

Expand full comment

The answer to your question is an emphatic NO! The NYT uses slanted headlines and then dresses it up with a few facts.

Expand full comment

I too took the WP and the NYT daily, delivered to my home.

They simply do not inform me anymore about really serious and thought provoking issues.

So I get my news from Heather, Robert, Glenn Kirchner, Steven Colbert, and many more well informed and reliable ( for truth) writers.

The Atlantic monthly is also well done still.

And it makes me sad that I do not have a “paper” to slowly journey through each morning or evening. 😰

Expand full comment

My thoughts exactly - I’m a longtime subscriber to both nyt and wapo, but have become furious at the ‘both sides’ writing styles (or blatant omissions) which I find skew farther and farther right. I’m a week into limiting my news diet to Robert Reich, Terry Kanefield, Heather Cox Richardson and Keith Olbermann’s podcast - it’s perfect!

Expand full comment

For Political news I monitor Bob and Heather and include Taegan Goddard's Political Wire and Raw Story. The latter is a bit inflammatory but its the only one like it that I monitor. Mostly the headline fits the story. Pol Wire is pretty much up to the minute and definitely not Both Sides ism.

For a somewhat calmer approach to the outrage that is DC I watch John Flannery's YouTube. John used to work with Ari Melber. Very concise well thought comments as he walks through his Cathedral of Trees in Virginia.

Expand full comment

Nope they all suck now and you are right.

Expand full comment

There's always the CS Monitor, The Economist, and Financial Times.

Expand full comment

I responded "people don't feel better off." As a pollster, you may appreciate this: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/large-numbers-of-americans-want-a-strong-rough-anti-democratic-leader/ar-AA17cNk4

The finding is right out of William L. Shirer from 1960. In all this, I think polls should be conducted that track how many people >do< hang up. I think that's an important statistic in itself that nobody mentions - rather than a simple heuristic that may or may not be considered in interpreting the data. For example, track how many people hung up before you were able to reach your target sample size. Even more interesting would be to find out >why< they hung up - of course, that's not possible because - well - they've hung up!

Of course, Thom Hartman goes into why "people don't feel better off:" https://youtu.be/beKBEWIv_mY

Expand full comment

DZK thank you so much for both of these links. I listened to all of Thom Hartmann and read the "strong leader" link. Hartmann is great as he is always factual, really gives you the goods. I have thought for a long time inequality is the root of our deterioration. I was struck by (not that I don't know...)how powerful a destructive force the Supreme Court has been...and what is really frightening is THIS YEAR they are tearing down of our institutions, protections, basic rights are going to get another big hit. There are some awful cases before them that they've wanted to have.

Expand full comment

As far as I'm concerned, control of the SCOTUS has been the whole game for at least 50 years.

Expand full comment

controlling SCOTUS while disabling Congress, allowing SCOTUS the power to establish and/or end legislation.

Expand full comment

But strictly speaking, that the SCOTUS raison d'etre. SCOTUS is >supposed to< rule on the constitutionality of of legislative and/or executive action. That's how the checks and balances works. It all boils down to how the SCOTUS justices interpret the law and The Constitution, which in turn, who nominates and approves those justices - in both the executive and legislative branches.

Expand full comment

agreed, but Scores of money and years of effort have been employed to get state legislatures, congress and SCOTUS in the position they are in now. So with that part of the larger strategy established, now SCOTUS can be used to produced wins for a minority (plutocrats, their sycophants and those they have hoodwinked and bamboozled)- empower the states while de-powering the Federal Government and its agencies. Limiting voting rights, further facilitating division: anti-woke (anti-coalition/DIVIDED) over woke (multi everyone coalition that incorporates all races, genders, sexual orientations, religions, classes, etc./UNITED).

Expand full comment

I'm not a pollster, but in my phone banking experience over the past 3 years, I kept track of hang-ups. 30% hung up before I uttered a single word. 30% hung up when I said I was with MoveOn. And another 30% hung up after my opening spiel, which was to encourage voter turnout in swing states.

Expand full comment

Nice observation - longitudinal, too! 60% hung up before you even had a chance to introduce yourself. I've had similar results in attempting to conduct personal interviews. At least you don't have to put up with ball-bats, or other weapons! (Lynchings have happened, too!)

Expand full comment

To be accurate, I should have said that I did introduce myself, "I'm [my first name], a volunteer with MoveOn."

Expand full comment

Let me update. How many do you need to contact by leaving a voicemail message who never respond? Many people are screening their calls that way, these days.

Expand full comment

With MoveOn, we are told NOT to leave a voicemail. Oddly enough, I encountered relatively few voicemails, compared with the people who hung up.

Expand full comment

Understood. However, I'm thinking of those who shut the door, or don't even open it when they see you, or simply open the door, say "no" and shut it. I'll take you're saying who you are and who you represent as roughly equivalent.

I should hasten to add, it has a lot to do with the political attitudes of the demographic location you're sampling. Some areas are glad to participate. In others, they seem to have been worked over by utility company pitch-men and other commercial, religious, or political activist intrusions.

In your case, you appear to be attempting a non-partisan effort to get out the vote.

Expand full comment

The phone banking I did with MoveOn was not partisan, but we were operating with information from Democrat voter rolls and people who had contacted or been involved with MoveOn in the past. Only rarely did staunch Republicans answer the phones, and we were instructed to not engage with argumentative people. They were sometimes parents of registered voters or disillusioned Democrats who had changed their party affiliation.

Expand full comment

Good to know. Thanks

Expand full comment

Back in the days of William Shirer, we didn't have open sewage outlets feeding into our river of information masquerading as News sources....e.g Fox, Newsmax, etc. while allowing Russian to dispose of their toxic waste disinformation. We need an EPA just for our news.

Expand full comment

I saw the article you mentioned about Americans wanting a strong rough anti-democratic leader on a newsletter I get from The Conversation. I guess they got it from NYT. I started to read the article through but had to walk away from it for awhile, thoroughly disgusted. And yes, I wish they would track the # of refusals and hangups but the clients ordering the polls aren't really interested in those stats. They only want the completes broken down into demographs.

Expand full comment

Between you and me, we've identified a >major flaw< in conventional, commercial sampling. Somebody wonder why statics sound like they've been drawn from a sample taken 15 feet over Neptune, I might suggest >sampling process <needs further study!> <

Expand full comment

Both sides want someone that is strong and who will be rough and/or bend the rules in his/her defense of my side! If this is true, it is more and more important for ALL sides to speak to one another, in an open and considerate way, that facilitates MORE dialogue (vs debate and division [distrust]) and can begin to dispel the lies/misinformation with truth & facts (trust) that will, ultimately, enable us to push back against the WILDLY successful tactic of 'Divide and Conquer' being waged on the MAJORITY (90-99%) by the small Oligarchy of Plutocrats that currently control things by using the power of their wealth, in an effort to gain even more wealth & power.

Expand full comment

fyiurban,

Sorry friend, but it is way past time to believe that the extreme right wing Republicans who have taken over the House are going to engage "in an open and considerate way".

In fact that is one of the main mistakes that Democrats have made over the last twenty five years or so, in treating the radicals as if they are reasonable and trying to play nice. A long string of Republicans have only continued to amp up their nastiness and their lies (Reagan, Gingrich, Rove, Cheney, et al). Lots of descriptions for this: Knife to a gunfight, etc.

Very similar to Nevile Chamberlain returning from a meeting with Hitler and declaring that we'll just sit down with Adolph and work out our differences.

It has now devolved to where the right wing crazies are the political equivalent of domestic terrorists. In many ways, including, among other things: wrecking elections, sewing mistrust in government, and encouraging violence. Best example (so far): January 6th, 2021. Most recent: repeatedly interrupting President Biden's SOTU speech with a level of nastiness that has steadily increased since they started in on Obama several years ago.

Last night Biden showed the best way to treat these people. Call them out, keep focusing on the benefits you are providing to working families and the common good, and challenge the crazies to put up or shut up.

Expand full comment

The goal must be MAJORITY. Right now, and by design, a simple majority is not sufficient. So a larger majority is needed and coalitions are needed to get there. There are a number of those republican voters, who are still mislead- hoodwinked and bamboozled, because they have held onto and perpetuateded myths and stereotyes of the "others", to their own detriment. Their leaders don't want them 'woke'- made aware of things like facts, history, the truth, because if they wake up and have to become critical thinkers, Republican leadership loses. This is where dialogue with those close to you is essential. Just like with racism, I can't access many of the closed door meetings and inter-family conversations to dispel the racial myths and stereotypes that persist there... those aren't my circles (not allowed in them) so someone in those circles has to speak truth to power and challenge them to be critical thinkers. Same is the case with all the things that are used to divide the majority- race, gender, sexual-orientation, religion, politics, class, etc. None of us is perfect or has all the right answers, therefore none of us is better than another. We can work collectively to raise all boats if we come together; build coalition. We can either do the work or just claim insanity- keep doing the same thing, expecting a different result.

Expand full comment

Some polling companies need to improve or broaden their sampling methods.

Expand full comment

Maybe you can help all of us understand this conundrum by revealing why, on the evening of Biden's superb State of the Union speech—in fact one of the best you've witnessed—why your focus is on some less than flattering poll numbers? Why aren't you reflecting and echoing his administrations many accomplishments? Why aren't you talking about how stunningly and charmingly good-naturedly he maneuvered the Republicans into (apparently) signing on to not cutting Medicare or Social Security? You're not the only one doing this, of course. But why do you do it? Why is a grumpy poll more important that the reality of what this effective President has accomplished and the fine speech he just gave? A day ago a NYTimes columnist wrote that Biden was a great President but asserted that he was too old and shouldn't run for a second term. Why? Why is the NYTimes actively working to try to undermine him? Is it because, as a reader comment noted today, he is a champion of the middle class, unlike Clinton and Obama who were champions of the extremely wealthy corporate financial class?

The pollsters haven't polled me. So I'll give my opinion here and now: I think Biden is doing a terrific job. He is a breath of fresh air: a President who likes and respects members of Congress and can work with them. He has deep and real understanding of the horrendous problems facing ordinary Americans because of financial deregulation promoted by Bill Clinton, who became a Ronald Reagan in Donkey's clothing. Biden can't right all the wrongs in two years, especially with such fragile margins in the Senate and now a Republican majority in the House. I plan to do everything I can to see that he is re-elected, and I plan to talk about what a good job he is doing and how happily surprised I have been, frankly.

Expand full comment

Exactly! Why can't we praise? Can we carry a list in our pockets of things Biden has done and pull it out to read when needed? No joke--that's what my Trump-supporting brother did. We were eating out at a restaurant, and the topic came up. He said, "I am proud of Trump. He accomplished so much in office. Let me read you a list."Then he reached for his wallet and pulled out a folded list of trumps accomplishments. He read them to us at the table. I was in shock. First of all, I didn't know Trump had accomplished anything other than a tax cut for the rich. Secondly, that my brother Cared What Trump did. And thirdly, that he was prepared, he had a list, he knew where the list was, he kept it close at hand, and he read it to us. Are we willing to do that for Biden? Are we willing to keep a list and read it? That's the kind of support we should be giving him and it would be a long list. And it would be a substantial list of accomplishments that mean something. Not the ridiculous things that my brother had on his list. Let's try it.

Expand full comment

Eleanor, I’ve tried this on several occasions, without notes I might add. Some people are good listeners, some agree but weren’t aware of all the good news, several were discouraged about our politics in general. When there is Republican or a right leaning individual in the group they block their ears, and won’t admit T was a disaster but instead spout the hard right line. If you try to debate with them they don’t have time and walk away. MAGA’s are truly brainwashed - best to just pity them and avoid engaging.

Expand full comment

Eleanor

When you have your list, please let us know. Many people will want a copy!

Expand full comment

"Offense wins games, defense wins championships."

Expand full comment

Thank you Judy.

I agree and only hope that we can pressure the media into talking straight. How boring the news has become. Like watching Amy Schumer all the time but not as witty or intuitive! I love Amy, but without facts and simple presentation so Americans can be educated and still go on trying to live their lives we have just become sad. Are we so bored that we depend on dumming down

Expand full comment

Because some people are trying to figure out what is driving apparent public opinion. Just praising someone does not get the work done and questions need to be asked.

Expand full comment

Setting aside the media, the polls, the party-in-power’s inadequate messaging, the reality that passed-legislation is yet to be implemented, and more, I believe it must be said that when one must repeatedly explain what he or she has accomplished, he or she is losing with the American people overall.

With 60% of the people in this country living precariously from paycheck to paycheck, wherein family income, in many cases, is only sustained by more people working longer hours, while still weighted down by mortgage debt, credit debt, and the like, the decision to disregard the human infrastructure piece of the Biden agenda, that had passed in the House, no thanks to Republicans, and nearly had passed in the Senate, again with zero Republican support, in my view, was a mistake.

Simply put, Democrats have to be willing to engage in war. The other side has shown that it will do whatever is necessary to attain and hold power. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Democratic leadership, receipts in hand, to say to the country, “This is what we have tried to deliver and these folks have voted against it—extension of the child tax credit, paid family and medical leave, a $15 hourly minimum wage, affordable, quality childcare, universal Pre-K, investments in housing, in eldercare, in impactful expanded ACA subsidies…”

My point, and note I haven’t mentioned what Biden and the Party, indeed, have delivered, is that Democrats have an extraordinary narrative, if only they would deliver it. Were I a player in the Party, given the opportunity to address the country, I would say, receipts in hand, “America, when they didn’t care about you, we did.”

Expand full comment

Well put. I agree. Americans are hurting economically and don’t have enough support. Even if Biden has made strides they will use that against him.

Expand full comment

your argument supports the article that DZK referenced- https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/large-numbers-of-americans-want-a-strong-rough-anti-democratic-leader/ar-AA17cNk4. Both sides want someone that is strong and who will be rough and/or bend the rules in his/her defense of my side! If this is true, it is more and more important for ALL sides to speak to one another, in an open and considerate way, that facilitates MORE dialogue (vs debate and division [distrust]) and can begin to dispel the lies/misinformation with truth & facts (trust) that will, ultimately, enable us to push back against the WILDLY successful tactic of 'Divide and Conquer' being waged on the MAJORITY (90-99%) by the small Oligarchy of Plutocrats that currently control things by using the power of their wealth, in an effort to gain even more wealth & power.

Expand full comment

Fyiurban, I appreciate your thoughtful reply plus the link. When I get home later tonight, I will read the attached piece and respond either tonight or tomorrow.

Expand full comment

no, thank you. You are right. especially regarding those on the lower end of the financial spectrum. None of those accomplishments matter if you are still struggling with the basics- food, shelter, security, resources, health, property, etc (Maslow's hierarchy of needs). In their minds, their needs are being looked over by both parties, so why not just let the system topple, what do they have to lose? We do need to fight for and with them (Rev. William Barber's Poor Peoples Campaign). We also have to speak truth to power and expose the lies and deception... but how we fight is just as important. Someone has to be the adult in the room and set the appropriate example... retain the moral high ground. If we know the solution is our power-in-numbers, we have to take steps to increase that power through building coalitions. Quote from William Barber- "Mr President, in your State of the Union address tonight, please don’t forget the 140 million poor & low-income people who were struggling to survive before you took office & are still hurting w/out living wages & access to healthcare." He estimates they are more than 33% of the electorate and that they could turn the tide in any election if they were targeted and fought for.

Expand full comment

I believe it's a combination of "all of the above", but primarily the media. Even "friendly" media has devolved to a focus on the negative. Few news sources are objective, and it seems it's more profitable to keep the political conflict and culture wars front and center. Shame on the Fourth Estate. They have sold out for the bottom line and may well bring this nation down.

Expand full comment

I wish the media would do better job of publicizing Biden’s achievements. In fact, the Democratic Party needs to do a better job of framing and packaging the many successes of our party and leaders. It’s almost like they’re apologizing and there is absolutely nothing to apologize for. Biden’s doing an amazing job.

Expand full comment

I agree. I have felt this way for years--Dems do a lousy job of communicating what they've done.

Expand full comment

Dems do not own the media.

Expand full comment

It’s also right wing media and there is so much more of it.

Expand full comment

Just the fact that I feel like I can sleep at night and had a sigh of relief when Biden got elected is enough for me. Intuition told me Trump was a danger and now the hate he whipped up is. With a sane man in office at least we have a fighting chance.

Expand full comment

I thought his speech was very inspiring and presented with warmth and concern for our country and our world. He spoke for at least75 minutes and never looked at a script. He acknowledged a number of citizens who had been invited to come due to pain they had endured which he was proposing ways to reverse. I am grateful for his numerous accomplishments for lower income Americans who’ve struggled for many years and whose lives will now have a chance to improve. And for building more income equality by increasing taxes on the wealthy. Many thanks to our President and may he have more success for our people and the world.

Expand full comment

He had a notebook in front of him with the outline of the speech. You never see the Teleprompter‘s in front of them.

Expand full comment

I never saw Biden look down once to look at notes. I think he did an amazing job and handled republicans beautifully.

Expand full comment

I agree, and with the advance in teleprompter technology, a speech giver never has to look down at their notes. It is all projected at eye level on multiple raised glass screens that the television audience never sees.

Expand full comment

I was not prepared to be astonished by Biden’s speech- but I was. “Stand up for seniors”- now that was brilliant- looked like everyone stood up, Whatever else he may be, Biden is so highly polished as a politician you can’t even recognize it, it’s subtle, pervasive and he only got this way through a positive outlook that I think he shared in that speech.

Expand full comment

Yes, these things he wants to do like tax buy backs and tax the wealthy more. It likely will not get done this term because republicans are in charge of the house but at least he gave us a clear view of what he wants. I just hope he doesn’t get caught between a rock and a hard place because republicans will continue to blame him for all the woes of the world anyway.

Expand full comment

Biden is sensible, not sensational.

Expand full comment

Last night was sensational.

Expand full comment

I'm sorry to say but I think, with about fifty percent of our population living in poverty and debt, and so much of so many people's attention being absorbed by some sort of "screen time", we have been so dumbed-down that the majority just don't think well. We actually can not figure out what is true and what is false. The broadcast media, at the behest of their corporate owners, intentionally miss-leads and spreads half-truths. Gone are the days of Walter Cronkite and the real news anchors. Look at the "NEWS," it's just a superficial show on a stage. The content is largely dumb, irrelevant trash. So we are truly a dumbed-down society and if the younger generations don't pick up the ball, I guess the supper-rich will continue to destroy our Democracy and the rest of our society will decline into abject poverty, disease, despair and death. It is obvious our civilization is in speedy decline: we can't seem to pour enough money into military and all new highly "advanced" nuclear devices that will probably kill us before climate change. Why have we not even begun to deal with Climate? The world COP meetings are a joke. But Davos Billionaire meetings seem to produce results. So, ya, we are uneducated, uniformed and un-empowered. Another "great"? empire coming to an end. And even if we manage to re-arrange some deck chairs, we are going down by the head. Of course there are some outstanding exceptions, but I believe that for the most-part, the American ruling class has been as mean and brutal as any in human history. And we probably do not deserve to continue. It dose make me very sad to know we will take most of the wonderful, innocent species of this planet with us.......well, not "with us" I trust they will make it to heaven. Most of us will not. So, My advice is be kind, do some good while we can, and appreciate what we have for now.

Expand full comment

The IQ of an average American is 98.

So half of all Americans have an IQ lower than 98, exacerbated by a lousy education and an anti-intellectual society.

When such is the case, America 2023 is what you get.

Expand full comment

Hi James, Evolution seems to have been a great idea but it isn't perfect. It would have been wonderful if we could have evolved just a little faster. Oh, and my wife says ... she thinks menstruation could reasonably have been limited to once a year! Or maybe just have some kind of "&%e$8##@" ON /OFF switch. You know, for when you have had 3 or 4 children, you're 37 years old and DON"T NEED THIS EVERY "&%e$8##@" MONTH FOR THE NEXT 12 or 15 YEARS !!!!!!

She will be OK, she's resting now and I will fix her a martini. She really is a doll, really, I do love her.

Expand full comment

George, I read your doom and gloom and thought like a silly child” thank god he said it” exactly as I’ve been feeling lately and so many of us cannot tolerate anyone telling the truth. Really! We are a “ be happy” society.... not, “be prepared, or be intelligent”, just “ be happy” and keep your head in the sand.

Expand full comment

Hi Jean, It is not my intention to be Doom and Gloom. I think it is great to be happy AND, we must never put or heads in the sand, of course. But I believe it is important to be honest. Integrity is essential. If we do not understand and acknowledge where we are, what reality is, then we can not even appreciate our situation let-a-lone think about changing things in ways we wish to make life better. Intelligence, both knowledge and ability are essential. We don't seem to have enough of either and it is very late, we don't have much time in witch to make some very critical decisions and implement actions on a planetary scale. Cooperate in ways we have never done before as a species. So, I am angry. If there was ANYTHING I could do that would make a difference I would. And I am very, very sad that there are so many powerful people who are so .... greedy? they are willing to see a planet's life systems die if they can increase their personal power or wealth by even a tiny fraction. How can any individual with a clearly sound cognitive ability behave in such a manner? I just can not understand. There are hundreds of them flying into Davos on their personal jets, meeting, strategizing, while the world is obviously becoming less hospitable every month.

Many people protest. But the economic and political power is so concentrated, policies are not changed. And thus we drift to the inevitable abyss. Something in me tries to understand how our parent's generation, from the early twentieth century sacrificed so much to give our generation (I was born in 1944) a better world. My heart just aches when I think of how we failed in our responsibility to pass on all the marvelous material things we have enjoyed. And the nature we have devastated. I'm sure there are more and more people every day becoming aware of these things. There will certainly be a great psychic trauma arise as this planet dies. I wonder if it will be felt somehow in the Universe? Probably not.

I do not believe in life after death. This consciousness is the only one we get. At least there is no proof to the contrary. So I am sad and I am angry, disappointed evolution of our species did not progress a little more quickly.

And so I wake in the morning, grateful to be here, to be alive on this beautiful Earth. Even knowing the American Empire is in the late stages of decline. Still I am healthy, my family are all well and happy. Thanks to the foresight of my President FDR, I am financially able to experience a far more comfortable seinor-age than 99. something % of all people who have ever lived on this "little blue spot". So I will share my New Year resolution in hope that it might inspire others. In addition to being grateful every day for this life, I will do my best to maintain a good attitude. To appreciate the positives and not dwell on the negatives. I will be more outgoing and friendly to people I meet. I will help when I can. I will act if I can contribute positively. I will smile more and curse less. I will show grateful appreciation for people in my city and all they do.

If the world is going to end tomorrow, all the more reason we must appreciate what we have today.

Expand full comment

Dear George,

Amen❤️

I didn’t mean to make you the “ doom and gloom guru” Your letter just said everything I feel and it was a relief to see my own feelings put to paper so well.

You’ve hit the nail on the head again in your conversation today.

I too try, ( born 1946) to be as good a person and a mentor to the young people I know. You are correct about the advantages we have as recipients of FDR’s New Deal. Anything other than those policies seem to me to not work for a nation.

And as for “Mother Nature”.. she will prevail.

I send you appreciation and much love.

Thank you for getting these important realities on paper.

Sincerely,

Jean( Muriel)🌈🎶

Expand full comment

Not that the party without a policy platform & a propensity to elect questionable standard-bearers could ever be to blame, but... maybe their reality-distortion technology is in full effect?

Abstractly, it's a *guaranteed* recipe for success: assure deflation of expectations, ensure they aren't met (especially if the other guy is getting the credit), and then insure another round of the same (because who could honestly expect any differently after the fact?).

> = |

PS: Policies take time to have an effect; perhaps the lag leaves everyone unsatisfied?

Expand full comment

62% of the US public don’t or can’t read. Their opinions are formed by sound bites.

Expand full comment

Can't would be a simpler problem to solve, no...?

Expand full comment

the mainstream media are owned by rich bastards like rupert murdoch, ATT, warren buffett, the hearst family, the forbes family, and jeff bezos, to name just a few of these ultra-wealthy human rights abusers, and basically, despite the fact that most journalists are political and social liberals, if they want to keep their jobs (which are astonishingly poorly paid and compensated to begin with), they have to kiss the ring. so they are part of this vast conspiracy of gaslighting and brainwashing of the public that has swept most of the free world in service of their masters' runaway greed.

Expand full comment

You may want to take Buffet's name off your list after reading this link

https://newrepublic.com/article/156399/warren-buffett-terrible-newspaper-owner#:~:text=Buffett%20has%20a%20long%20history,until%20Graham%20died%20in%202001. Plus he sold the Buffalo News.

I'm not an admirer or defender, just don't think Buffet rises to the level of evil the others do even though his Berkshire Hathaway owns much stock in several media companies.

Expand full comment

Can journalists become Unionized? Walk away for under pay and for not being able to tell the truth.

Expand full comment

not to repeat what terry said about unions, let me add that at least a few journalists ARE walking away. many of them are finding new homes here on substack where they continue pursuing journalism. i try to support as many as i can, both because i want to read their work and also because i want to support them. but as an unemployed person, i am barely scraping by myself, so my contributions are small or nonexistent, alas.

Expand full comment

I think the NYT just weathered a strike of some sort. But they already have a union.

Before a strike there is usually organization as a union then recognition under federal law. I have no idea beyond that

Expand full comment

Most press want to set Biden up for criticism rather than just reporting his real achievements. His colleagues need to toot the horn more too. It’s become a “who screams loudest to shock people” game led by right wing media and naïve Republicans.

Expand full comment

I wish Biden could hold more press conferences and call their lies into question, maybe weekly.

Expand full comment

I wholeheartedly agree. He needs to be more firey!

Expand full comment

I liked the way he handled the republicans and I like the way he engages in real time without just droning on but I’d like to see more putting republicans on the spot. Make them answer for themselves.

Expand full comment

The 'low approval ratings' that were mentioned on MSNBC on several shows, were from polls (that were not even identified), which just do not reflect the FACT that the midterms and the last presidential election showed that voters prefer President Biden, period.

Expand full comment

I agree. I don’t always trust polls and even 538, who are supposed to have to beat polls are questionable at times. Unfortunately people follow polls and base their opinions on them. The herd instinct is prevalent.

Expand full comment

Jo ; It seems that those who want to sway the voters are taking advantage of an unfortunate 'herd instinct'. But we do not have to be cattle or bison or other herd animals (sheep?). I think fewer people are relying on things like polls, now that most of us can read. Even if one is seemingly so clueless as to appear to have been 'living under a rock' knows that some of the current republican ideas are not good for them, or anyone. I think some people got lazy because there was a 'fairness doctrine' at one time ; but that has been so long ago it isn't even 'in the rearview mirror', a thing that may totally disappear ; now that there are back up cameras.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
February 9, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Hahaha!

Expand full comment

Best polls

Expand full comment

As you suggest in your choices "The problems[do] remain so huge" for many in this country.

What Biden has been able to accomplish is impressive, but the socioeconomic trauma ordinary Americans have had endure since the Reagan Presidency will take decades to undue, if we're fortunate enough to continue on the path Biden is forging, without more destructive republican presidencies in the near future.

But, I also think Americans are just plain worn out (I know I am, as are my friends).

Moreover, so many people died needlessly from a badly-managed COVID-19 response from the Trump Administration and more still have been affected by these deaths, including long COVID.

Add to the above, a never-ending election cycle, fueled by corporate media, political consultants and pollsters and it's just exhausting.

I think this is why there is a certain disconnect with Biden's polling numbers and his accomplishments.

Expand full comment