Have you ever noticed that when poll information supports someone’s information — like “A majority of the US population opposes a war in Iraq” — then folks who want to see that information seize on it as proof positive that the Considered Opinions of the People agree with their point and should be respected?
But when polls say something different — like, “Seventy-one percent of Americans now support a war on Iraq” — then, inevitably, it will be touted as how Certain Folks have managed to fearmonger and browbeat a Naive Populace into Error?
(And, no, that reliance on/vilification of polling is not the sole property of any particular party or faction. It’s just the examples above are among the more recent iterations of this phenomenon.)
25 view(s)
Or how about when all of the poll info isn’t mentioned? Frex, a second question of, “what if the UN is not involved?” often lowers the poll numbers to below 50%.
That’s reported far less often.
Except that the poll cited was after the President said bag the UN. Apparently, what the follow-up question was saying was try going to the UN, and if it doesn’t work, fine.
Hell, if there was significant UN involvement (control) in the Iraq war, I’d be against it. Count on the French or the Dutch to watch our backs? Hell no.
And, again, I’ll say: why should the assent of China, Russia, or even France make a difference in terms of why such a course is morally justified? Why is the appearance of “legitimacy” so important in determining if this is “right” or “wrong”?
But I digress. And repeat myself. Again.