Interview: John Ziegler
posted at 6:00 pm on December 3, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
We couldn’t connect for today’s show, thanks to his busy schedule, so instead John Ziegler and I connected via phone a little while ago to discuss his new poll at How Obama Got Elected. John explains the purpose and what he sees as the message from his latest poll, which confirms the earlier poll Ziegler commissioned, and it’s not to argue that Barack Obama voters are stupid:
Over at Fox, John explains the reason for the second poll:
Next, I issued a challenge on national TV to liberals to duplicate the Zogby results with McCain voters (and offered to pay for it myself if McCain voters didn’t outperform Obama voters on the “quiz”). Despite loads of belly-aching from the left that Zogby only polled Obama voters no legitimate takers took me up on my offer. So I decided to go ahead and do it myself. Zogby, seemingly intimidated by the firestorm of negative reaction, declined to take my money to do virtually the identical poll that his company was thrilled to do just a week before.
After discovering that other polling outlets were similarly frightened by the prospect of having the Obama-backers harass them, I was able to find a reputable one that was not. If ever there was proof of the adage “Be careful what you wish for…” the results of the ensuing survey are it. The Obama-backers are going to have to reignite their spin/assault machine of rationalization in a huge way.
The conclusions that can be drawn from this new poll are multiple and really rather staggering. In general, McCain voters were significantly more well-informed than their counterparts, and there is overwhelming evidence that the gaps in knowledge are directly related to the media sources they were exposed to.
In this interview, we talk less about these issues and more about the implications of the second survey. John wants to emphasize that the point he’s making is about the media and their failure to inform their viewers. Honestly, with as much attention focused on the prospects of one-party government in the event of an Obama victory, what does it say about CNN’s coverage that more than half of their viewers in this survey couldn’t select which party controls Congress? At 48%, that underperforms just flat-out guessing for a two-option question.
It’s always fun talking with John, because he brings so much passion to the conversation. Don’t miss this entry. It’s about 22 minutes long.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
They forgot to ask how many Obama voters thought that The One would fill their gas tank and pay their mortgage. I’d guess the McCain voter percentage would be 0% on that question.
GoHskrs on December 3, 2008 at 6:40 PM
Can’t listen right now, still at work,……………………….. but did you ask him if he would like to puch Allen Colmes in the mouth for every time he interupts him and talks over him when asked a question……………….?
Seven Percent Solution on December 3, 2008 at 6:45 PM
I am really surprised that the so-called knowledgeable and educated MSM could whitewash/not cover alot of the stuff that came out about the 0. My God, the dems had other candidates that could pass the smell test better than this loser we are saddled with now.
cjs1943 on December 3, 2008 at 6:49 PM
I’m really hoping someone writes a detailed book called “2008: The Year That Journalism Died”. Maybe a project for Bozell or someone else at the Busters. I’m more of a library guy, but I would definately add that one to my home collection.
BadgerHawk on December 3, 2008 at 6:51 PM
2008?
Journalism died way before this year, my friend.
rightside on December 3, 2008 at 7:08 PM
It was terminal, but this is this year it finally died.
BadgerHawk on December 3, 2008 at 7:24 PM
Journalism started to die a long time ago.
It started to really die back in 1992, when the “objective” media refused to report that Fed statistics showed that the economic recovery had started in March of 1991. They didn’t report this story until after Bill Clinton had been safely elected on an “it’s the economy, stupid” mantra. It took the NY Times until the start of the next century to admit that they hadn’t “reported” it.
Another nail in the coffin came a couple of years later, when the NY Times, the Associated Press, and others, suddenly decided to stop calling the bad guys “terrorists”-a word they had no problem using on their front pages for decades.
Another nail in the coffin came when Newsweek came across a blockbuster story about a sitting President sexually exploiting a female workplace subordinate, then asking her to lie under oath about it. If a Republican President had done the same thing, they (and NOW) would have demanded that he be taken out behind the barn and shot, preferably in the groin. They decided not to run the story. It took a rogue internet guy to break it.
Yet another nail in the coffin came when the evil Bush “stole” the 2000 election in Florida. A group of “journalists” immediately rushed to Florida and started to do their own vote recount to try and prove Chimpy stole the election.
4 years later, the Associated Press filed a lawsuit demanding that the evil Bush release all of his military records from the Texas Air National Guard, because they weren’t “satisfied” with what he had released to that time.
At the same time, they refused to report on the allegations against his opponent made by 250 men who had served with him in Vietnam (and Cambodia). In addition, they refused to report that this empty suit would only release all of HIS records to 3 of their own, two of whom worked for newspapers that endorsed this clown for President.
Can’t make this stuff up, kids.
BTW, MSNBC polling showed that O’bama convincingly won the votes of high school dropouts-in the battleground states of Ohio and Florida, for instance, he won that group by a 70%-30% margin.
They haven’t reported that, either.
Del Dolemonte on December 3, 2008 at 7:30 PM
These findings should motivate Obama and the congress to give all civics and history teachers a raise and another four years of paid leave.
snaggletoothie on December 3, 2008 at 7:50 PM
Failure. Oh I think not as they uncork the bubbly. If they informed their viewers they would have voted, with noses held, for McCain.
The media set out and accomplished everything they wanted. Obama is President elect.
patrick neid on December 3, 2008 at 8:14 PM
I can not understand how people who bother to vote do not know who is in control of Congress. It is as if they go out of their way to be stupid.
Terrye on December 3, 2008 at 8:25 PM
Excellent post, thanks. You really know your stuff.
Red State State of Mind on December 3, 2008 at 8:41 PM
Glad to be of service. FYI I was a regular at Ed’s previous base, Captain’s Quarters, but now spend most of my time at Power Line. We try to educate the clueless over ther as well, so please venture over to their forums.
Del Dolemonte on December 3, 2008 at 8:44 PM
are you saying I am ‘clueless’? : )
I am somewhat new to blogging, and so far this has been my main hang out; overall there are some very good points made here;
With the so-called ‘trolls’ I am glad there are people with differing opinions, but they seem mostly to be taking personal shots or repeating platitudes and I rarely read a point of theirs that resonates or changes my opinion.
Red State State of Mind on December 3, 2008 at 8:50 PM
“John wants to emphasize that the point he’s making is about the media and their failure to inform their viewers. …”
Thats really quite wrong. The media informed their viewers exactly how they wanted to inform them. Propaganda can be achieved two ways. Comission, by stating the weakness of one’s opponent. “God he’s old.” Or by Omission, by not pointing out the faults of ‘your guy’. “Oh lets not talk about the Ayers relationship.”
The press knew exactly what they were doing.
Dr. Dog on December 3, 2008 at 9:04 PM
Oooh, this is interesting:
Now which ones are the “inbred morons” again?
ddrintn on December 3, 2008 at 9:20 PM
As a Southerner (who lived in the NE for over ten years) those numbers are good to see.
INC on December 3, 2008 at 9:35 PM
+7%
Seven Percent Solution on December 3, 2008 at 9:58 PM
Obviously Darwin has been neutered. The nanny state now allows ever more inept people to be captains of their own lives, and captains of the voting booth. Our society is now dominated by shockingly il-informed and il-mannered luddites. In frontier times, this crop of people might not have survived beyond a few days. So, for the luddites (and Rush’s listeners in Rio Linda):
.
1. the Congress was controlled by democrats before you voted for Obama;
.
2. militant islamists plot to kill and terrorize us with as much determination now as they did on 9/11; and
.
3. the Fed isn’t some high tech farm that grows extra money after the government has spent every dime taxpayers kick in.
Mark30339 on December 3, 2008 at 10:00 PM
I can not understand how people who bother to vote do not know who is in control of Congress. – Terrye
These are people who don’t normally pay attention to history and politics, if they did, the Pubs would be getting 70% of the black vote. Obama’s win means the Dems will keep getting 90% of the black vote for another 50 years, despite the Pubs’ history of liberating slaves, the agreement on most issues between Pubs and blacks, and the history of slavery and the dems.
I wish all black voters would read “They think you’re stupid” by Herman Cain and “Bamboozeled” by Angela MacGowen.
Tony737 on December 3, 2008 at 10:29 PM
If we look at the crosstabs and look at the congressional control question we get the following %correct answer:
Strong GOP 66%
Soft GOP 60%
Indy 55%
Soft Dem 44%
Strong Dem 37%
Q14 Obama said bankrupt Coal
Strong GOP 54%
Soft GOP 43%
Indy 31%
Soft Dem 22%
Strong Dem 13%
Only 13% of Strong Dems knew about the coal comment? Ok, yes, there’s probably a source of info effect. Just like there’s probably a salience issue. But then again, maybe some people are just out to lunch.
Maybe the source of info question is tainted itself. I.e., if you really don’t care, tell the interviewer that you listen to CNN…you want to sound smart don’t you?
r keller on December 3, 2008 at 11:15 PM
It doesn’t, however, underperform flat-out guessing a three-option question, which that was. Still, given that either party had an equal chance of being given to a particular respondent first, and the “neither” option was always given third and last, it is a poor perforance among the CNN crowd.
As r keller pointed out, the “Strong Dem” response barely beat out flat-out guessing. Worse, the 100%-wrong answer of “Republicans” beat that by almost 12 points (give or take rounding).
steveegg on December 4, 2008 at 12:10 AM
It is as if they
go out of their way to beare stupid.Terrye on December 3, 2008 at 8:25 PM
Schadenfreude on December 4, 2008 at 1:29 AM
Just shows how far a soulless Marxist can go when he has no conscience and a willing media not just shilling for him, but outright lying, spinning and hiding very important information. The media got just what it wanted and the rest of us will get it up the exit point. The uninformed masses were looking for a leader and the MSM told them that the big-eared goblin was “The One”. They believed it. Thus giving solid evidence to the truth of the statement “The masses is the asses”. Don’t remember who said that, but he was spot on.
SKYFOX on December 4, 2008 at 6:09 AM
It’s early, but I’ll nominate that for Comment of the Day™.
steveegg on December 4, 2008 at 8:09 AM
Comment pages: