Fox News Least Trusted? NPR Most Trusted? (Look who's cooking the poll numbers)

Huffington Post had a glorious headline: "Fox News Most Distrusted Name In News: Poll." I found that totally unbelievable, so I did some digging. Interestingly, though not surprising, I found some information that gave me to pause. Incidentally, the pollsters had a more "positive" spin on the headline-theirs simply said "PBS Most Trusted Name In News"

The Pollsters, Public Policy Polling, seemed innocuous enough, but the poll didn't make sense, since I remembered gleefully posting to my facebook page last year, the same poll clearly showed Fox was the most trusted.

The current poll clearly states they polled "Voters" -- 632 of them in fact between January 14 and 16 this year. However the margin of error is high, a full 3.9% with additional disclaimers for refusal to answer questions by those they tried to poll, and for "weighting." Now, anyone who took stats in college knows that in polling, the only legit weighting is when there is refusal to answer questions, so I naturally became suspicious!

I pulled up the info again on last year's polling of the same questions. There was more than double the number of people polled last year than there were in 2011. Interestingly they were "Registered Voters" last year, as opposed to "voters" this year. So this year's polled could be those who voted for their favorite amateur on "American Idol" perhaps? There is no distinction as there was last year, which is certainly cause for a closer look. Furthermore, it seems last year, they followed a more reasonable and widely accepted practice, thus giving it a far lesser margin of error at +/- 2.8%.

If you notice, I had to use a Politico report from last January to quote the numbers for the PPP poll done at that time, as it is not listed on their website. I found this to be a little bit bothersome, given the notable differences in the amount of people polled, the margin of error, the weighting issue, etc. And while perusing the PPP site, I found more interesting points.

It seems that the same 632 folks were asked about Sarah Palin and whether they thought she had anything to do with the Tucson Shooting. The data showed that they thought she didn't. Now, given the numbers on the other questions asked of the same folks, I would have to say I call B.S. If all of those moderates and independents have turned their backs on Fox, then surely they have gone to the dark side right? Surely they buy into the Kos/HuffPo/WaPo/NYT line that Palin is responsible for Giffords et al getting shot right? This does not compute.

Growing tired of reading the rubbish on PPP's site, I looked at the personnel and it all became glaringly obvious. The founder comments on nearly every press release, as if he was interviewed by someone, and it is nearly always a liberal slanted jab at the good guys. On the Palin issue he stated: "This is vintage Sarah Palin," said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. "Americans start to sympathize with her a little for getting unfairly blamed for the Arizona shooting, and then she quickly squanders whatever good will she earned." And on the 2011 Presidential Poll he exclaimed: "Barack Obama's in his strongest position for reelection in our polling since 2009," said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. "Democrats have really rallied around him since the party's defeat in November and he continues to benefit from a pretty weak field of potential opponents."

Armed with this knowledge, I had to dig a little deeper into the ownership/leadership of Public Policy Polling and their clients. I found that their Research Director Jim Shields was Research Director/Lobbyist for the Nevada State Education Association (a union) and a member of the National Education Association's West Coast Organizing Team. Their clients include such jewels of the Democrat party as recently fired North Carolina Congressman Bob Etheridge, who gained notoriety for physically assaulting a young college kid doing a class project, Wisconsin Democrat Steve Kagen who was once busted for selling allergy shots without a license, cornered Karl Rove in a bathroom and told him : "You recognize me? My name's Dr. Multimillionaire and I kicked your ass," a dozen or so unions, and some really questionable Democrat Machine type "communications" firms including Campaign Connections who are a PR/Communications firm that specializes in (among other things) Grassroots/Grasstops, which by design would mean they specialize in Astroturf.

Lastly, as if I didn't know already that these men at PPP were out to help the progressives destroy America further, a name on their client list looked familiar -- oh so familiar. I read about Faithinamerica.org. The name is misleading. They are actually a progressive GLBT outfit that is lobbying for gay sex education across the country in schools. They offer curriculum for teachers and counselors, etc. They think that Christianity is bigoted, as homosexuality is shunned in the churches, and they have a problem with traditional marriage. They offer multiple talking-points memos so that one can easily combat such horrid people as pastors, priests, and parents about how their maniacal Christian beliefs can affect the pre-operative 8 year olds at your kids' schools!

I know I shouldn't be surprised, but the more I read, the more I understand just how Barry and company were able to so easily steal the White House from the American people, and how the intricately woven web of misinformation to the masses by outfits like this could easily sway the folks who get these numbers fed to them by Couric, Williams, and Ifill.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.