The one-dimensional opinion polls that Americans are constantly bombarded with rarely provide information on WHY people believe what they believe. Consequently, those polls are more often a reflection of the corporate news media propaganda that we are exposed to than anything else – such as what we would believe if we received accurate information from our news media.
As an example, a series of
Gallup polls taken from March to June of 2006 indicated that a substantial minority of Americans see a strong connection between George Bush’s “War on Terror” and his Iraq War. Specifically:
39% of respondents think that “Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks” (March 10-12);
44% “consider the war in Iraq to be part of the war on terrorism which began on September 11, 2001” (March 10-12); and
40% believe that “the war on terrorism” is “better off (29% believe it is worse off) as a result of the war with Iraq” (June 9-11).
Given the above responses it is perhaps not surprising that Gallup also found that 37% believe that “it was worth going to war in Iraq”. That figure must be influenced by two opposing factors in addition to those noted above:
48% believe that the Iraqi people are “better off” (29% say “worse off”) as a result of the war (June 9-11); and
26% believe that the people of the United States are “better off” (42% say worse off) as a result of the war (June 9-11).
Thus in summary, the 37% figure that denotes the percentage of Americans who believe that “it was worth going to war in Iraq” must be heavily inflated by those who see the war as a part of the war on terrorism, and also inflated somewhat by those altruistic Americans who believe that the Iraqi people are better of because of the war, while the percentage favoring the war must be mitigated somewhat by the fact that only 26% believe that Americans are better off because of the war.
But what if the poll respondents were provided with some clarifying information, and the responses were stratified to take into account mistaken beliefs. In that case, we would probably see something like this:
Are you aware that no creditable evidence suggests that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks?Yes (39%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 8%; No – 92%
No (54%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 58%; No – 42%
No opinion (7%)
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 30%; No – 21%
Are you aware that there is no creditable evidence that prior to the Iraq War in 2003, Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction or had plans for the development of such weapons?Yes (44%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 13%; No – 87%
No (53%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 59%; No – 41%
Are you aware that in a recent poll of national security experts, 87% said that the Iraq War was undermining our war on terror? Yes (10%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 1%; No – 99%
No (90%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 41%; No – 56%
Are you aware that approximately 40,000 Iraqis have been killed so far in the Iraq War?Yes (40%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 20%; No – 75%
No (60%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 48%; No – 50%
Are you aware that 87 % of Iraqis would like us to agree to a timeline for leaving their country? (See page 45)
Yes (10%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 15%; No – 85%
No (90%):
Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Yes – 39%; No – 57%
Such a poll would show, in no uncertain terms, that approval of the war effort is driven almost totally by mistaken understandings regarding such things as the role of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in the 9-11 attacks on our country and the effect of the war on the Iraqi people. That information could then be to used enlighten people far better than the one-dimensional polls that are currently used.
Some will argue that this proposal involves “leading questions” and therefore is invalid. I have two arguments to that criticism. First of all, I could argue that merely asking what effect the Iraq war has had on our “War on terror” is a “leading” question, since that question itself implies that there is a connection between the two, when in fact no evidence exists to that effect. Similarly, one of Gallup’s questions is prefaced by: “As you may know, the terrorist leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was killed on Wednesday by U.S. air strikes.”, which I think is no less leading than the ideas that I am suggesting. And secondly, even if one concedes that the suggested questions are “leading”, they would still provide valuable information with regard to how the provision of accurate information would influence the responses to poll questions regarding approval of the Iraq War.
The bottom line is that if polls are going to provide useful information they should do much more than merely reflect the garbage information that people receive from news media sources that parrot the Republican Party talking points. Rather, they should delve into the reasons for people’s beliefs by analyzing cross tabulations that look at the differences in responses between well informed and poorly informed respondents. In that way, these polls could be used as clarifying and educational resources.
On the other hand, as it is now, current polling practices remind me of a Vice Presidential debate I watched between Al Gore and Dan Quayle prior to the 1992 elections. Quayle was criticizing Gore’s book, “
Earth in the Balance”, and Gore was correcting Quayle by saying that his book did not say what Quayle claimed it said. Gore even quoted the page number, and the argument went on and on. I had the book right in front of me, which clearly proved that Quayle was either misinformed or lying. But how do you imagine that the stupid talking heads managed this problem after the debate? Rather than get the book out and use it to clarify the argument, they simply debated which candidate seemed more convincing in his claim (Quayle, of course.)
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
