Analysis of NYT/Stanford climate poll analysis: ‘Cook up a poll, produce results they like, and then use it as a club to make whatever they want’
American Thinker analyzes new NYT/Stanford poll: 'The New York Times has a breathless announcement: Most Republicans Back Climate Action! Except, it's not most Republicans; by the Time's own numbers, it's only 48%, and even that number is very suspect...This is the classic way that the Left shifts public opinion; they cook up a poll, produce results they like, and then use it as a club to make whatever they want. They can get the results they like either by leading questions, asking unrepresentative samples, or just by plain making things up.
The poll was conducted by the New York Times (Left bias), Stanford University (Left bias), and "the nonpartisan environmental research group Resources for the Future". How many "nonpartisan" environmental groups do you know? The questions were of the nature of: "If nothing is done to reduce global warming in the future, how serious of a problem do you think it will be for the United States?"
This question is biased because it presumes there is global warming. At best, it's disputed. But the person asked this question might automatically presume there is global warming simply by the wording of the question. NYT poll: "If nothing is done to reduce global warming in the future, how much do you think it will hurt future generations? "
That's just like "If you don't stop beating your wife, how much do you think she will hurt in the future?" Again, the question presumes there is global warming and the phrase "nothing is done" is biased against inaction, as is "how much will it hurt".
