A ONE-SIDE-ONLY IMPEACHMENT ARTICLE

I just read a commentary written by politico.com’s Heather Caygle, Sarah Ferris and Kyle Cheney, titled, “Dems see one last chance to boost public support for impeachment”.

Assuming the intention was to provide readers with neutral information, I have to say this article troubled me. Let me tell you why.

First off, there are the references to impeachment polling.  That certainly makes sense.

My problem, however, is that only two such polls were referenced – those of CNN and Politico/Morning Consult – both of which show public approval of impeachment has stayed the same throughout the adam schiff “impeachment inquiry” hearings.

What Ms. Caygle, Ms. Ferris and Mr. Cheney have conveniently left out is all the polls that show approval for impeachment has dropped, especially among the key independent group. I can think of three offhand – Emerson, Quinnipiac and Gallup – and am pretty sure there are more besides.

Why was there no mention of these polls in the article?  Why were readers left with the implication that polls such as Emerson, Quinnipiac and Gallup don’t even exist, even though they do?

Then there are quotes from members of the House of Representatives.

The views of five House members are cited in the article:  David Cicilline (D-RI),  Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) and Rep. John Yarmuth (D-KY).

That’s it.  That’s all of them.

As you may have noticed, not one Republican is quoted.  Zero.

Wouldn’t you think an article which discusses how Democrats are trying to boom up impeachment interest against a Republican President would have quotes from, I don’t know, maybe one or two Republicans, so readers would get a taste of both sides?  Even just one Republican?

How can Ms. Caygle, Ms. Ferris and Mr. Cheney think their article is complete and neutral, when it exclusively presents one side of the political aisle and excludes any vestige of the other side?

How can they think their article is anything but what amounts to a promotional piece on behalf of the Democrat Party?

I have to at least consider the possibility that this is all they intended it to be.

2 Comments

  • Before the rise of the internet, how many big issues were reported on, the way we witness above and everyday elsewhere???
    How long have the media lied/tricked it’s customers???

  • Some polls show that support for impeachment has increased or grown, some show it has dropped. According to the aggregates the consensus is centred around the former, and even most of the polls that show a fall in impeachment support still show a majority support for impeachment.

    The only really bad poll was Emerson, and given that the same poll showed Trump approval at +5, which was way out of left field and was even more generous than the landline-only Rasmussen polls, it’s pretty clearly a more conservative-favouring outlier. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t count; polls publishing their outliers is a sign of integrity. But it also doesn’t mean you can cherrypick that poll and run with it as the new state of the political environment.

    As for the other two “bad polls”: the Gallup poll is almost a month old and Quinnipiac is only slightly negative towards impeachment (with unusually low support for impeachment among Republicans – again, fine, but worth noting) while still showing majority support for it among independents. Both polls also ask whether trump should be impeached AND REMOVED which is very important to note.

    The bottom line is most polls demonstrate majority support for impeachment and it’s disingenuous to try to cherrypick any particular angle is. The support for impeachment probably isn’t +7 like SSRS says or +9 as Morning Consult and Survey USA say, but it probably isn’t -2 like Emerson College says or-3 like Quinnipiac says either.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *