Fox News’ “Impeachment Poll”

I was challenged by a friend when I brought up the weighted aspect by this: “Have you taken any graduate level courses on polling Sean? I have.” So I guess you have to take graduate level courses in statistics to be fooled? I don’t know… I don’t put ANYTHING past these #NeverTrumpers any-longer. But I never say, “have you read over 2,000 books cover-to-cover, have a library of over 5,000 books as well as 3,000 more digitally?” — to make a point become true.

BIZPIC has this about the Fox News Poll:

The problem is that the poll was heavily biased because it over-sampled Democrats, thereby leading to skewed results.

According to analysis by the New York Post, a poll weighted for party affiliation would’ve concluded that 44.9% of voters favor impeachment, while 44.4% oppose it.

In other words, a less-biased poll would’ve shown that the majority of voters (55.1%) oppose impeachment.

Braun Research conducted the Fox News poll by sampling a pool comprised of:

  • 48% Democrats.
  • 40% Republicans.
  • 12% Independents.

In reality, registered American voters are:

  • 31% Democrat.
  • 29% Republican.
  • 38% independent.

Any poll that oversamples Democrats will lead to a skewed result. This is exactly what Fox News host Greg Gutfeld said this week when he dismissed the Fox News poll as bogus.

“We got to point out that it’s weighted toward Democrats,” Gutfeld said. “It’s 48% Democrats, 40% Republicans, 12% other. Also, it’s being taken at the fever pitch of media coverage about a single topic, so what do you expect?”

Gutfeld underscored: “We have to remind ourselves how many Democrats and how many Republicans are in this poll, and that these polls have been known to be wrong.”

AMERICAN THINKER continues the breakdown and shows how Rasmussen attempts to correct for such things:

How did the Fox polling unit come up with this number?

The Fox news polling companies interviewed 1,003 registered voters, ostensibly throughout the length and breadth of the United States.  Many polling companies use either all adult Americans (254 million) or registered voters (158 million in 2016) as their universe for polling.  Obviously, the greater the number of potential people to contact and question, the easier a poll is to complete and to skew a result.  In reality, what matters is who votes in an election.  In 2016, 86% (or 136.6 million) of registered voters cast a vote.  A poll of likely voters would inherently be more reliable but more difficult to achieve.  Currently, only Rasmussen among national polls uses exclusively likely voters and they are among the most reliable.

As the issue of impeachment is overtly political, the political make-up of the respondents in any poll is critical.  In this recent Fox poll, 48% of those polled claimed to be Democrats, 40% Republican, and 12% independent.  However, as Gallup points out in its most recent research, 31% of all Americans identify as Democrats, 29% as Republican and 38% as independent.

Ideally, all polls, as does Rasmussen, should strive to reflect that political affiliation dichotomy or as close as possible, considering the difficulty in finding people willing to be polled and be honest in their responses.

Therefore, the Fox poll, with its political make-up of respondents, is manipulated to come up with a desired result.  The issue isn’t the difference between the number of Democrat and Republican respondents, but the gross undercounting of independents and the massive overcounting of Democrats.

Over the past three months to date, in a variety of polls, an average of nearly 84% of all Democrats favored the impeachment of Donald Trump.  Therefore, when Fox uses 48% Democrat registered voters, the poll immediately, before taking into account any other group, will indicate 41% in favor of impeachment and removal.  Thus, to get to 51%, only 20% of those identifying as Republican or independents in this poll would have to be in favor of impeachment.

However, if Fox had used the actual political breakdown of 32% of Americans identifying as Democrats, then instead of an immediate impact of 41% in the result, it would have been 27%, or 14 percentage points less.

Further, over the past three months, polls have averaged 92% of Republicans and 56% of independents opposed to impeachment and removal.  If the Fox poll sample had been 29% Republican and 39% independent, using these average poll results, the final tabulation would have been 44% instead of 51%.

But there would have been no headlines and breathless anchors on CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, and ABC, nor any banner headlines in the Washington Post and New York Times trying to convince the nation that the citizenry is turning on Donald Trump….

 

No Official Vote On Impeachment – Per Pelosi

Here is the news almost everyone knew was coming, via RIGHT SCOOP and THE WASHINGTON TIMES: “Pelosi has reportedly informed her caucus that there will be no official impeachment vote in the House”

Now, my feeling on this final decision (of course, in politics nothing is ever “final”) is that after Marie Yovanovitch testified — presumably under oath — and apparently denied using State Dept resources to spy on American citizens, THI may have been a bridge too far for Nancy. So far everything has backfired on the Dems… this being the latest. And as more is known about the illegality of her and her staffs actions, the more Democrats stand to be hurt in 2020.

HOT AIR has a great post involving ALL THE ISSUES of this story… some of it is not too helpful to pro-Trumpers like myself… but for a good balance of this, read their whole piece… which ens thus:

So where does this ride come to a stop? How much of this is true — all of it, none of it, or only some of it? Trump loyalists will surely consider all of this as more evidence of a Deep State plot that now involves both the State and Justice Departments. Trump haters will see this as another case of foreign influence on the administration and a plot to smear Trump’s opponents, both electoral and otherwise. The rest of America might just be hoping that the [expletive deleted] ride would come to an end, period.

At this point, the mess is too complicated to suss out which conclusion reflects the truth. What does appear to true is that we’re not going to know for sure what’s true for a long, long time — and it might turn out, ironically, that the DoJ could end up as the most credible player in Ukraine-Gate.

Here are two videos discussing the issue introduced above:

John Solomon on Hunter and Joe Biden

  • JOHN SOLOMON: I can confirm to you tonight. The US government had open source intelligence and was aware that as early as February in 2019 that the Ukrainian government was planning on reopening the Burisma investigation. This was long before the president ever imagined to have a call with President Zelensky. In fact it’s before President Zelensky was even elected. This is a significant shift in the factual timeline. This is information that was omitted from the whistleblower’s complaint.

SORRY DEMOCRATS, IT’S OVER!…

John Solomon DROPS BOMB: Info Omitted from Whistleblower Report – Ukraine was Re-Opening Probe into Hunter Biden’s Company in February

Impeachment Efforts Harm Intel Community/Whistleblower Laws

Amidst the latest attempt to remove President Trump, Larry discusses the circumstances of the whistleblower’s report to Congress over President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky—in what was claimed to be diplomatic pressure to investigate Joe Biden and his son’s business dealings in the country. Larry further delves into all the other failed attempts to unseat a duly elected president.

I have to think this is all choreographed… that the full script was written and the MSM is following it to the “T.” This second “whistle blower” was set to come out at this time and the media was suppose to run with it because they all thought Trump would still be obfuscating the details. EXCEPT, Trump fast-lined the call transcript and complaint to be released…. hence the responses to George Stephanopoulos on his Twitter:

TWITCHY notes Legal Insurrections take down of the latest revelation of a 2nd whistle blower:

LEGAL INSURRECTION continues it’s cogent thinking by noting that the “[w]eaponization of whistleblower laws is yet another breach of norms in an effort to unwind the 2016 election and manipulate the 2020 election.” Continuing LI notes failure after failure of the Left to oust Trump:

Circulating claims of Trump-Russian collusion prior to the 2016 election didn’t work.

Using foreign-supplied fake intelligence, from a British spy who utilized Russian sources, to obtain surveillance of the Trump campaign and transition team didn’t work.

Intimidating Electoral College Electors to change their votes after the election didn’t work.

Having the Director of the FBI lie to, set up and try to entrap the president didn’t work.

Having that same FBI Director leak memos to the media to manufacture grounds for a Special Counsel didn’t work.

Trying to invoke the 25th Amendment to declare the president unable to perform the job didn’t work.

Two years of the Mueller Investigation didn’t work.

Three years of a permanent crisis news cycle meant to paralyze the administration didn’t work.

After all these failures to unwind the 2016 election, Democrats and the mainstream media are trying a new tactic: Create a Star Chamber “impeachment” process fueled by anonymous whistleblowers and selective leaks that is not so much designed to remove the president, though they would if they could, but to manipulate the 2020 election.

The first intelligence community whistleblower is not so much a whistleblower as a politically biased operative (according to the Inspector General) who gathered information from various sources, went to Adam Schiff’s office for guidance, then filed a so-called Whistleblower Complaint that almost certainly was drafted by a team of lawyers. WhistleBlower No. 1, because he or she filed the claim as a whistleblower, is entitled to anonymity, there will not be the type of cross-examination and investigation of the whistleblower’s background and information that was so critical when Democrats rolled out a series of accusers against Brett Kavanaugh.

With Whistleblower No. 1 failing to fulfill the mission, there was a leak to the NY Times of a potential Whistleblower No. 2. That’s how this is going to work, there will be leaks to the media to frame the public narrative just like regarding supposed Russian-collusion.

That potential Whistleblower No. 2 is not actually a whistleblower, he or she is reportedly a witness already interviewed as part of the first Whistleblower Complaint. Whistleblower No. 2 is not blowing the whistle on anything.

[….]

At the same time that evidence is being funneled through whistleblower secrecy, Democrats are intent on shutting Republican’s out of the investigative process by conducting a non-impeachment impeachment investigation……

(Video added by RPT)

…..There has been no formal vote authorizing an impeachment investigation, so Republicans are without procedural mechanisms to fully participate in the process and to use congressional powers to conduct their own investigation.

Expect Schiff and team to leak like sieves, but only the information they gather in secret that they think helps them.

This has all the makings of a congressional Star Chamber of secret “whistleblowers” and Democrat leaks meant to manipulate both the public perception of the need for impeachment and the 2020 election.

And to end, this is a great “Tweet Storm” by Fred Fleitz:

1/ As a former CIA analyst and former NSC official who edited transcripts of POTUS phone calls with foreign leaders, here are my thoughts on the whistleblower complaint which was just released… (Complaint PDF)

2/ This is not an intelligence matter. It is a policy matter and a complaint about differences over policy. Presidential phone calls are not an intelligence concern. The fact that IC officers transcribe these calls does not give the IC IG jusrisdiction over these calls.

3/ It appears that rules restricting access and knowledge of these sensitive calls was breached. This official was not on this call, not on the approved dissem list and should not have been briefed on the call.

4/ The way this complaint was written suggested the author had a lot of help. I know from my work on the House Intel Commitee staff that many whistleblowers go directly to the intel oversight committees. Did this whistleblower first meet with House Intel committee members?

5/ It is therefore important that Congress find out where this complaint came from. What did House and Senate intel committee dem members and staff know about it and when? Did they help orchestrate this complaint?

6/ My view is that this whistleblower complaint is too convenient and too perfect to come from a typical whistleblower. Were other IC officers involved? Where outside groups opposed to the president involved?

7/ This complaint will further damage IC relations with the White House for many years to come because IC officers appear to be politicizing presidential phone calls with foreign officials and their access to the president and his activities in the White House.

8/ Worst of all, this IC officer — and probably others — have blatantly crossed the line into policy. This violates a core responsibility of IC officers is to inform, but not make policy.

9/ This is such a grevious violation of trust between the IC and the White House that it would not surprise me if IC officers are barred from all access to POTUS phone calls with foreign officials.

The Nation Magazine Warns Democrats About Impeaching 45

Larry Elder reads from the VERY Left wing magazine, THE NATION’S — article: “The Ukraine Scandal Might Be a Bad Gambit for Democrats”. In it we find some damning tear-downs of positions taken at times over the past days by the media, and Facebook friends. An excellent tour of an honest Lefty worried about 2020.

Another great article can be found at AMERICAN GREATNESS entitled, “Bring On the Biggest Nothingburger of Them All

Why Hasn’t Pelosi Held A Formal Vote On Impeachment?

And this is the million-dollar question, answered by Rep. Chaffetz… House Speaker Pelosi does not want to give subpoena power to House Republicans, says Fox News contributor Jason Chaffetz, former chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

Believe In Something, Especially Political Cartoons (9-9-2018)

BURT REYNOLDS

“I may not be the best actor in the world, but I’m the best Burt Reynolds in the world.” (STEYN ONLINE)

McCAIN

DO IT

KAVANAUGH


HOLLYWOOD

MEDIA/POLITICAL

Pence Says He’S ‘Never’ Been Involved In 25Th Amendment Talks: ‘100 Percent Confident’ No One On Staff Involved In Anonymous Op-Ed (WASHINGTON TIMES)

MUELLER/MISC

Trump Didn’t Violate Campaign Finance Law (Media Myths)

The first hour of Thursdays show where Mark Levin discusses the false media reports that Donald Trump violated campaign finance laws. A good dealing with the topic.

Former CIA chief Hayden warns against impeaching Trump (“One-third of America will believe it was a soft coup’)

….“If President Trump is somehow forced to leave office before the end of his first term [] one-third of America will believe it was a soft coup,” added Mr. Hayden, a career intelligence official who retired in 2009 after leading the CIA under former President Barack Obama and George W. Bush.

An outspoken critic of the president, Mr. Hayden warned against impeachment in light of prosecutors securing convictions this week against Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort, Mr. Trump’s former personal attorney and election campaign chairman, respectively….

(WASHINGTON TIMES)

A Primer for Constitutional Impeachment (Constitution 101)

I have heard from many talk show hosts that you can impeach a ham sandwich for jay-walking. However, like with other issues, the framers of the Constitution had a convention — they spoke on many of the items added to it’s text, clearly, and were working from definitions and meanings enumerated from their day… and in writing.

MARK LEVIN reads from the book “IMPEACHMENT: THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEMS“, and lays down the case that the writers of the impeachment clause in the Constitution would not allow any frivolous issue be the driver for impeachment.

Impeachment Talk – Keep It Up Dems!

Michael Medved discusses the Democrats bad strategy to continuously discuss impeachment, and doing so, giving the Republicans a hot button issue to increase GOPers voters in 2018 as well as raising more money during the lead-up to 2018 and 2020. For more information on “locking the Donald up” go to the WASHINGTON FREE BEACON.

HOT AIR helps out in this regard with video of Ted Cruz’s Democratic challenger saying what will drive Republican voters to the polls: