[thunderous_funker]

Published on Wednesday, October 22, 2003 by the Arab News
How the Poll Results on Iraq Were Manipulated
by James Zogby

Early in President Bush's recent public relations campaign to rebuild support for the US war effort in Iraq, Vice President Cheney appeared on "Meet the Press." Attempting to make the case that the US was winning in Iraq, Cheney made the following observations:

"There was a poll done, just random in the last week, first one I've seen carefully done; admittedly, it's a difficult area to poll in. Zogby International did it with American Enterprise magazine. But that's got very positive news in it in terms of the numbers it shows with respect to the attitudes to what Americans have done.

"One of the questions it asked is: 'If you could have any model for the kind of government you'd like to have' - and they were given five choices - 'which would it be?' The US wins hands down. If you want to ask them do they want an Islamic government established, by 2: 1margins they say no, including the Shiite population. If you ask how long they want Americans to stay, over 60 percent of the people polled said they want the US to stay for at least another year. So admittedly there are problems, especially in that area where Saddam Hussein was from, where people have benefited most from his regime and who've got the most to lose if we're successful in our enterprise, and continuing attacks from terror. But to suggest somehow that that's representative of the country at large or the Iraqi people are opposed to what we've done in Iraq or are actively and aggressively trying to undermine it, I just think that's not true."

In fact, Zogby International (ZI) in Iraq had conducted the poll, and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) did publish their interpretation of the findings. But the AEI's "spin" and the vice president's use of their "spin" created a faulty impression of the poll's results and, therefore, of the attitudes of the Iraqi people.

For example, while Cheney noted that when asked what kind of government they would like, Iraqis chose "the US... hands down," in fact, the results of the poll are actually quite different. Twenty-three percent of Iraqis say that they would like to model their new government after the US; 17 .5 percent would like their model to be Saudi Arabia; 12 percent say Syria, 7 percent say Egypt and 37 percent say "none of the above." That's hardly "winning hands down."

When given the choice as to whether they "would like to see the American and British forces leave Iraq in six months, one year, or two years," 31.5 percent of Iraqis say these forces should leave in six months; 34 percent say a year, and only 25 percent say two or more years.

So while technically Cheney might say that "over 60 percent (actually it's 59 percent) ... want the US to stay at least another year," an equally correct observation would be that 65.5 percent want the US and Britain to leave in one year or less.

Other numbers found in the poll go further to dampen the vice president's and the AEI's rosy interpretations. For example, when asked if "democracy can work well in Iraq," 51 percent said "no; it is a Western way of doing things and will not work here."

And attitudes toward the US were not positive. When asked whether over the next five years, they felt that the "US would help or hurt Iraq,"50 percent said that the US would hurt Iraq, while only 35.5 percent felt the US would help the country. On the other hand, 61 percent of Iraqis felt that Saudi Arabia would help Iraq in the next five years, as opposed to only 7.5 percent, who felt Saudi Arabia would hurt their country. Some 50. 5 percent felt that the United Nations would help Iraq, while 18.5 percent felt it would hurt. Iran's rating was very close to the US', with 53. 5 percent of Iraqis saying Iran would hurt them in the next five years, while only 21. 5 percent felt that Iran might help them.

It is disturbing that the AEI and the vice president could get it so wrong. Their misuse of the polling numbers to make the point that they wanted to make, resembles the way critics have noted that the administration used "intelligence data" to make their case to justify the war.

The danger, of course, is that painting a rosy picture that doesn't exist is a recipe for a failed policy. Wishing something to be can't make it so. At some point, reality intervenes. It's a hard lesson to learn, but it is dangerous to ignore its importance.

For the administration to continue to tell itself and the American people that "all is well," only means that needed changes in policy will not be made.

Consider some of the other poll findings:


Over 55 percent give a negative rating to "how the US military is dealing with Iraqi civilians." Only 20 percent gave the US military a positive rating.

By a margin of 57 percent to 38 . 5 percent, Iraqis indicate that they would support "Arab forces" providing security in their country.

When asked how they would describe the attacks on the US military, 49 percent described them as "resistance operations." Only 29 percent saw them as attacks by "Ba'ath loyalists."

When asked whom they preferred to "provide security and restore order in their country," only 6 . 5 percent said the US. Twenty-seven percent said the US and the UN together, 14 . 5 percent preferred only the UN. And the largest group, 45 percent, said they would prefer the "Iraqi military" to do the job alone.
There are important lessons in all of this. Lessons policy makers ought to heed if they are to help Iraq move forward. What the Iraqi people appear to be telling us is that they have hope for the future, but they want the help of their neighbors more than that of the US.

That may not be what Washington wants to hear, but it ought to listen nevertheless. Because if policy makers continue to bend the data to meet their desired policy, then this hole they are digging will only get deeper.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
[B], 2003 by the Arab News

LOL

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
LOL

Keep your ad hominem arguments out of my thread, please.

[christ]

Is the 'Zogby' in the by-line any relation to Zogby International?

If so, I would say that he was pretty well placed to observe what ZI did. Regardless of where he is published.

[swrate]

Originally posted by christ:
Is the 'Zogby' in the by-line any relation to Zogby International?

If so, I would say that he was pretty well placed to observe what ZI did. Regardless of where he is published.

as usual ....twisting reality is the politicians national sport

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by christ:
Is the 'Zogby' in the by-line any relation to Zogby International?

If so, I would say that he was pretty well placed to observe what ZI did. Regardless of where he is published.

No he is not related. Glad you asked. He is the president of the Arab American Institute and considered a prominent expert on US-Arab relations.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
No he is not related. Glad you asked. He is the president of the Arab American Institute and considered a prominent expert on US-Arab relations.

I thought that Zogby and the poll Zogby were brothers?



BG

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
I thought that Zogby and the poll Zogby were brothers?



BG

Really? I meant "related" in the sense that James doesn't work for Zobgy International, I don't know if they are family. You may be right.

Sorry for the confusion. The author does not work for Zogby International, AFAIK. I have no idea if they are family or not.

[BRussell]

They are brothers. I've seen them speak together on C-SPAN. When I saw the author I assumed that was the pollster Zogby, but James is actually the Arab American Institute guy. It seems odd that James would write an article about his brother's poll. But I do know they have worked together on polls of Arabs and about Arab issues.

[Uday's Carcass]

ths is ridiculous. so many organisations take poll all the time and the establishment media are always looking for any way to bash Bush and undermine his administration. To think that polls were manipulated is idiotic. You're no doubt one of the fools who voted that Jews rule the world by proxy.

sorry, but any 'arab news' outlet is nothing but a lame name for packaged corruption, lies, and hate.

Produce a legit corroborating source and I might take this tripe seriously.

[adamk]

Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
ths is ridiculous. so many organisations take poll all the time and the establishment media are always looking for any way to bash Bush and undermine his administration. To think that polls were manipulated is idiotic.

i think the point is the poll wasn't manipulated, rather the conclusions drawn from the numbers were.

there are numerous examples of this in the original post. feel free to show how cheney's conclusions weren't mis-leading. in doing this, you may want to consider the omission of other finding's in the polls that weren't cited by cheney, since they did not support his statements.

Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
sorry, but any 'arab news' outlet is nothing but a lame name for packaged corruption, lies, and hate.

they probably say the same thing of the west...

Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
Produce a legit corroborating source and I might take this tripe seriously.

check out www.zogby.com . that appears to be the organization where the poll was conducted. however, whether you consider it a legit source, is another matter.

adam

[boots]

Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
ths is ridiculous. so many organisations take poll all the time and the establishment media are always looking for any way to bash Bush and undermine his administration. To think that polls were manipulated is idiotic. You're no doubt one of the fools who voted that Jews rule the world by proxy.

sorry, but any 'arab news' outlet is nothing but a lame name for packaged corruption, lies, and hate.

Produce a legit corroborating source and I might take this tripe seriously.

Yeah, I think you missed the point. The poll wasn't manipulated, and Cheney never criticized the poll - he actually went out of the way to say it was a credible poll. Rather, he (and the AEI) misused the numbers from the poll to convey a view that wasn't supported by the poll numbers.

That is the issue. The misuse of polling data. This is one of the biggest problems with polls...how the data gets used.

[petehammer]

Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
You're no doubt one of the fools who voted that Jews rule the world by proxy.

Boy! That was related and on topic!

Or was it just a lame attack?

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by petehammer:
Boy! That was related and on topic!

Or was it just a lame attack?

welcome to the political lounge. Those who can discuss politics DO, and those who can't spew lame attacks.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
tsorry, but any 'arab news' outlet is nothing but a lame name for packaged corruption, lies, and hate.

Produce a legit corroborating source and I might take this tripe seriously.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
welcome to the political lounge. Those who can discuss politics DO, and those who can't spew lame attacks.

And you are as as guilty as the next person.

[adamk]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
And you are as as guilty as the next person.

case in point.

petehammer, the signal-to-noise ratio can get pretty low around here unfortunately.

BOT. to those who dismiss the conclusions of the 'irreputable' source, it should be no trouble to show how the conclusions could not be derived from the results of the poll.

adam