Inside the numbers

Only in America would be opinions of 1000 people mean so much.  It might not matter to the average Joe or Jane, but it supports the  talking points our politicians will use to promote their agenda.  It's as if we're the puppets and the posters are pulling the strings.  People like MSNBC’s Chris Matthews take these polls as gospel; it doesn't matter who the source is, and he gets angry if people disagree with the results.  I used to be an avid poll watcher but these days we're over saturated with daily polls, I just glance at them now and then.  I do like the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll because it's more of a detailed quarterly poll.

The results of the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll is not favorable to the current GOP, the Tea Party or those that think ObamaCare will bankrupt our nation.  In fact, according to the poll, people want more to be done to drive down the high cost of Health Insurance and availability.

The latest NBC /Wall Street Journal surveyed 1000 people, 77%% of them being white. That statistic alone makes the poll more favorable to the democrats because if more minorities  would have been polled, the likelihood of them voting in the negative would be nil.  Those are facts pundits shy away from because it can be seen condescending, racial, or rude.  Minorities may have pushed the “ headed in the right direction” numbers down because they are disproportionately affected by our weak economy.

I'm sure the White House is going over the poll numbers with a fine tooth comb, because that's the only tool available to measure the pulse of America, at a given point in time.  They're using the results to plan their strategy on dealing with the opposition and making their case to the American people at the State of the Union speech next week.  President Obama can  now make his speech with the same confidence he had when he took office or at least before the healthcare issue.  It doesn't matter what poll you look at; Americans do not think we will win in Afghanistan, and they don't think we should be there.  The president will address the issue, but it is questionable as to how much time he devotes to it and how much persuasion he will use to try and convince us that the issue is worth our effort, money, and troops.
Joe Lieberman's appearance on “ Morning Joe” didn't turn out the way he anticipated.  He was making a farewell tour but when the subject of him replacing Secretary Robert Gates came up; it all went downhill for him.  He was questioned about his vote for the invasion of Iraq.  He stood by his vote a double downed on his reason by saying”“I’m basing it on the so-called Duelfer report … Charles Duelfer conducted the most comprehensive report on behalf of our country. Nobody thought it was partisan. I wanna be very clear. He didn’t find big caches of weapons of mass destruction, but he found and proved I think that Saddam had every intention, particularly to develop nuclear weapons, was developing chemical and biological weapons. and had a structure in place, including nuclear scientists, that he was prepared to support if he broke out of the sanctions, which he was inclined to do.” It was then when Arianna Huffington lit into him by saying”“Well, based on these completely unfounded assumptions, I sincerely hope that for the sake of the country you do not become the secretary of defense. " …….  Lieberman responded by saying ““I don’t think you’ve read it, sweetheart.”..  How condescending is that?

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/20/lieberman-tussles-with-huffington-over-iraq-on-morning-joe-calls-her-sweetheart/#ixzz1BbMqcAUR