Fake News, Fake Archive - CNN Edition

Fake News, Fake Archive - CNN Edition

Fake News, Fake Archive – CNN Edition

Commentary by Brian C. Joondeph

Saturday, September 14, 2019

There were very few weeks for CNN. Who knew that fake news pressure could be so challenging?

Firstly, they tried to put President Trump in his rube for saying that Alabama could be in the Hurricane Dorian corridor. It happens that CNN was recommended The same thing, a few days before Trump, he warned Alabama “to be watching”.

Then came the fiction that Trump focused on a Russian informant. Instead the decision on any journey or effluent resulted in Trump becoming president. We know that this happened, but CNN chose to convince the current president.

Now it's an opinion poll. The story of the week is CNN, ”says 6 out of 10 to say that the second term isn't going to Trump.” Well, he arranges it. If CNN says that, it must be true. Get ready for President Beto or Pete.

Grab YouTube screen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Zh_RxSASY

Remember how hard they said that Trump stole Putin and the Russians from Hillary Clinton. And how a Trump frog would soon be marching from the White House, unless a gaggle of psychiatrists confirming Trump insane gets rid of it first through the 25th Amendment.

CNN told us Stormy Daniels would be the slayer Trump. Or was it Omarosa? Or Michael Cohen? Or Megan Rapinoe? I have lost a track. Michael Avenatti was the perfect candidate in the eyes of Brian Stelter, a CNN show host with the most fraudulent name, “Reliable Sources.”

CNN is gasty over this latest poll, reinforcing their reputation as a hackney and partisan promotional arm of the Democratic Party. This is the story that Trump's successful offer of reconciliation reverses. In the minds of Beltway journalists, everyone likes Donald Trump and wants to take packing in November 2020.

CNN describes his poll by saying, “Overall, the picture poll expresses a President that he has done little to improve negative impressions of him or his work during his term of office. . Or low unemployment recorded, especially for women, blacks and Hispanics. Or American energy independence. I guess these achievements lead to "negative impressions" for the CNN watch zombies.

The polls also have their survey sample. Make a trumpet poll on the Upper East Side of Manhattan or in Bhoulder, Colorado and it is not surprising that its number will be permitted in the low digits. In this particular poll, the internal methodology reflects how CNN acquired the desired result by commissioning a poll overseeing the Democrats. “31% said they were a Democratic Party, 25% said they were Republicans, and 44% described themselves as independent or members of another party.”

The poll supervised 6 percentage points. Of the 44 per cent who were independent or “members of another party,” how many other parties are there? Could some be members of the Green Party or American Democratic Socialist, and “The Squad” is a party? Do their opinions give a better insight into Republicans or Democrats?

The CNN poll only looked at self-reported registered voters, not likely voters, as a more accurate pollsters survey. According to CNN, “about 55% of citizens of the voting age wore ballots” at the 2016 presidential election, meaning that half of those surveyed did not stay voting.

For comparison, look back eight years ago when Barack Obama was running for reconciliation. Gallup poll since December 2011 found that 55 percent of those surveyed believed that reelection was not going to Obama. This number varies from the Trump number of 60 percent mentioned in the CNN poll. But Obama renamed easily.

Note also the media coverage not only by CNN, President Trump. The Media Research Center found that Trump receives 92 per cent negative average coverage. The Pew Research Center, “Trump media agreed three times more negative than in Obama's case, there is only 5 percent positive.” T

Due to the huge difference in media coverage of Trump Versus Obama, the fact is that similar polling results are favorable to President Trump. Another way to look at these prospects of reflection is to see Obama's approved number against Trump at similar points in their respective presidencies.

Rasmussen Reports do not just so. As a separate option, Rasmussen was one of the most accurate pollsters to predict the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. A Presidential Daily Tracking Poll at Rasmussen, probably not just registered voters, is creating a more valid survey sample because even half of the voters do not vote.

On 10 September, the total approval number for Trump was 47 per cent, compared to 42 per cent for Obama exactly eight years ago, the same point in both presidencies. And we know who won the revival easily in 2012.

Is CNN reporting its poll results honestly, based on the factors mentioned above? Or are they congestion, trying to create their desired election results? From the article that reported on the poll, “Trump approval ratings are to deal with major issues, and there is little movement in the wrong direction of the President.”

The Democrats, and their media handlers, did not learn much since 2016, when it was predicted that Hillary Clinton's landslide was entire, even on Election Day. Representative Jerry Nadler is pushing forward when only 21 per cent of voters support this direction.

It is interesting that the media deal with a poll that supports their agenda or desired thinking, without ignoring any conflicting information. For example, the media pays little attention to Rasmussen polls showing Trump's support among black voters joking about 30 percent last month.

Or on a Zogby poll from last month with this result, “Trump's rating has been improved after minorities improved: 28% of African Americans and 49% of Hispanics at least approved by the president.”

Trump enjoys 88 per cent job approval among Republicans according to a recent CNN poll, but this is not the headline.

The Democrats ignore the dislike polls or trump rally amounts and enthusiasm on their own danger. Another bad night might be people living through fake news polls in November 2020.

Brian C. Joondeph, MD, is a freelance Denver-based doctor and writer whose pieces are featured in American Thinker, Daily Caller, and other publications. Continue on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and QuodVerum.

The views expressed in this column are those of the author, not Rasmussen Reports. Comments on this topic should be sent to the author or syndicate.

Rasmussen reports It is a collection-oriented media company,
publication and distribution of information on public opinion.

We conduct public opinion polls on various topics to inform our audience of events
in other news and interests. To ensure editorial control and independence, t
we pay for the polls themselves and generate income through sales sales, t
sponsorships, and advertising. Night voting on political, business and lifestyle topics
it provides the content for Rasmussen Reports website which is updated frequently every day.
If it's in the news, it's our polls. In addition, the data encourages
updated daily newsletter and various media outlets
All over the country.

Some information, including the Rasmussen Reports everyday
and commentaries are available free of charge to the general public.
Subscriptions are available for $ 4.95 per month or 34.95 per year
which gives subscribers exclusive access to more than 20 stories per week for forthcoming elections, t
consumer confidence, and issues that affect us all. For those who are really in the numbers,
Platinum Members can review demographic chrosstabs
and the complete history of our data.

To learn more about our methodology, click here.


Leave a comment

Send a Comment

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.