What the WP/Harvard Poll Really Said (Not that you didn't know O lied, but...)

based on Harvard University/ Washington Post poll ^ | 1-26-10 | Vanity

[dangus]

Citing the then-unpublished Harvard University/ Washington Post poll the Obama administration and its apologists claimed that the Massachusetts voters who voted for Sen. Brown intended to show support for his health care bill. In reality, only 1% said they voted for Brown to support the Obamacare bill; 5% supported Coakley to stop the Obamacare bill.

The Obama administration said that voters were simply angry. But 70% of Brown's supporters said their vote was more for Brown than against Coakley; 25% said their vote was more against Coakley. However, only 57% said their vote was more for Coakley and 40% said it was more against Brown.

Obama claims that Massachusetts voters supported his agenda, but only 4% of Brown voters said their vote expresses support for Obama; Only 5% (mostly the same people) said their vote expresses support for the Democrat agenda.

Obama claims that Massachusetts voters still support health care reform. But only 14% of Brown voters support health care reform; Nearly the same portion (13%) of Coakley voters oppose health care reform. In fact, 22% of voters believe that they would be better off if health care reform passes; 39% believe they would be worse off. Isn't it funny that the Washington Post and Harvard University didn't object to the President defaming them? Isn't it funny that they didn't issue corrections? Isn't it funny that the reporters these lies were issued to didn't correct or challenge the false assertions?

Oh, and there's this: 60% of voters disapprove of the job Gov. Patrick is doing in office. And that's coming from a poll which claims Obama's approval rating was 61%. (Other polls had it as low as 43%.)

[panzerkamphwageneinz]

TWO WORDS: COGNITIVE DISSONANCE

[dsc]

You don’t suffer from cognitive dissonance when you know you’re lying.