Polling Data Analysis with Stephen Moore

Not lying so much as willfully misleading.

I had the misfortune to watch Stephen Moore debating approval ratings for Trump by African Americans. From RawStory:

…you have to look at [Trump’s] record when it comes to civil rights not necessarily what he said or is alleged to have said,” Moore answered. “Brooke, if this man is a racist, why is it that his approval rating, among blacks, has increased while he has been president? It’s because of his record, not what he says.”

Data on this question based upon a systematic methodology is available from Gallup. Here is what WaPo provided based on Gallup data:

Source: Gallup via WaPo.

I wondered where Mr. Moore obtained his finding. Apparently, as WaPo points out, it’s from this Breitbart article, which in turn cites an Atlantic article. The latter article is circumspect about the comparison since it involves exit polls (for 2016) and approval ratings (for 2017), while the Breitbart article infers the trend more explicitly. Since the two samples are different in selection, I’d say it’s at least problematic to infer a trend.

And so it goes with Stephen Moore and data. For his treatment of macro data, see this post.

7 thoughts on “Polling Data Analysis with Stephen Moore

  1. 2slugbaits

    Not lying so much as willfully misleading.

    I don’t know about that. “Willfully misleading” implies that Moore actually knows that what he’s saying is false. As I’ve said before, I don’t think Moore sees himself as lying. He’s just a moron, pure and simple. The Trump cheerleaders who consciously lie restrict their pronouncements to Trump friendly outlets like Fake Noise. Moore is cavalier with the facts just because he’s a BS artist who makes stuff up on the fly based on his intuitions of what he thinks the facts must be. He BS’s so much that I’m sure he truly believes his own nonsense. There’s a difference between outright mendacity and plain old stupidity.

    I noticed that in the exchange Moore never really addressed Brooke Baldwin’s litany of clearly and outrageously racist words and actions.

  2. rtd

    Menzie you very recently stated “I’m merely following Mr. Trump’s lead, and using the language he uses. So, isn’t he the one who should be pulling back?” Isn’t Moore & Breitbart doing the same with The Atlantic article and/or other sources? Akin to yourself, they’re the LCD. Your ability to move the nets while serving is impressive.

    Also, I like the first sentence of this post. It could’ve been restated as “Not lying so much as disingenuous” if you’re curious. Because, contra-your claim, lying isn’t necessarily the same as being disingenuous.

  3. pgl

    Moore on the one hand:

    “Ive been in meetings with Donald Trump many times in the last two years and I’ve never once heard him say anything disparaging”.

    Later he says:

    “Look, I think there are times when Donald Trump uses language that I strongly disapprove of, Brooke”.

    I’m glad he disapproves of S***hole even if he claims Trump has never used anything remotely like this word.

  4. Moses Herzog

    I’m guessing it’s hard for you to catch much TV news, but do you want to know the “talking head” or “analyst” that really annoys the hell out of ME?? Christopher Ruddy, who is the head of “NewsMax”. And it’s not just him reading off his talking points like he just got them in a bullet form memo from Hope Hicks. It’s that outfits like “PBSNewsHour” and BBC’s “Beyond 100 Days” keep interviewing the bastard like he’s a neutral party or some objective observer. OK, if these news outlets want to have a Trump lapdog on, fine, but at least have someone on the other side of it. I have seen him appear twice on these shows to blather with no divergent view to counter his crap.

Comments are closed.