Tumblr Icon RSS Icon

Best progressive polling analysis website loves that coal money

By Joe Romm

"Best progressive polling analysis website loves that coal money"

Share:

google plus icon

I have repeatedly recommended Nate Silver’s fivethirtyeight.com for hard-core political junkies who want the best analysis of the blizzard of state, national, and tracking polls (see here and here). Sadly, the site is a junkie itself for that sweet coal-industry-front-group money from the American Coalition for Dirty Clean Coal Electricity.

538_coal.jpg

Nate, just say no!

‹ Maryland climate campaigners on terrorist list

Sununu’s Newfound Opposition To Big Oil ›

8 Responses to Best progressive polling analysis website loves that coal money

  1. Ronald says:

    maybe website funding is like sausages and politics, you don’t want to see what goes into making them.

    I own farmland. I think ethanol from corn to put into motor vehicles is stupid for many reasons. But recently I have been able to stick high farmland rents to the renters because of the increased demand because of ethanol. Sometimes you just have to take the money.

  2. Rick C says:

    Nate, say it ain’t so!

  3. P. G. Dudda says:

    The analysts on that website are *trying* to be politically neutral, insofar as they avoid impressions of conscious bias. They do clearly state in their profiles that they are both pro-Obama, but they are running the analyses to try and get honest assessments of where the polls stand. Ths means that in order to prevent appearance of bias in their analyses, they pretty much _have_ to accept ads from all ends of the political spectrum. Ads are not an endorsement per se, just a statement of “their money isn’t too dirty for us (yet)”. It’s a marketplace of ideas, folks… good, bad, AND ugly!

  4. MikeB says:

    From Nate’s FAQ:
    Why do you run ads for [insert name of candidate you don't like]?
    I believe in the right of free speech. Blogging is one form of free speech, and political advertising is another. If I believe an ad is particularly misleading, I will seek to block it, but otherwise, this site takes a non-partisan position toward which advertising it accepts. Ads for John McCain, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have each appeared on this website at various times.

    Personally, if the coal people want to waste their money supporting Nate, I say let them. ;)

  5. Joe says:

    Yeah, Nate is confused. He runs a blog. He moderates comments. He has control over what he publishes. My taking coal money he is tacitly endorsing not just the coal industry, but the whole greenwashing front-group disinformation campaign aimed at duping the public.

    The “clean coal” ACCCE people may be polluters, but they obviously see a benefit in spreading their disinformation. So far I’m not certain how anyone can call it a waste of money, given that their policies seem to be dominant in this country.

  6. Joe Galliani says:

    Candidates lying about their records and making promises they can’t keep is one thing.

    Industry trade groups who blatantly lie about the toxicity of their product; lie about the facts of their business practices; distort the record about the historic and daily damage they do to the environment, the earth’s climate and the health of people of all political parties is an entirely different issue. Especially when they advertise a failed fantasy as hope for the future.

    Today’s clean coal advocates make yesterday’s doctors who endorsed cigarettes as”good for your health” look like Ralph Nader in comparison.

    I love Nate’s site, but I’m going to let him know how much I hate his clean coal ads and the dirty money that goes with them.

  7. Brian D says:

    While I agree with Joe, I’d also like to add that it’s apparently dependent on your ISP to some regards. As a Canadian addict of FiveThirtyEight, I saw ads for Canadian political coalitions (two centered against Harper and one centered for him) on those banners that I never saw anyone comment on — I can only suppose that these banners never showed up outside of Canada. (Likewise, I never see the McCain ads that run there — the same ads that folk in the comment threads encourage clicking, as each click increases the bill that the McCain campaign owes Nate. This also could be due to my ISP.)

    To the point, though, I still see the clean coal ads. What I said above only applies to the banner ads, not the ads on the left column.

  8. David B. Benson says:

    What MikeB said. :-)