A few weeks back I teased the Seattle Times editorial board for its amazing “psychic powers” regarding public opinion on the deep bore tunnel.
“State lawmakers approved the project, the governor favors it and the region — save for one activist mayor — considers the matter settled,” the Times confidently wrote. To which I bemusedly replied:
Hear that? Except for Mayor Mike McGinn, the entire region favors the Big Bore tunnel, even me! Wow. The Times must know me better than I do. Amazing.
Well, it turns out, not so much.
Indeed, according to a new KING-5/SurveyUSA poll, public opinion is rather split, with only 47% of respondents supporting the tunnel compared to 46% opposed. Furthermore, 48% of respondents are “very concerned” about the costs of the tunnel, and33% “somewhat concerned”, while respondents say that they agree with Mayor Mike McGinn that construction should wait until the state agrees to pay for cost overruns, by a whopping 63% to 31% margin.
I guess the Times’ editors aren’t all that psychic after all. In fact what they are, is totally out of touch.
But confidently so. And in the op-ed business, confidence is apparently the only thing that matters.
UPDATE:
Fixed post to correct my understatement of respondents’ concern.
I’d cheer these results, but that would put me in the awkward position of cheering for something King 5 said.
But the Times is the region… they decided.
The Times doesn’t yet realize that the days when editors could run the country by telling people what to think are gone.
They could pay for it with all the money saved by getting rid of union maritime engineers in the engine rooms of the Ferries and replace them with $11 an hr non union mechanics.
The fact there are 33% who are not concerned with the cost of tunnel speaks volumes about the rootless Atheist Progressive lack of contact with reality.
Not Concerned?
Who are these fools??
Cynical @ 5:
Cynical, where do you read 33%?
It looks like 80% or so percent of the respondents are concerned…
@6 Cynical, where do you read 33%?
Goldy – see above.
josh spews @7:
If you look at the link to the poll, you see the numbers J. Whorfin referenced. Goldy’s quote is incorrect.
It’s all about framing. How about asking voters about a “surface” option? Think that will get as much support as one thinks? How about, “would you support a tunnel if the overun issue was handled”? Far different outcome I would bet. The question was asked under the assumption that the overrun risks are not handled. That is the crux of the debate; KING 5 says it’s a forgone conclusion in the framing of the poll.
Exactly how does the Seattle public get information about anything?????
I suspect that by far the only significant footprint on the local neocortex is sensationalistic talk radio,
So, they “hear” that their is a big potential legal problem. The never get to hear any form of rational discussion of this (or any other) issue.
Mayor Nickles lost because the yellow airwaves made a phony issue over snow removal. Hell I did not even like Nichols but for him to lose his job to the two nebishim was a lousy testimony to the wisdom of the people.
Along comes McGinn … whether he is right or wrong is less important than his effect in causing a scandal.
If this makes Goldy feel good, I guess he also like the Faux effects. Glen Beck is pretty damn successful at creating an alternate reality.
Democracy is a crap shoot when it degenerates to this level.
POLL:
Goldy is still mad that The Times wouldn’t hire him and round-filed his application and resume.
Get over it already! :)
The Times is exactly the same on Seattle public schools. They loooove Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson despite the fact that while she’s created a lot of churn, there’s not much she’s accomplished. Despite the fact that two parent surveys gave her low marks and teachers at 12 schools, in the weeks before school let out, voted no confidence in her leadership, the Times still loves her. In one two-week period they had at least 2 editorials and an article touting how great she is.
And then there’s the recent state audit report that found multiple issues of district mismanagement including the Superintendent spending way over her daily limit on her district issued credit card AND spending it on a non-allowed item. Does the Times have anything to say about the audit? No, they just pick up an AP story on it without having their own reporter covering it.
It’s mind boggling how they think they are really the only game in town.
Goldy–
Thanks for correcting your error.
It is still shocking that even 33% are only “somewhat concerned” about a project that if it goes wrong, will bankrupt Seattle.
Shows the moronocrity is still quite strong.
I’ll bet most of these “somewhat concerned”‘s and those unconcerned are rootless Atheist Progressives that think money comes from ObaMao’s money tree and debt doesn’t ever have to be paid back.