Why Anti Gun PPP Is Now Completely Discredited

Train of Abuses writes in an email:

As anyone who remembers the latest anti-gun blitz after Newton knows, PPP is probably the most blatantly anti-gun polling organization in the nation. After being hired by Bloomberg, they were cited over and over by the press with the "90%" and "80%" support for BG check lines. However, another great side effect of the CO recalls was the complete discrediting of PPP based upon their actions as nothing more than a glorified push polling organization. Since this polling organization will continue to be used to attack gun rights in the future by politicians and media figures, I think it is important that we use this incident to discredit them and show how worthless their polling results actually are in terms of the gun debate.

This link provides a pretty good overview: http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/09/ppp-sat-on-poll-showing-colorado-recall-strength/

Essentially, PPP has been discredited for two main reasons:

1) As Nate Silver and Mark Blumenthal - one being a former NY Times employee, the other a current Huffington Post pollster, so not exactly far right wing figures - pointed out, it is highly unscientific and unacceptable to simply not release polling because the pollster doesn't believe the results. Their credibility is immediately questioned in general, and the next thought is wondering how many other times something like this has been done. The subsequent condescending explanations from PPP about believing the people were "confused" or "didn't understand the question" because 1/3 of Dems sided with the recall in what PPP viewed as "non-obtrusive laws" is ridiculous, and something that a judge in Colorado rejected when the head of PPP made the exact same argument to throw out the recall.

2) Giron was recalled despite an overwhelming majority supposedly supporting background checks on firearm purchases according to PPP's own polling. This alone invalidates the logical leap often displayed by PPP that because voters agree with an abstract automated phone question that BG checks are a "good idea" does not mean they will support a candidate for actually implementing them. BG checks to "stop criminals" sounds as though it is a good idea until the reality of what all that involves sets in. PPP then resorted to the "NRA distorted the message" nonsense - amazingly done despite pro recall forces being outspent by six to one and the NRA not really being much of a factor in Giron's race anyway - shows that they fail to understand that there is a huge difference in supporting a concept and supporting how it is implemented. A great example would be how "cutting government spending" almost always does very well in polling, but those same people would be furious if their favored government program was actually cut.

So in the future, when PPP is cited as "proof" that the public wants BG checks or some other form of gun control, we can always point back to the CO recall election to completely discrediting their results based on all of the above.