‘Stupid’ Dilbert creator killed his career because of a highly flawed right-wing poll: analysis

Scott Adams, the creator of the “Dilbert” cartoon strip which has been yanked from newspapers across the country due to his racist comments, has only himself to blame for his troubles because he relied on a highly dubious poll when he attacked Black Americans.

That is the opinion of Slate analyst Aymann Ismel who pointed out the Rasmussen poll that the controversial cartoonist used in his diatribe can, at best, be viewed as an attempt to troll non-conservatives. Instead it appears to have ended Adams’ career.

Adams quickly lost his syndication deal and watched as newspapers lined up to pull his strip after posting a video where he claimed, “If nearly half of all Blacks are not OK with white people—according to this poll, not according to me, that’s a hate group,” before advising his fans to “get the hell away from Black people.”

According to Ismel, “I cannot overemphasize how dumb it is that Scott finally filleted his reputation in full over a trolly Rasmussen poll. If you’re not familiar, Rasmussen is a right-leaning pollster that produces semi-mainstream polls but is noted for its murky methods and what the New York Times has called ‘dubious sampling and weighting techniques.'”

READ MORE: Trump lawyer hints at using ‘rapper’ defense to keep him out of jail

He then added that Rasmussen has been coy about their methodology when it came to that poll.

“Rasmussen said 13 percent of poll respondents were Black, so about 130 people. If we take the results entirely at face value—which I’d discourage—that means it found about 34 Black people who answered ‘disagree’ or ‘strongly disagree’ with the statement ‘It’s OK to be white.’ We have no more information about why. (Adams got to his figure by also including Black respondents who answered ‘not sure.’)”

According to the analyst, “Rasmussen apparently assumed its audience would be too stupid to know any of that, and in the case of Scott Adams, it was clearly right. Perhaps some of the people Rasmussen polled were aware of the history of the phrase, which at one point made it into a Tucker Carlson monologue; it’s hard to say, and Rasmussen didn’t care to ask. But the whole charade seemed clearly designed to end up on shows like Adams’, where it purported to become a referendum on whether or not Black Americans hate white people.”

“The irony is that the ‘it’s OK to be white’ troll has now undone Adams worse than it did any supposed campus hysterics… Alas, Adams lived by the poll—and Rasmussen got exactly what it wanted,” the columnist concluded.

You can read more here

Related articles

Joshua Lynch accepted into national drug abuse program for innovators

Johns Hopkins recognizes emergency medicine professor for his pioneering opioid...

‘Zero to Do With Epstein’: Johnson Gives New Reason Why He Hasn’t Sworn in New Democrat

"It's like a ghost town. So we're going to administer her oath as soon as we get back. This has zero to do with Epstein."

The post ‘Zero to Do With Epstein’: Johnson Gives New Reason Why He Hasn’t Sworn in New Democrat first appeared on Mediaite.

Trump’s blunders ‘raise the risk of global conflict’ as enemies ‘gang up’: analyst



After a series of diplomatic blunders, President Donald Trump and America's reputation loss could "raise the risk of global conflict" and come at a major cost, including "mischief or worse" from enemies.

In an opinion piece published Monday, Bloomberg columnist Andreas Kluth describes how a good reputation can be difficult to obtain or maintain, and Trump "has squandered whatever credibility America had left in foreign and security policy."

Following his rambling speech last week in front of the United Nations and his struggle to see the difference between "personal chemistry" with President Vladimir Putin and diplomatic action, Trump has effectively put both adversaries and allies on edge, wrote Kluth.

"Inklings of danger are everywhere," Kluth writes. "America’s partners are becoming more anxious and making alternative arrangements for their security: Saudi Arabia just signed a defensive pact with Pakistan after watching an Israeli strike against its Gulf neighbor Qatar, which is allied to, but got no help from, the United States. America’s adversaries keep testing the resolve of Trump and the West, as Putin is doing in eastern Europe. Or, like Xi Jinping in Beijing and Kim in Pyongyang, they’re recalculating bellicose scenarios in secret. Other countries, like India, are wary of committing to America and keeping all options open, even clutching hands with Moscow and Beijing."

And although Trump is not the first president to struggle with navigating U.S. reputation among foreign nations, it puts America at an unfortunate future disadvantage.

"Against this backdrop, anybody watching US policy for the past decade, from friendly Europe to adversarial China, already had reason to doubt US credibility. What Trump has done in his second term is to remove the doubts and confirm the loss. Allies now know they can’t trust America, while adversaries are ganging up and recalculating their plans for mischief or worse.

It's unclear what will happen in the future; a damaged reputation jeopardizes diplomacy.

"These responses to America’s loss of credibility will raise the risk of global conflict," Kluth writes. "The danger will go up even more if the US, under this or a future president, panics and decides to overcompensate in reestablishing its reputation, with a demonstratively hawkish turn that could tip into war. If America and the whole world are becoming less safe, it’s because Donald Trump’s foreign policy is, literally, in-credible."