Posted on Apr 24, 2018
POLL: Most Post-9/11 Veterans Do Not Support Jackson For VA Secretary » Iraq And Afghanistan...
1.23K
7
8
1
1
0
IAVA just surveyed our active duty and veteran members on their support for VA Secretary nominee, RDML Jackson, in advance of his Senate hearing tomorrow. However, with some late allegations about his qualifications circulating on Capitol Hill, his hearing was postponed this morning. It does not look good for him. See results at the link.
POLL: Most Post-9/11 Veterans Do Not Support Jackson For VA Secretary » Iraq And Afghanistan...
Posted from iava.orgPosted in these groups: 
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Donald Trump
Congress
United States Senate
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Donald Trump Congress United States Senate
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 3
UHmm, lets see
Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) says he is a bad candidate.
They polled ONLY their members and came away with "most post 9 - 11 Vets" do not support him.
Is it surprising that members of IAVA would vote along their membership organizer views?
How does polling only members of a single organization equal "Most Post-9/11 Veterans " ?
And notice anything missing worth that statement ? "most-post-9-11-veterans-do-not-support-jackson-for-va-secretary"
Are those the only Vets that matter? Post 9-11 vets that belong to IAVA?
What of the few million of non post 9 - 11 Vets?
What of the few million post 9 - 11 Vets not members of IAVA?
This is no different than going to a Mothers against everything members only meeting and asking "Do you support more gun control?" Or a DNC nation meeting and asking "Do you support a democrat for president next cycle?" The outcome of the "poll" is easily assured.
Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) says he is a bad candidate.
They polled ONLY their members and came away with "most post 9 - 11 Vets" do not support him.
Is it surprising that members of IAVA would vote along their membership organizer views?
How does polling only members of a single organization equal "Most Post-9/11 Veterans " ?
And notice anything missing worth that statement ? "most-post-9-11-veterans-do-not-support-jackson-for-va-secretary"
Are those the only Vets that matter? Post 9-11 vets that belong to IAVA?
What of the few million of non post 9 - 11 Vets?
What of the few million post 9 - 11 Vets not members of IAVA?
This is no different than going to a Mothers against everything members only meeting and asking "Do you support more gun control?" Or a DNC nation meeting and asking "Do you support a democrat for president next cycle?" The outcome of the "poll" is easily assured.
(1)
(0)
CAPT (Join to see)
IAVA is the primary VSO representing interests of post-9/11 vets, with over 400,000 members. Other VSOs poll their own members, so this is very common. To get better informed on who IAVA members are and on their opinions, you can see our annual survey here: https://iava.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/IAVA_Survey_2017_v11update.pdf
IAVA_Survey_2017_v11update.pdf
ñà!ñà! :GE endstream endobj 4224 0 obj /Metadata 248 0 R/Pages 241 0 R/StructTreeRoot 250 0 R/Type/Catalog/ViewerPreferences endobj 4225 0 obj /ExtGState/Font/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageC]/XObject/Rotate 0/StructParents 4/TrimBox[0.0 0.0 612.0 792.0]/Type/Page endobj 4226 0 obj endobj 4227 0 obj [/ICCBased 4242 0 R] endobj 4228 0 obj endobj 4229 0 obj stream HUÝT7?OLl'q,!.ÊT.VÔÁRux;P ÍÆÇÏvoÿzúöü1zuüðæýC*éõë_ÞíËVµ:qªÝ2JÏ·?Ó?Pßý^ÒÓSÍ$Ö7KªZ2«ZÓ...
(1)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
CAPT (Join to see) - They surveyed 2,266 IAVA members and make a claim "Most"
Sorry, its misleading at BEST, dishonest otherwise
Its not even "most" of the IAVA members .. using your number of 400,000 that 2266 members surveyed is about 1/2 of 1 percent and still its only "most" of that 1/2 of a percent.
Yes, I have a prioblem, no matter what "side" it is, when they lie, or play with the data to "support" thier postion and make unvalidated claims.
The worst of it....it might very well be a valid position I might want to support, but how can it be trusted?
Sorry, its misleading at BEST, dishonest otherwise
Its not even "most" of the IAVA members .. using your number of 400,000 that 2266 members surveyed is about 1/2 of 1 percent and still its only "most" of that 1/2 of a percent.
Yes, I have a prioblem, no matter what "side" it is, when they lie, or play with the data to "support" thier postion and make unvalidated claims.
The worst of it....it might very well be a valid position I might want to support, but how can it be trusted?
(1)
(0)
CMSgt (Join to see)
Another opinion:
http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=3758
http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=3758
Why I am cancelling my IAVA membership immediately PART I
I’ve always been a little leery of IAVA, right from the start. I personally like Paul Rieckhoff, and have friends who speak highly of him. I like the fact
(0)
(0)
CAPT (Join to see)
That is an excellent sampling with only +/- 2% margin for error and a 95% confidence level. You can chose to ignore it, but I'd suggest you go talk to a professional pollster to get it explained to you. A sampling of only 1,000 can get an accurate sample of US public opinion. We regularly provide testimony to Congress with our data and if it was not legitimate, we would get called out. We don't.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
CAPT (Join to see)
I don't think so. Very tough job and whoever gets it always takes arrows. We worked well with McDonald and Shulkin, but unfortunately the latter shot himself in the foot. That and partisan infighting at VA.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I have no issue with the small percentage of surveys used to determine the percentages. That's the entire process of polling and there is a lot of statistics and math behind how that all works. But I agree that since only IAVA members were polled and no non members, then the headlines should read "most post 9/11 veteran members of IAVA do not support...". There is a population selection issue if you try and imply that the IAVA members equally represent the opinions of all post 9/11 vets. It would be like saying that NRA members opinions are the same as all American gun owners, which is just not valid.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google