BHA - misuse of Political Affiliation data?

Bughalli

WKR
Joined
Nov 16, 2012
Messages
503
Location
Bend, OR
Looking for a second opinion here, because I might be hyper sensitive to politics these days...or my goal to avoid it.

I've been a BHA member for a couple years. I like them because they represent my values in preserving the outdoor heritage. Politically I consider myself an independent because no one party represents all my opinions. I vote based on specific issues and can swing in either direction depending on the topic. I'm generally anti-politics. Just don't enjoy talking about it (I know, yet I am).

I was surprised to see BHA bring politics up. They sent out a press release and emails lately talking about their member survey and I feel there's a slight manipulation or misrepresentation of the facts (comparing them to most political news these days). I feel like this eroded their credibility and my trust. BHA used a headline and opening statements that BHA members are "70 percent identify as Republican, Independent or unaffiliated (20 percent are Democrats)." That was the headline of a PR release and also one of the primary statements in the opening paragraph; and now an email they sent out. My initial take-away from it....wow, I'm surprised it leans so far Republican. What you remember is 70% Republican and 20% Democrats. Not a big deal, just surprising.

But then I read the details of the survey. The results were: 23% republican, 33% independent, 23% democrats and 16% none of the above. Gosh, that seems VERY different from the statement above that grouped 3/4 of people into one bucket and compared them to the other. Why not lead with a message of "highly diversified" or "More independents than other groups" or something that brings people together.

I don't know, but those headlines rubbed me the wrong way because the facts felt manipulated. Again, maybe I'm hyper sensitive to this because I'm generally anti-politics. I just don't like how news organizations have a bias and agenda; and now party affiliation was brought into an organization I care about and thought was neutral.

Thoughts?
 

Chad.frank

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 29, 2017
Messages
162
I’m a board member in Wisconsin and did not see this email. Did you receive it from National?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Trial153

WKR
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
8,187
Location
NY
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
8,184
It won't really impact my support of BHA but stuff like that bugs the shit out of me too. If we're going to play the truthful independent thinkers card why state the results in that manner?

It's not as bad as Patagonia saying "Trump stole your land" which put them on equal BS spewing grounds as the "give the land BACK to the states" rhetoric but it is annoying.

Edit: To me it indicates they are caving to gain acceptance from the crowd that's so petrified of being called a liberal that they can't think for themselves.
 
Last edited:

Chad.frank

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 29, 2017
Messages
162
I did see it now. I think that they are stating how diverse the BHA membership is. I’m not quite sure why they would single out the 20 percent Democrats in the top part of the email. But for the most part I think it’s harmless. Says a lot about our organization, that we fit with so many different people and that we all can come together as one when it comes to certain issues like public lands.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

go4thegusto

WKR
Classified Approved
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
3,030
Location
Fargo ND
The survey result representation also surprised me. I think a staff writer was given a little too much poetic license. I have always liked RMEF's stance that no matter who is in power over time they have to work with both side to move the core mission forward. Hence no party endorsement. I am excited about the BHA mission and will let this slide but they need some feedback.
That said, my P&Y membership is likely getting dumped after they booked Donald Jr. as speaker for the next gathering. I emailed whether they have a back up plan if he is in federal prison by then. Right or left thinking, these guys were trying to undermine our democracy, and still are.
 

Mike7

WKR
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
1,300
Location
Northern Idaho
The survey result representation also surprised me. I think a staff writer was given a little too much poetic license. I have always liked RMEF's stance that no matter who is in power over time they have to work with both side to move the core mission forward. Hence no party endorsement. I am excited about the BHA mission and will let this slide but they need some feedback.
That said, my P&Y membership is likely getting dumped after they booked Donald Jr. as speaker for the next gathering. I emailed whether they have a back up plan if he is in federal prison by then. Right or left thinking, these guys were trying to undermine our democracy, and still are.

Wow, all I can say is wow!

BHA's mini-spin in a statement is the least of our troubles. But we are in big trouble, when critical thinking has all but dissolved and people blindly believe a blatantly dishonest, hypocritical media and political establishment.
 

JWP58

WKR
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
2,090
Location
Boulder, CO
That said, my P&Y membership is likely getting dumped after they booked Donald Jr. as speaker for the next gathering. I emailed whether they have a back up plan if he is in federal prison by then. Right or left thinking, these guys were trying to undermine our democracy, and still are.

Lol best part of this thread lol

"Undermine our democracy" lol love it. But fusion GPS wasnt undermining anything correct?
 

Rthur

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
236
The survey result representation also surprised me. I think a staff writer was given a little too much poetic license. I have always liked RMEF's stance that no matter who is in power over time they have to work with both side to move the core mission forward. Hence no party endorsement. I am excited about the BHA mission and will let this slide but they need some feedback.
That said, my P&Y membership is likely getting dumped after they booked Donald Jr. as speaker for the next gathering. I emailed whether they have a back up plan if he is in federal prison by then. Right or left thinking, these guys were trying to undermine our democracy, and still are.

How about some evidence of your assertion concerning P&Y's choice of speaker?

BTW- Look up Constitutional Republic


R
 

hodgeman

WKR
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
1,547
Location
Delta Junction, AK
I went and re-read it... I'm not sure what the hubbub is...

The headline is that BHA is largely non-partisan.
The lead in-
Nearly 70 percent of BHA members are age 45 or younger, and more than 70 percent identify as Republican, Independent or unaffiliated (20 percent are Democrats). That's a list...

What that says is that 70% of the members are either Repub, Indies, or Unaffiliated. And in parenthesis....20% Dems.

The article states that 33% are Independent, 16% are "none of the above" and 8% didn't list an affiliation...for 57% "non-partisan" while 43% identify as GOP/DNC. That supports that assertion in the headline that most BHA members are non-partisan since the minority of members identify as either political party.

While you could say it better...it's not exactly like they're coercing the truth. The article supports exactly what the headline says. For an org that's been the subject of right wing smear campaigns...their point is they're more non-partisan than anything else, and their data supports it.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
2,652
Location
West Virginia
Their attempt was to prove politics has nothing to do with their agenda according to the article cited above. I see no misrepresentation in that.


It is worth noting that it's people like gusto that turn hunters against the BHA. More so then anything the BHA has ever done as an organization. It goes the other way too. Right wing is a term used for political gain as well. I'm as conservative as they come. Yet, I watch the BHA and hope they become the group we sportsmen need in my eyes. So, I can join them. So, acting as if conservatives have an agenda against the BHA is incorrect too. There is simply no need in turning your support of public lands in a political debate. Fellas the best thing we could ever do to protect our public land access is forget about politics. Forget about it. Stop picking sides based on a party. Because, as stated above, none of the lying butt heads are doing any of us favors. In public lands or, in everyday life.
 

Trial153

WKR
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
8,187
Location
NY
If we should take anything away from the article it's that we are a diverse organization and have found commonality in a worthy cause. Unfortunately I think we have all become hypersensitive at the injection of political labels into every topic and I completely undertand not wanting that to permeate into BHA.
 
OP
B

Bughalli

WKR
Joined
Nov 16, 2012
Messages
503
Location
Bend, OR
Here's the press release. BHA Membership Is Young, Active, Nonpartisan, Demographic Survey Shows




| Fishing Wire


There's the headline title, which is great (diversity). The sub-title surprised me first, which says 2/3 are Republican or Independent. Later it's stated again, referencing the "More than 70% identify as Republican etc...". Yet only 23% are Republican. How you do the rollup or grouping is arbitrary, so much so, that it's hard not to feel it's intentional.

Look at these statements
- More than 70% are Republican or Independent, with 20% Democrat.
- More than 70% are Democrats or Independent, with 23% Republican.
- Almost 60% are Independent or non-affiliated, 23% are Republican and 20% are Democrat.

Point being...they all represent the exact same data. The grouping is what makes them sound different and memorable.
 
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
8,184
Here's the press release. BHA Membership Is Young, Active, Nonpartisan, Demographic Survey Shows




| Fishing Wire


There's the headline title, which is great (diversity). The sub-title surprised me first, which says 2/3 are Republican or Independent. Later it's stated again, referencing the "More than 70% identify as Republican etc...". Yet only 23% are Republican. How you do the rollup or grouping is arbitrary, so much so, that it's hard not to feel it's intentional.

Look at these statements
- More than 70% are Republican or Independent, with 20% Democrat.
- More than 70% are Democrats or Independent, with 23% Republican.
- Almost 60% are Independent or non-affiliated, 23% are Republican and 20% are Democrat.

Point being...they all represent the exact same data. The grouping is what makes them sound different and memorable.

I’m curious if people really think it just accidentally ended up that way?

Again, not a huge deal but I’m not a fan of how they presented the facts here.
 

Chad.frank

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 29, 2017
Messages
162
Here's the press release. BHA Membership Is Young, Active, Nonpartisan, Demographic Survey Shows




| Fishing Wire


There's the headline title, which is great (diversity). The sub-title surprised me first, which says 2/3 are Republican or Independent. Later it's stated again, referencing the "More than 70% identify as Republican etc...". Yet only 23% are Republican. How you do the rollup or grouping is arbitrary, so much so, that it's hard not to feel it's intentional.

Look at these statements
- More than 70% are Republican or Independent, with 20% Democrat.
- More than 70% are Democrats or Independent, with 23% Republican.
- Almost 60% are Independent or non-affiliated, 23% are Republican and 20% are Democrat.

Point being...they all represent the exact same data. The grouping is what makes them sound different and memorable.

It never stated that 70% are Democrat and never said 60% are independent. It said 70% are republican, independent or non affiliated with 20% democrat. Then later in the email it broke it down 33% independent, 23% Republican, 20 Democrat, 16% none of the above and 8% non affiliated.

I think again the main reason this was put out was to show how diverse our membership is and to show that we welcome anyone that wants to fight to keep public lands public.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Jbehredt

WKR
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
1,702
Location
Colorado
I’m curious if people really think it just accidentally ended up that way?

Again, not a huge deal but I’m not a fan of how they presented the facts here.

It was no accident. A half hearted attempt to quiet the concerns of pro gun, conservative members who have been getting an uneasy feeling about being a part of a group that is embraced by so many liberals. I know this because that’s exactly how it played out in my mind, albeit very briefly. That was immediately followed by some critical thinking and further reading that fully restored my uneasy feeling.
 

Trial153

WKR
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
8,187
Location
NY
It was no accident. A half hearted attempt to quiet the concerns of pro gun, conservative members who have been getting an uneasy feeling about being a part of a group that is embraced by so many liberals. I know this because that’s exactly how it played out in my mind, albeit very briefly. That was immediately followed by some critical thinking and further reading that fully restored my uneasy feeling.
Wouldnt it work the opposite way and cause concerns for "liberals" to be associated with "pro gun, conservatives"? Do the "liberals " get an uneasy feeling seeing all the firearms on the BHA website and in the BHA magazine?
No wait, I cant be. Everything has to be directed at us and serve an alternative unstated motivation.
 

Jbehredt

WKR
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
1,702
Location
Colorado
Wouldnt it work the opposite way and cause concerns for "liberals" to be associated with "pro gun, conservatives"? Do the "liberals " get an uneasy feeling seeing all the firearms on the BHA website and in the BHA magazine?
No wait, I cant be. Everything has to be directed at us and serve an alternative unstated motivation.

I’d assume that liberal members of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers have already considered its connections to firearms. The middle of the road and occasional left leaning politics of the org occasionally catch (new) conservative members off guard.
 

LandYacht

WKR
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
773
Location
Frisco
Initially, it struck me the same way that it struck you. Then I read the information and came away with a sense of critical thinking. I was glad that I wasn’t spoon fed something. Being able to use my own brain to come up with my own conclusions was empowering. Not just relying on a headline and moving on. It could have been written with Democrats in the first group instead and the content of the article would have been no different. If we are relying on only part of the information, we aren’t truly making accurate assessments.

The exact same thing could be said about the knee jerk P&Y guy that posted in this thread. He isn’t the only one in our nation that has become stoned eared when it comes to hearing what others have to say. It seems that too many people make up their mind with headlines and partial information. When presented the opportunity to actually have first hand knowledge, they turn their ears to stone, and yell louder in an attempt to drown out information that might not support their conclusions.

It’s too bad we don’t still say the pledge of allegiance. I think it would really help in not only uniting our country, but we would know which republic we stand for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Trial153

WKR
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
8,187
Location
NY
I’d assume that liberal members of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers have already considered its connections to firearms. The middle of the road and occasional left leaning politics of the org occasionally catch (new) conservative members off guard.
You nailed it "assume, I will give you that much.
 
Top