Polls Don't Mean Much.......Usually by Jongsstraw

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Because of the Soviet invasion of Georgia, and latent racism in the USA. Sometimes I wonder if we're too stupid to survive.

"latent racism" ? You're not giving Americans any credit...this isn't 1955.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 8:54 AM

How about because of the stupid media meme that has been

"Obama must be doing a shitty job because he's only up 8 points in the polls. He just must not be that liked, his message must just not be resonating, he must be mistrusted, not taken as one of the people, etc. etc. etc. etc."

And this bullshit has played for a couple months now, as if the argument is "Jesus, Mccain really really sucks, so if Obama isn't really really up on him maybe we should be looking at what's wrong with Obama."

the logic of the attack has been baffling to me, but it's given them a consistent opportunity to paint Obama not as succeeding, even when he was up a good percentage in our closely divided, partisan, and yes, latently racist country, but as failing.

It's disgusting, but brilliant, and it seems to have managed to help take the wind out of his sails. Now they can start talking about Mccain, the maverick, the comeback kid, an inspirational story of change you can believe in, you know, dimes, nickles and pennies, the kind of change that you know, is believable, like a different name and face in the White House, even while the song remains the same.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:10 AM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

As for the Clintons "dominating" the convention... I'd just compare that to Reagan's dominance of the Republican debates. People tend to want to flaunt "the good old days" of their party, and show it off in a nice spotlight. So, since the economy was really much stronger, and things just generally seemed better - at least as far as Democrats are concerned - back in the Clinton years, it makes sense to bring them in to fire up the party faithful.

Now, having said that, I have to admit that I think it's a bad idea. I just have this sneaky feeling that the Clintonistas really are up to no good, and are going to try to pull a fast one. It's just something about that family; they can't seem to let an opportunity to be dishonest pass them by.

Why is Obama underperforming? There's any number of reasonable guesses that could be taken, but I'd wager that at least part of it is that he's taken a few steps back from his early campaign's promise of change and difference. Instead, now he seems to be just more of the same. It dampens enthusiasm.

On the one side, we see Obama becoming more mainstream, and that is seen as a bad thing by his core supporters; on the other side, we see McCain becoming more mainstream, and that is seen as a good thing by HIS supporters. Seems like no matter who we elect, we're going to end up with someone smack dab in the middle. The only way Obama is to the left of McCain, or McCain is to the right of Obama, is if you arrange them that way for the group photo...

Just my tuppence...

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I just have this sneaky feeling that the Clintonistas really are up to no good, and are going to try to pull a fast one.

Definitely.

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:15 AM

Maybe the old mainstream media has become irrelevant? Maybe there's just a backlash against what they tell us is good for us? It's all happenin' on the internet and cable now. And forget newspapers; that news is already a day old when you read it. The thing about the internet is that no one monopolizes it. There is fairness due to the fact that there are an endless amount of political sites for all political persuasions.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Because of the Soviet invasion of Georgia, and latent racism in the USA. Sometimes I wonder if we're too stupid to survive....

Racism? Please. Racism put Obama in this race. He's getting 90% of the black vote...because they WILL NOT vote for the white guy. Thats the racism here. But thats not a fair statement either because 80% of those same folks would vote for the Democrat, regardless of who it is, so really the pro-Obama black racism is as small a factor as the anti-Obama racism.

There are several factors for this turnaround, all attributable to Obama.

One, Berlin. I said the week before his speech that it would be his high water mark. The media was fawning all over this guy, he was acting the rock star/President Elect and people were tired of it and willing to FINALLY take a closer look. And make no mistake, the speech at the ballpark he's planning for the convention will just hammer this point home, its a very dramatic event, a great visual...but its too much and plays right into the mistakes he made in Europe. If speeches won elections the we'd all remember fondly President William Jennings Bryon, who as you recall, was a Democrat.

Two, oil. At the same time they were taking a closer look at Obama the oil drilling issue came to a boil. On one side, 'No Vote Nancy' and on the other side, the 'Drill Now' movement. McCain said "drill now" and develop alternatives too (a plan supported by Paris Hilton)...Obama said check your tires. This lead the American people to conclude the while McCain wants to have more oil AND more alternatives...Obama is all about the hot air.

Three, Russia. McCain reacted to the 3am phone call with a clear and firm statement of policy in opposition to the blatent aggression against Georgian soveriegnty. Obama released a statement saying it was kinda bad, then thought about it a bit, released another statement saying it might be something that isn't good, then read a few polls, took another day or so to think and get advice...then "what he said and here's some of my staff to give me credit for the cease fire"...a cease fire that wasn't quite in place at the time.

Four, the Clintons. They rolled Obama on the convention and everybody saw it. If you can't stand up to Hillary, who lost, you'll never face down a Putin.

Give McCain a lot of credit. He quietly let the media do the job...giving Obama the means to destroy himself (I would have said 'enough rope to hang himself...but that's racially insensitive).

When Obama was addressing Germans about how fallable America was in Berlin, McCain was in Berlin Ohio talking to small town Americans about his plans to keep America strong, restore prosperity, and why he's the one to pick in November.

Then there's this line that sum's up Obama pretty well and delivered with the most fire and conviction I've heard from McCain since 2000:

"Behind all the words, Senator Obama's agenda can be summarized as this: Government is too big, and he wants to grow it. Taxes are too high, and he wants to raise them. Congress spends too much, and he proposes more. We need more energy, and he's against producing it. We're finally winning in Iraq, and he wants to forfeit."---

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:21 AM

the problem with the rhettoric at the end there Hero, is I challenge you to back any of Mccain's claims about Obama with facts. Start with the taxes why don't you. The middle class will be paying less under his plan, that's hard to dispute, but I'm looking forward to your efforts.

Obama has been talking about alternative energy and its the repubs that tried to ignore everything else he said on it and pretend it was just about inflating tires, which even Mccain has accepted, would be effective to some degree. It's your sides lie. If you're going to attribute his failings to your lying, then by all means, do so, but accept taht its bullshit.

.........

also, didn't Obama want to release oil reserves, which all experts say would lower gas prices almost immediately by from a third to a half by fucking with speculators?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:22 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Racism in this country is alive and well JS. Don't kid yourself. 28% of people polled ADMIT to not wanting to vote for Obabam bc of his race. The real measure of race is when you ask people whether they think race will be a factor for the people they know. (This is a truer indication of racism.) In that case, 40% think so. So almost half of the population doesn't want to vote for Obama because of his race. This isn't just a white phenomena, altho it hurts Obama in the older, white, female crowd. Hispanics are also less inclinded to vote for a black. Unfortunately, when blacks point out the racism they themselves are tagged as being "racist". It's a no-win situation.

I also think that Obama hasn't done enough negative campaigning. I hate it, but negative campaigning is- unfortunately- very effective.

In the end, it's all about "identity politics". People tend to vote for people that seem and look like them. Race plays a part, as well as sex, age, money, marital status etc. You have to come out with a message that is so overwhelmingly positive (or negative) that you break through the identity barrier. Obama hasn't done that, and he has a higher barrier to overcome.

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:24 AM

You make some good points, H. And you too, Signy.

Admittedly Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:27 AM

Jong,

thing is, the evidence suggests that the media has been saying the opposite. Studies have been done and that's the conclusion. Maybe you could pull out counter studies, but if anything, your argument that the media has consistently been fawning over Obama and giving him good press is far from undisputed, and actually has a hole to dig out of before it comes up even with the strength and evidence of the argument on the other side.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Racism in this country is alive and well JS. Don't kid yourself. 28% of people polled ADMIT to not wanting to vote for Obabam bc of his race. The real measure of race is when you ask people whether they think race will be a factor for the people they know. (This is a truer indication of racism.) In that case, 40% think so. So almost half of the population doesn't want to vote for Obama because of his race. This isn't just a white phenomena, altho it hurts Obama in the older, white, female crowd. Hispanics are also less inclinded to vote for a black. Unfortunately, when blacks point out the racism they themselves are tagged as being "racist". It's a no-win situation.

I also think that Obama hasn't done enough negative campaigning. I hate it, but negative campaigning is- unfortunately- very effective.

In the end, it's all about "identity politics". People tend to vote for people that seem and look like them. Race plays a part, as well as sex, age, money, marital status etc. You have to come out with a message that is so overwhelmingly positive (or negative) that you break through the identity barrier. Obama hasn't done that, and he has a higher barrier to overcome.

Are you refering to the type of racism we all witnessed when Jesse Jackson used the N word and said Obama was talking down to Black people? Or the type of racism we all saw coming from Rev's Wright & Farrakhan? Or the type of elitist racism when BHO said that middle Americans cling to their bibles & guns when things get tough? Or when Obama said he didn't look like other Presidents on our money? Hasn't he used the race issue to pre-blame McCain, when I haven't seen anything like that coming from McCain? I think they called that playing the race card from the bottom of the deck; at least that's what Clinton said was done to him in SC. For the average Joe white man, systemic racism ended in 1965 when Dianne Carrol starred in the lead role of a major network prime time show, Julia, and when Shatner kissed Uhura on the lips in 1966. Actually a white girl (Elizabeth Hartman)kissed Sidney Poitier on the lips in 1965's A Patch of Blue first. America's had African-American Sec. of State, Nat'l Security Advisor, Senators, Congressmen, Bill Cosby Show, ESPN, etc etc. Everything's integrated now, everything's "protected" now. Yes there are Americans who will never vote for a black man, but I believe that % is pretty small.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
Jong,

thing is, the evidence suggests that the media has been saying the opposite. Studies have been done and that's the conclusion. Maybe you could pull out counter studies, but if anything, your argument that the media has consistently been fawning over Obama and giving him good press is far from undisputed, and actually has a hole to dig out of before it comes up even with the strength and evidence of the argument on the other side.

You may be right, I'm no expert on the media. And sometimes we do hurt the ones we love....and the other relevant saying might be familiarity breeds contempt.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
Start with the taxes why don't you. The middle class will be paying less under his plan, that's hard to dispute, but I'm looking forward to your efforts.

First of all there are the 2001 tax cuts. They will be gone, that means higher taxes. Capital gains goes up, so sell your house or cash in your stocks...higher taxes. Die...50%.

Then he plans to raise taxes on all but the middle and lower classes. Fine, but his plan raises taxes on anyone making more then $40,000 or $75,000 for married types. His breaks and rebates don't apply to anyone the actually PAYS taxes. He also plans higher energy taxes on items like gasoline.

Edited to add: I've been reviewing details of Obama's plan. I admit the above numbers were based on reports from his plan, not the plan itself. I thought it best to look at the Obama tax plan on his website (combined with what I know about the current system) and I came to the following conclusions:

It seems there are two forces at work here. The plan (what might happen), and the nonplan (what will happen). What will happen is that Bush's tax cuts will expire. That means an immediate rollback of income tax rates, capital gains, estate taxes, etc to January 19th, 2001 levels (pre-first rebate checks). Obama will allow this to happen. Then he will seek to implement his 'plan'. This involves taxing capital gains, investment, business profits, etc. Some of this money will be given to low and middle class families. He will then cut and simplify taxes of the poor, which I support (why should some poor fella have to work through the tax system when they are not paying taxes anyway). Middle class families will recieve cuts, but those cuts will not equal what they have now UNLESS they have kids. Kids equal cash.

Additional direct taxes on item like gas will mean higher net taxes. He plans to offset this for the poor and middle class by taxing profits and giving away money.

So while squeezing slightly harder prices will soar to pay for the new taxes, jobs will be cut as small businesses struggle to meet new burdons, and there will be less capital or incentive for investment. So have fun with that...I'm glad I'll be working for the government.

Quote:

Obama has been talking about alternative energy and its the repubs that tried to ignore everything else he said on it and pretend it was just about inflating tires, which even Mccain has accepted, would be effective to some degree.

Putting a windmill on a car is not a good energy plan no matter how much you inflate the tires. McCain jumped on the tire pressure issue right away (they were giving away Obama tire gauges the next day).

Quote:

also, didn't Obama want to release oil reserves, which all experts say would lower gas prices almost immediately by from a third to a half by fucking with speculators?

That's crazy. They were talking about a release of our war reserve with no drilling to back it up. And the consensus was a temporary reduction of 3-5% of the price over a two week period for the amount of oil he wanted released.

One Republican alternative was to slowly release the oil AND drill. Allowing the new drilled reserves to replace the stockpile and then replenish what was used.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:55 AM

Is 28 percent of the population who admit to not voting for Obama because of his race a small poplation to you Jong? A quarter of people who feel free enough to admit their own prejudices?

Go ahead, go back to 'black' racism. Why the fuck is that the only thing you frightened white people ever talk about. Why is that the only thing that captures your imagination.

Will many blacks vote for Obama because he's black? Yeah, though I don't think its that simple. He wouldn't be polling like that among blacks if he were Clairance Thomas.

And considering that Obama is the first major presidential contender of black skin, the issue is not that these people wouldn't vote for a white person, its that they want to vote for a black person, they are inspired, in this America that a black man can be on the ticket and have a real chance at being our next President.

Are there black rasists, sure. Is their decision to vote for Obama because he is black a 'racist' decision? I think that's more complicated to answer than whether or not somebody is racist when they say they would NOT vote for a black man.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:58 AM

No, I think the point was not to realease it all, but to advertise its release, to refuse to tell speculators when it would happen, and to what degree, and that that in and of itself would affect the cost of oil.

My understanding is that people making up to 250 thousand dollars will be paying less under Obama's tax plan than under Mccains. Do you have different numbers?

Are you going to tell me that Mccain was giving out tire pressure guages because he thought the idea had merit? Please, stop being a jackass.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:02 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Righteous ?

I happen to know a white seperatist who actually intends to vote for him cause he feels "betrayed" by the GOP, and hates Hillary with a foamingly rabid passion - and man is he EVER pissed about having his only "mainstream" voting option to be a man of color....

I find endless amusement in busting his chops about it too.

I myself do not care for any of the three, and feel that Obamalamadingdong is gonna get freakin steamrollered just like Carter was if he does take the office, and I am skeptical that he is ruthless enough to take the necessary measures because they would totally destroy his political career forevermore.

We need a seriously stubborn jackass who's willing to be passionately hated, demonized nonstop, and probably impeached on a pretense - because that would be the end result of taking the necessary measures.

And I don't think not a one of these three have the balls for it.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:03 AM

There's a Presidential first for everything...
JFK - Catholic
Liebermann - Jew
Ferraro - Woman
Gore - AI

Some win, some lose. I do not like the trend I'm seeing that proclaims that if you don't support Obama you must be a racist. Hell, Hillary got half the Dem vote, so the way I see it that leaves only about 25% of the total population that loves Obama. He's got to get at least Hillary's 25% to support him, and if your 28% of Americans being racists is correct, that will be a daunting task.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
For the average Joe white man, systemic racism ended in 1965 when Dianne Carrol starred in the lead role of a major network prime time show, Julia, and when Shatner kissed Uhura on the lips in 1966. Actually a white girl (Elizabeth Hartman)kissed Sidney Poitier on the lips in 1965's A Patch of Blue first. America's had African-American Sec. of State, Nat'l Security Advisor, Senators, Congressmen, Bill Cosby Show, ESPN, etc etc. Everything's integrated now, everything's "protected" now. Yes there are Americans who will never vote for a black man, but I believe that % is pretty small.

Jong, mean well here, you really do, but racism is alive & well in average America, it's sometimes quiet, even amazingly polite, but I see it everywhere, and I live in Progressive, Liberal New England college town. I shudder to think what it's like in the Yee-Ha states.

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:14 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Racism, the great 20th century American boogey-man....

Scare those white-folks into saying,thinking,doing exactly what YOU want....

and awaaaay I go...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:15 AM

Frem,

that's funny, and while my original, sadly racial determinate sense of the election this year a couple of years ago was that it wasn't going to be the year to put forward a woman or a black man, I was largely surprised by how well both him and Hillary were polling, and realized that I was way wrong...that the reality is that shit was going so bad that even people with deep seeded bigotry were willing to swallow their own bile because they were so estranged and alienated by the people they thought were their surrogates.
............

I hope Obama is cut out for it. I do think that this was the year not to play to the middle though. I agree with Kwicko that he has lost some momentum just for doing that, and with you that him being concileatory in this climate is a knock against him.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
For the average Joe white man, systemic racism ended in 1965 when Dianne Carrol starred in the lead role of a major network prime time show, Julia, and when Shatner kissed Uhura on the lips in 1966. Actually a white girl (Elizabeth Hartman)kissed Sidney Poitier on the lips in 1965's A Patch of Blue first. America's had African-American Sec. of State, Nat'l Security Advisor, Senators, Congressmen, Bill Cosby Show, ESPN, etc etc. Everything's integrated now, everything's "protected" now. Yes there are Americans who will never vote for a black man, but I believe that % is pretty small.
Jong, mean well here, you really do, but racism is alive & well in average America, it's sometimes quiet, even amazingly polite, but I see it everywhere, and I live in Progressive, Liberal New England college town. I shudder to think what it's like in the Yee-Ha states.

Well what do you want me to do about it sir? I didn't nominate him knowing this "fact"...did the Dems?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Well what do you want me to do about it sir?

Just be the good colour-blind dude that you are, and vote for the dude least likely to continue Bush's mistakes.

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:20 AM

Who is saying that if you don't like Obama, you must be a racist? Every time we point out that racism is a factor it get's poopooed and convoluted to suggest taht we think it applies to everybody who doesn't want to vote for Obama.

Far more powerful than race in this country is the illusionary divide between D's and R's, and frankly, there's a bigger population that are less likely to vote for him because of the D than they are because of his skin color, inspite of being sold up the river themselves by their own party.

I'm not sure how much of that population overlaps, and won't make any claims here.

............

I'll also add that I'm quite aware how soon I might find out that my party is going to do the same to us, if we take congress and the Presidency. I'm giving it one shot to do it right, and then I might find myself voting in the primaries, but voting third party in the generals. They've shown so far that they are not a far cry from their 'rivals.'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Well what do you want me to do about it sir?
_____________________________________________
Just be the good colour-blind dude that you are, and vote for the dude least likely to continue Bush's mistakes

"colour" ??...you going Madonna on us?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Gore - AI

I thought Gore was the first wooden candidate. The first tree to be nominated by a major party. Sure, some have been stiff and some have had portions of their anatomy replaced by wood (teeth for example), but the first all american redwood candidate deserves recognition.

I note for the record there has never been a President or Vice President named AL. However in 1904 Teddy R. defeated Democrat Alton Parker, in 1916 Allen Benson (Socialist) came in third to Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Hoover beat the pants off Democrat Al Smith in 1928, and in 1936 Roosevelt edged out (in every state save Maine and Vermont) the out-of-this world candidate Alf Landon (R).

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:27 AM

That was AI, not AL....bad joke

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

I note for the record there has never been a President or Vice President named AL.

Al Franken will change that.

isall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Al Franken will change that.

Isn't he the guy who had the rally where one fella showed up (and he was looking for the County Pig Roast...which was an understandable mistake)?

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 12:37 PM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Quote:

"latent racism" ? You're not giving Americans any credit...this isn't 1955.

You must be lucky. In a lot of areas of the country it's not even latent, it's very visible.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 1:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

"latent racism" ? You're not giving Americans any credit...this isn't 1955.

"A coloured Mayor? That'll be the day."

McFlyisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 1:14 PM

Quote:

I note for the record there has never been a President or Vice President named AL.

I note for the record that you're wrong - there has indeed been a VP named Al - Al Gore. Much as you loathe him, I don't think you can do away with the fact that he was the Vice President.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 2:03 PM

RIVERLOVE

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
racism is alive & well in average America, it's sometimes quiet, even amazingly polite, but I see it everywhere, and I live in Progressive, Liberal New England college town. I shudder to think what it's like in the Yee-Ha states.

Maybe you should move to a place where there's a diversity of people to see how things really are. In Florida, for example, one is respectful of everyone around them because otherwise you can get shot. Lot's of civil respect going on here buddy. Also, the diversity mandates of corporations train & compel us all to be color blind.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 2:06 PM

RIVERLOVE

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

I note for the record there has never been a President or Vice President named AL.

I note for the record that you're wrong - there has indeed been a VP named Al - Al Gore. Much as you loathe him, I don't think you can do away with the fact that he was the Vice President.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

Score one for the Kwikoman! And you didn't even have to bash Bush in the process! The Force is strong with you. I think you are also correct about the potential Clinton coup d'etat coming up. You know that Bil & Hill & Carville & Lanny-boy are plastering these new poll numbers in front of every single super delegate's face 24/7. And now a roll call? There wasn't supposed to be any stinkin' roll call! Can anybody say riots and burned-down cities?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:51 PM

Quote:
And you didn't even have to bash Bush in the process!

Well, I *have* been ill lately, so my game may be a bit off. Give me time to recoup, and I promise I'll be back to form!

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 21, 2008 10:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I note for the record that you're wrong - there has indeed been a VP named Al

Yeah, meant to work in a "before".

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 21, 2008 2:31 PM

RIVERLOVE

And Al Gore's accomplishments during 8 years as VP?

Global Warming Anything?....Nada, Zilch
Energy Independence Anything?...Nada, Zilch
Anti-terrorism Anything?....Nada, Zilch
USS Cole Blown Up By Al Qaeda?......Nada, Zilch
2 Embassies Blown Up By Al Qaeda?...Nada, Zilch
Ruwandan Genocide?...Nada, Zilch
Somalia Humiliation Debacle?...Nada, Zilch

Taking illegal campaign cash from China?...Yes
Making illegal campaign calls from VP Office?...Yes
Gaining 50 pounds?...Yes
Going incognito with a beard?...Yes
Re-emerging from obscurity with a new-found Environmental crisis awareness as a means to become marginally relevant?...Yes

It's easy to see why he's quite forgettable.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 21, 2008 5:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
And Al Gore's accomplishments during 8 years as VP?

Global Warming Anything?....Nada, Zilch
Energy Independence Anything?...Nada, Zilch
Anti-terrorism Anything?....Nada, Zilch
USS Cole Blown Up By Al Qaeda?......Nada, Zilch
2 Embassies Blown Up By Al Qaeda?...Nada, Zilch
Ruwandan Genocide?...Nada, Zilch
Somalia Humiliation Debacle?...Nada, Zilch

Taking illegal campaign cash from China?...Yes
Making illegal campaign calls from VP Office?...Yes
Gaining 50 pounds?...Yes
Going incognito with a beard?...Yes
Re-emerging from obscurity with a new-found Environmental crisis awareness as a means to become marginally relevant?...Yes

It's easy to see why he's quite forgettable.

Let's see how that stacks up to Dubya's 8 years as President:

Global Warming Anything?....Nada, Zilch
Energy Independence Anything?...Nada, Zilch
Anti-terrorism Anything?....Nada, Zilch - He's actually INCREASED Al Qaeda's recruiting!
Four airliners hijacked and crashed by Al Qaeda?......Nada, Zilch - but he DID sit in an elementary classroom trying to read "My Pet Goat" while it was going on, and sat there with that stupid fucking look on his face.
World Trade Center towers brought down by Al Qaeda?...Nada, Zilch - except to invade Iraq, where we knew the terrorists WEREN'T hiding, and to leave Tora Bora, where we knew they WERE hiding.
Darfur Genocide?...Nada, Zilch
Georgia Humiliation Debacle?...Nada, Zilch
Osama bin Laden captured? Nada, Zilch
Al Qaeda on the run and out of business? Nada, Zilch
Taliban defeated? Nada, Zilch
Learning how to speak and read English? Nada, Zilch

Giving up covert operatives for petty political vendettas?...Yes
Being the Vice President's bitch?...Yes
Tanking the U.S. economy?...Yes
Politicizing the Justice Department for petty political vendettas?...Yes
Re-emerging from obscurity to become marginally relevant?...Not likely

It's easy to see why he won't be quite so forgettable...

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 21, 2008 5:54 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I find statistics interesting, but I also find them to be subject to interpretation.

There was an interesting episode of West Wing, once. (Well, more than once, but I've always remembered THIS episode.)

The President was up for reelection soon. He was confronted with the issue of Flag Burning. He was against making it illegal. However, a poll came out showing that the majority of Americans wanted it illegal. It was a dilemna. If he stuck to his guns, he'd lose the election.

Or so he thought.

But the same poll was re-analyzed. It was found that the poll gave an incomplete picture. People were asked whether they wanted Flag Burning made illegal... But they weren't asked whether that issue would sway their vote for President. A new poll revealed that while they cared, they didn't care enough to swap Presidential choices over it. So, the President decided to stick to his guns. No Flag Burning law.

And so I come to some statistics presented earlier in this thread:

"28% of people polled ADMIT to not wanting to vote for Obabam bc of his race. The real measure of race is when you ask people whether they think race will be a factor for the people they know. (This is a truer indication of racism.) In that case, 40% think so. So almost half of the population doesn't want to vote for Obama because of his race."

These numbers can be analyzed and parsed a number of ways.

28% of people polled didn't want to vote for Obama because of his race? Ouch. How many of those 28% also didn't want to vote for Mccain for some reason? Details like that matter.

"The real measure of race is when you ask people whether they think race will be a factor for the people they know. (This is a truer indication of racism.)"

Really? That question basically boils down to: "Do you know a racist person?" If it was a Yes/No question, I'd have to answer Yes. 'Cause man, I'm sure I know SOMEONE who will consider race a factor in this election.

I'm surprised the number isn't closer to 100%. I mean, can we all honestly say we don't know ANYONE whose decision making is affected by race? If anyone can make that honest claim, then the state of racism in this country is pretty good. 60% of Americans don't know anyone for whom race is a factor.

But that's probably not true, either.

Statistics are interesting. But they aren't reliable. The man who makes up the poll and the man who interprets the results have a lot more to do with the statistic than the man who answers the poll.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 21, 2008 6:34 PM

Quote:

These numbers can be analyzed and parsed a number of ways.

28% of people polled didn't want to vote for Obama because of his race? Ouch. How many of those 28% also didn't want to vote for Mccain for some reason? Details like that matter.

Too true. And knowing how many of those asked were registered Republicans or Democrats would also tend to skew the interpretation a bit, too. Democrats who don't want to vote for "the black guy" might hold their breath, close their eyes, and just do it anyway, figuring that it couldn't be worse than Choice B. And Republicans who don't want to vote for the black guy already aren't going to, at least in this instance, because Obama has two strikes against him in their eyes: he's both black AND a Democrat.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 22, 2008 4:02 AM

For one to jump into this 28% race factor debate one would have to believe it. I don't. I think people & pollsters alike are agenda-driven and somewhat devious on political & social issues. Time & time again we've seen poll numbers skewed and mis-represented, or just outright totally wrong. So why should anyone believe that Obama's skin color matters? And what part of the 90% African-American support that Obama has spills over into this 28% race issue number? I'm sure that's it's a big issue out in the Arayan Nation world, but in the real world of day to day business and social interacting, I don't hear or see any evidence of this at all. And to just assume that it's there, however silent and hidden, is racist in itself.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 22, 2008 4:10 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"And to just assume that it's there, however silent and hidden, is racist in itself."

Absolutly true.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 22, 2008 4:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
in the real world of day to day business and social interacting, I don't hear or see any evidence of this at all. And to just assume that it's there, however silent and hidden, is racist in itself.

Yes, you're right, I think. If no evidence of it is clear, best to judge it's not there...
Just don't assume it doesn't exist, either.

Chrisisallprejudicedagainstbipeds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 22, 2008 7:18 AM

Jong, did you see the post where Wulfenstar said that the white race becoming a minority in this country would make this country go to shit?

You choose to see no evidence of racism, even when it's right in your face. Cool. There's no proving you wrong then. It's clearly impossible to do so.

PluS ...you had no problem using statistics quoting that 90 percent of the black population will vote for obama becauase he's black.

Why exactly the double standard? In the end, is it really just a matter of you choosing to believe whatever numbers reflect your own chosen paradigm? Nicely done.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 22, 2008 7:24 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"Jong, did you see the post where Wulfenstar said that the white race becoming a minority in this country would make this country go to shit?"

Actually, I'd be curious to see that post myself. Because, as far as I can tell, I never said such a thing.

If you want to defame a mans charecter, at least do it with some semblance of dignity. And a little lesson in honor here...Do it to their face.

And, for fraks sake, use the truth.

Righteous, you are such an assclown.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 22, 2008 7:32 AM

I stand corrected,

maybe Jong didn't see the other thread. That would explain his ignorance on the matter.

It was in the thread about gay marriage that you said

"Yeah, and wont that be fun.

Look at how nice the places are where there is a minority of whites.

I'm just saying."

IN response to this

"Controlling the birthrate in this country has only ensured that by 2020 whites will be a minority."

What does that mean to you? Sure, I paraphrased, but I'm not finding a way to parse your meaning differently.

I can't imagine for that matter, taht somebody who thinks current minorities becoming the majoridy will be bad for this country, would be willing to vote for a minority. But people are kooky

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 22, 2008 7:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:

Jong, did you see the post where Wulfenstar said that the white race becoming a minority in this country would make this country go to shit?

You choose to see no evidence of racism, even when it's right in your face. Cool. There's no proving you wrong then. It's clearly impossible to do so.

PluS ...you had no problem using statistics quoting that 90 percent of the black population will vote for obama becauase he's black.

Why exactly the double standard? In the end, is it really just a matter of you choosing to believe whatever numbers reflect your own chosen paradigm? Nicely done.

Is that your goal in life...to prove me wrong? That's very sad for you.

Wulf's remarks about race are his business.

The 90% figure is from actual Primary number exit polls. Maybe not 100% accurate, but likely ballpark.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 22, 2008 7:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:

maybe Jong didn't see the other thread. That would explain his ignorance on the matter.

I don't think much of you either. Who's the more ignorant? The ignorant, or the ignorant that chases after him?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 22, 2008 7:47 AM