Just sayin'... by Niki2

That "poll" was "conducted" by Media Matters, a far-left smear machine operation. The "poll" was not scientific by any means, and likely just written as they want. Their cherry-picked and out of context style has been rebuked time and again as insane propaganda and pure lies. Occasionally, a story like this from them does filter down to cable tv or even the NY Times, but it doesn't make it any less absurd. The extreme left fringe loves these guys, as they are the hate-master propaganda machine those folks crave. Funny how they seem to be guests of honor when they come out from under their rocks to chat with Keith Olbermann on his show of rants, hate, and character assassination. They don't have the guts or the truth behind them to ever appear in a forum where they will be challenged and asked questions. I'm surprised at you Niki...you should know better. You've posted often about fairness and truth, and how you don't like name-calling and smears. Your little "Republican" statement has me wonderin' about your sincerity, because it sounds to me like pure ideo-partisan venom.

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 3:06 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)

Quote:
Posted by Jongsstraw:

That "poll" was "conducted" by Media Matters, a far-left smear machine operation. The "poll" was not scientific by any means, and likely just written as they want. Their cherry-picked and out of context style has been rebuked time and again as insane propaganda and pure lies. Occasionally, a story like this from them does filter down to cable tv or even the NY Times, but it doesn't make it any less absurd. The extreme left fringe loves these guys, as they are the hate-master propaganda machine those folks crave. Funny how they seem to be guests of honor when they come out from under their rocks to chat with Keith Olbermann on his show of rants, hate, and character assassination. They don't have the guts or the truth behind them to ever appear in a forum where they will be challenged and asked questions. I'm surprised at you Niki...you should know better. You've posted often about fairness and truth, and how you don't like name-calling and smears. Your little "Republican" statement has me wonderin' about your sincerity, because it sounds to me like pure ideo-partisan venom.

But you say that like it's only done by ONE side... Read this edit and see if it makes any less sense:

That "poll" was "conducted" by FoxNews, a far-left smear machine operation. The "poll" was not scientific by any means, and likely just written as they want. Their cherry-picked and out of context style has been rebuked time and again as insane propaganda and pure lies. Occasionally, a story like this from them does filter down to cable tv or even the Wall Street Journal (also owned by Rupert Murdoch), but it doesn't make it any less absurd. The extreme right fringe loves these guys, as they are the hate-master propaganda machine those folks crave. Funny how they seem to be guests of honor when they come out from under their rocks to chat with Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly on their shows of rants, hate, and character assassination. They don't have the guts or the truth behind them to ever appear in a forum where they will be challenged and asked questions.

Is there anything inaccurate in the above? Or are you attacking the messenger because you don't like the message?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 3:45 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Here's a link to the report of the actual poll in Daily Kos.

http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2010/1/31/US/437

It would be interesting if they had also done a control of random folks, not self-selected as Republicans.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 4:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
But you say that like it's only done by ONE side... Read this edit and see if it makes any less sense:

Is there anything inaccurate in the above? Or are you attacking the messenger because you don't like the message?

Kwicko, I don't care about the message. I only care that propaganda is on display as some sort of truth. I don't play the finger-pointing game of rationalization and equivocation anymore, but to my knowledge Fox polls are either done in partnership with other organizations, or they are clearly labeled non-scientific if the case may be. Besides that, when has a "Fox poll" ever been posted here and portrayed as fact....not by me for sure. I could do a phone poll in the next 30 minutes of people who I know or conduct business with. That poll would be very slanted to the ideology I support. It would be meaningless in the real world.

The other point is that I already know that this is what a lot of you guys believe about us Republicans. It doesn't really bother me. No matter how I feel about it, it won't change. You may have noticed that I'm not flinging this type of stuff in anyone's face here. No gloating about recent Republican victories; no gloating about Obama's problems, no "rubbing it in with glee" so to speak, like some others do. I have defended Obama, supported what many would consider "liberal" positions on gays, torture, govt. option, etc. I've gone after both Rush and Beck at times as well. You've done some of that too in the last year. You have not been as much of a hard-core ideologue as I once had you pegged for. That's a big part of what has me motivated to be more fair and honest. Perhaps I have been wrong or naive in my interpretation of things, and you are exactly the same as when we could only curse and insult each other. My gut says no. It's not that my core beliefs have changed, just the way I bloviate about them here has. Niki's post is harmless, and perhaps I over-reacted, but she is often times the one calling for civility and mutual respect. I do not want to, and will not go back to being the kind of RWEDer who would write something purely to embarrass or attack anyone's beliefs here.

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 4:38 AM

Quote:
I could do a phone poll in the next 30 minutes of people who I know or conduct business with. That poll would be very slanted to the ideology I support.

But that quote right there shows that you DO have a slant, you ARE an idealogue, at least to a degree.

You've gone to great lengths lately to moderate your views and get away from the "party line" politics, but it's still there.

That's not an attack; it's a truth. I'm guilty of it as well, probably far more than you. It's inculcated into us; our party ideology isn't something that's that easy to walk away from, any more than any other abusive relationship is. :)

As to the claims that Fox does their polling in partnership with someone else, all I can say is, "So?" Does that make their polling somehow more valid? As I've noted before, Gallup, Rasmussen, and all the other polling companies are completely capable of (and often have a vested interest in) slanting their polls, often by HOW the questions are structured, but just as often in the ORDER in which the questions are asked.

As to Geezer's point, it seems rather silly to try to gauge what self-identified Republicans believe by polling people who aren't self-identified Republicans, doesn't it? It's not a poll on what the general public believes, and isn't meant to portray itself as one. It's a poll on what REPUBLICANS believe; is it wrong to ask people who identify themselves as Republicans what Republicans believe? If I wanted to know what women are thinking, would I ask men?

Now, back to Fox; It was pointed out that Fox doesn't claim their "polls" are scientific. True enough, but where in the MediaMatters polling do you see them claiming it as a scientific poll? Anywhere?

Beyond that, have you ever seen Fox try to DISTANCE themselves from their polling, or try to claim that their polls AREN'T accurate or scientific? They pretty clearly have a record of passing off polls that are radically skewed and even occasionally outrageously wrong (remember when the responses totalled up to over 125% of people polled?), yet I've never seen them claim that their polls should be ignored or ridiculed as wildly inaccurate.

I take this latest poll not as scientific fact, but rather as a general gauge of where Republicans' heads are at. Note that they used SELF-IDENTIFIED Republicans, not tea-baggers or "independents" like Wulfie or PN claim to be. They went to the party faithful, the idealogues, and they asked them what they believe about this President. And the results should be at least a little bit concerning for the future of the party.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 5:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
I could do a phone poll in the next 30 minutes of people who I know or conduct business with. That poll would be very slanted to the ideology I support.

But that quote right there shows that you DO have a slant, you ARE an idealogue, at least to a degree.

You've gone to great lengths lately to moderate your views and get away from the "party line" politics, but it's still there.

That's not an attack; it's a truth. I'm guilty of it as well, probably far more than you. It's inculcated into us; our party ideology isn't something that's that easy to walk away from, any more than any other abusive relationship is. :)

As to the claims that Fox does their polling in partnership with someone else, all I can say is, "So?" Does that make their polling somehow more valid? As I've noted before, Gallup, Rasmussen, and all the other polling companies are completely capable of (and often have a vested interest in) slanting their polls, often by HOW the questions are structured, but just as often in the ORDER in which the questions are asked.

As to Geezer's point, it seems rather silly to try to gauge what self-identified Republicans believe by polling people who aren't self-identified Republicans, doesn't it? It's not a poll on what the general public believes, and isn't meant to portray itself as one. It's a poll on what REPUBLICANS believe; is it wrong to ask people who identify themselves as Republicans what Republicans believe? If I wanted to know what women are thinking, would I ask men?

Now, back to Fox; It was pointed out that Fox doesn't claim their "polls" are scientific. True enough, but where in the MediaMatters polling do you see them claiming it as a scientific poll? Anywhere?

Beyond that, have you ever seen Fox try to DISTANCE themselves from their polling, or try to claim that their polls AREN'T accurate or scientific? They pretty clearly have a record of passing off polls that are radically skewed and even occasionally outrageously wrong (remember when the responses totalled up to over 125% of people polled?), yet I've never seen them claim that their polls should be ignored or ridiculed as wildly inaccurate.

I take this latest poll not as scientific fact, but rather as a general gauge of where Republicans' heads are at. Note that they used SELF-IDENTIFIED Republicans, not tea-baggers or "independents" like Wulfie or PN claim to be. They went to the party faithful, the idealogues, and they asked them what they believe about this President. And the results should be at least a little bit concerning for the future of the party.

Of course I'm an ideologue...to a degree as you say. So are you, and just about everyone else here. How could we not be? We have opinions and we have our own core belief systems. No one here is part of the great "un-informed masses", and only a handful seem to me to be true Independents. The way the world is now it is very difficult to not tend to fall into one camp or the other. But it doesn't mean we necessarily have to support and defend every single apsect of that ideology. I don't support the Republican Party platform without question. I don't even know if there is one, or what it represents. I only know that most of the other side's positions are highly objectionable to me.

One annual poll which I believe is quite scientific is the Gallup Poll taken at the end of every year. It simply asks people how they generally describe themselves. For the last several years the results have been the same :

40% say they're Conservative
40% say they're Independent
20% say they're Liberal

Now you can question that respected annual poll or even dismiss it if you care. And I actually find it just a tad hard to believe myself. If I wanted to get all mean and snarky, I could say...fine, believe Media Matters. Because the more you believe it, the more disillusioned & distraught you'd be when their statements are proven untrue. They, along with the Daily Kos predicted a victory for Coakley in Massachussets. They, along with the Boston Globe would not even publish poll numbers in the final week showing Brown gaining, and then ahead. I'm sure those organizations had a real bad night that Tuesday. I could say defend them, and follow them with your heads and hearts right off the political cliff. But I won't say any of that because what would the point be?

I would have been just as critical if someone had posted a Fox Poll that perhaps said that Democrats are all basically nuts. I'm not just picking on Media Matters or the Left. I can't stand any of it, and if you're going to post a poll here in RWED, you should consider the source first.

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 6:11 AM

Quote:
If I wanted to get all mean and snarky, I could say...fine, believe Media Matters. Because the more you believe it, the more disillusioned & distraught you'd be when their statements are proven untrue.

And if *I* wanted to get mean and snarky, I could say, "Fine, dismiss Media Matters's poll numbers out of hand, because the more you ignore the reality of what's happening in your party, the more shocked you'll be when they're proven true and you're driven off a cliff."

Quote:
They, along with the Daily Kos predicted a victory for Coakley in Massachussets. They, along with the Boston Globe would not even publish poll numbers in the final week showing Brown gaining, and then ahead.

And? I seem to remember several right-wing sources (including Fox analyst Karl Rove) GUARANTEEING a McCain/Palin landslide. And they refused to show poll results - even on election day - which showed Obama clearly outstripping his competition. And yet people still pay attention to FauxNews, don't they? Are you saying that anybody interested in the truth should never watch anything connected to FauxNews? If so, I agree.

Quote:
I'm sure those organizations had a real bad night that Tuesday. I could say defend them, and follow them with your heads and hearts right off the political cliff. But I won't say any of that because what would the point be?

You won't say that, but you just did. It's disingenuous of you to put it that way, and it's a bit cowardly to say you wouldn't say something, while at the same time saying it. See what I mean?

By the way, if the polling numbers came from some other source (say, FoxNews or ABC, for example), would you treat them differently? And who ARE the polling sources that you trust, and why do you trust them?

Lots of people trust Rasmussen, but I find them to have quite a right-wing bias. I'm sure conservatives find them utterly fair and balanced. You see what I'm talking about? As you said yourself, pretty much EVERYBODY has an ideological agenda, even the pollsters. So why should I trust one source over another, or distrust one source more than any other? Aren't they pretty much all equally skewed, and therefore screwed?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 7:10 AM

BYTEMITE

So... Screw it. I'm going streaking!

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 7:28 AM

STORYMARK

The poll may well be biased, but is sure does represent the feelings of Republicans in my county pretty well - or at least, all those I've spoken with or know.

Anecdotal of course, but it is what it is.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 7:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

So... Screw it. I'm going streaking!

We're going streaking!!

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 8:00 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Okay, to begin with, let me clarify. I said “a poll”, assuming that it was one of many and might be contradicted elsewhere—you can pretty much find a poll saying anything if you look hard enough.

Second; JS, no, the poll wasn’t “conducted” by Media Matters, as you can see if you look at the actual poll Geezer kindly searched out and cited for us. Yes, a search showed Daily Kos is definitely left leaning. But the poll was CONDUCTED by Research 2000, and a google search doesn’t show me if they’re ideologically slanted. Does anyone know? I can find tons of polls BY them, but no description of them which indicates if they have a leaning or, if they do, which way it might be. I’ll wait to hear if anyone else knows any more about them before dismissing the poll completely. I find references to “Rasmussen Research 2000”, don’t know if they’re connected, but I tend to trust Rasmussen pretty much. I don’t care who PAYS for the poll—if it doesn’t show the answers they want, I’m assuming they don’t publish it. I care who CONDUCTED the poll.

So whether what you say is true or not, your initial assumption is fallacious, unless you can prove Research 2000 is slanted.

Your remarks about me might have confused me; I wasn’t sure whether you were saying my putting up the poll was “something purely to embarrass or attack anyone's beliefs”. It wasn’t, if that makes any difference; to me it was truly shocking, as I have always pretty much assumed that Dems and Repubs have different ideologies, but that aside from the fringe elements, were pretty much equal in smarts. I hold onto the thought that RIGHT NOW, the situation is such that propaganda has influenced people to an unusual degree, but I truly didn’t think previously that it was to that great a degree! I didn’t know about your “past” here, by the way. Personally I’ve usually found you well spoken and civil in putting forth your opinions, however much they differ from mine. It’s interesting to hear someone who’s changed their attitudes; I wish we could all at least TRY to have the attitude you describe as having come to yourself. I know I could do a helluvalot better. It’s not an excuse, but a reason that I’m not: I was so frustrated and angry during the Dumbya years, and astonished that my country would follow him so blindly, that both that and the way the right-wing is behaving today has pushed me further and further left.

I’ve never participated in political forums before coming to the other Firefly board I was on, and then this one. While I TRY to be as civil and fair as I can most of the time, I admit that sometimes I give in to my baser tone, and it doesn’t bother me as much as it should. . .see it if you will as letting out some of what I’ve felt for so long. Hopefully if/when things get more reasonable, my vituperative feelings will have spent themselves and I’ll be less ideologically slanted. I hope so; mostly because that would mean things got less insane.

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 8:01 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yes, Gordon; I wasn’t that surprised, given Dumbya got two terms, etc. (even tho’ I firmly believe the first one was given to him by daddy-stacked SCOTUS). I didn’t expect it to be THAT bad, tho’, and it was disheartening. . . actually I might say “shocking”.

Quote:
Readers, Independents, Libertarians and Constitutionalists don't exist in Nikovich's Verse

That’s just a stupid statement which has nothing to do with the issue at hand. I ignored the rest.

Geezer, thank you SO much for finding and posting a link to the actual poll. I found it very interesting; but again, sad. It added to what I had heard in both a good and a bad way.

I was heartened to see that a pretty good majority was against secession, that they were fairly equal about sex education in the schools, the high percentage who felt marriage should be a partnership, the high percentage who didn’t want contraceptives outlawed, that they considered birth-control pills equivalent to abortion being about equal, and the huge percentage who thought women should work outside the home

I was sad as hell to see the high percentage of those who believed Sarah Palin would make a better President that Obama (shocked, actually!), and shocked to see the high percentage who thought Genesis should be taught (tho’ the poll didn’t say it should be the ONLY thing taught or that it explained HOW the world was created, only that it was how GOD created the world—a point of nit picking, I realize. . .)

There was no surprise they were anti-union, anti-gay, anti-illegal immigrant, the high number who thought abortion was murder yet supported the death penalty. . .those were pretty predictable.

All in all, it was quite educational for me. The questions I listed initially had shocked me at first, and I stand by everything I said about them, but it was nice to see some of the other surprising percentages.

Byte, if it weren't so cold here, I'd join you streaking (tho' I'd have to "limp-streak". I've always felt it terribly unfair that man could go around topless and women can't...my best friend/ranger used to backpack topless and "to hell with the world"...

Story: You have my deepest sympathy. I've always known I wouldn't survive in a very right-wing area, or, for the most part, in a rural one. I'd be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. Conversely, I've always been proud to live HERE, because for all we're nuts, we've been in the forefront of a LOT and I think we're more tolerant. Just MHO.

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 8:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
If I wanted to get all mean and snarky, I could say...fine, believe Media Matters. Because the more you believe it, the more disillusioned & distraught you'd be when their statements are proven untrue.

And if *I* wanted to get mean and snarky, I could say, "Fine, dismiss Media Matters's poll numbers out of hand, because the more you ignore the reality of what's happening in your party, the more shocked you'll be when they're proven true and you're driven off a cliff."

Quote:
They, along with the Daily Kos predicted a victory for Coakley in Massachussets. They, along with the Boston Globe would not even publish poll numbers in the final week showing Brown gaining, and then ahead.

And? I seem to remember several right-wing sources (including Fox analyst Karl Rove) GUARANTEEING a McCain/Palin landslide. And they refused to show poll results - even on election day - which showed Obama clearly outstripping his competition. And yet people still pay attention to FauxNews, don't they? Are you saying that anybody interested in the truth should never watch anything connected to FauxNews? If so, I agree.

Quote:
I'm sure those organizations had a real bad night that Tuesday. I could say defend them, and follow them with your heads and hearts right off the political cliff. But I won't say any of that because what would the point be?

You won't say that, but you just did. It's disingenuous of you to put it that way, and it's a bit cowardly to say you wouldn't say something, while at the same time saying it. See what I mean?

By the way, if the polling numbers came from some other source (say, FoxNews or ABC, for example), would you treat them differently? And who ARE the polling sources that you trust, and why do you trust them?

Lots of people trust Rasmussen, but I find them to have quite a right-wing bias. I'm sure conservatives find them utterly fair and balanced. You see what I'm talking about? As you said yourself, pretty much EVERYBODY has an ideological agenda, even the pollsters. So why should I trust one source over another, or distrust one source more than any other? Aren't they pretty much all equally skewed, and therefore screwed?

Sorry you think I'm a disingenuous coward. I did not phrase that section of my post the way it was intended, so yeah it was dumb by me to say it that way. As for the rest, I guess you missed the last part of my post where I said I would question a Fox poll posted here too. As to Rasmussen, he did accurately predict the Obama victory to a tenth of a point, 52.7% to 47.3% to be precise. But I accept your statement that all pollsters may be biased in some way. I likely watch more Fox than you, and I cannot recall them predicting a McCain victory ever. There was one week, and one week only, after their convention when McCain did take a temporary lead. But after that, I never heard what you say they said.

Cut to the chase.....You can believe what you want, and you can believe and trust Media Matters, MSNBC, and Daily Kos. I think that's great! America is all about individual freedom of choice. Forgive me if some of your recent posts gave me an incorrect impression that you had softened a bit from your past hard-line attitudes. I guess you're more likely to extend a friendly hand if the other person is agreeing with you. That's just human nature. I will never always agree with you, and vice-versa I'm sure. That's why we get along so not well. Have a great one!

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 8:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Okay, to begin with, let me clarify. I said “a poll”, assuming that it was one of many and might be contradicted elsewhere—you can pretty much find a poll saying anything if you look hard enough.

Second; JS, no, the poll wasn’t “conducted” by Media Matters, as you can see if you look at the actual poll Geezer kindly searched out and cited for us. Yes, a search showed Daily Kos is definitely left leaning. But the poll was CONDUCTED by Research 2000, and a google search doesn’t show me if they’re ideologically slanted. Does anyone know? I can find tons of polls BY them, but no description of them which indicates if they have a leaning or, if they do, which way it might be. I’ll wait to hear if anyone else knows any more about them before dismissing the poll completely. I find references to “Rasmussen Research 2000”, don’t know if they’re connected, but I tend to trust Rasmussen pretty much. I don’t care who PAYS for the poll—if it doesn’t show the answers they want, I’m assuming they don’t publish it. I care who CONDUCTED the poll.

So whether what you say is true or not, your initial assumption is fallacious, unless you can prove Research 2000 is slanted.

Your remarks about me might have confused me; I wasn’t sure whether you were saying my putting up the poll was “something purely to embarrass or attack anyone's beliefs”. It wasn’t, if that makes any difference; to me it was truly shocking, as I have always pretty much assumed that Dems and Repubs have different ideologies, but that aside from the fringe elements, were pretty much equal in smarts. I hold onto the thought that RIGHT NOW, the situation is such that propaganda has influenced people to an unusual degree, but I truly didn’t think previously that it was to that great a degree! I didn’t know about your “past” here, by the way. Personally I’ve usually found you well spoken and civil in putting forth your opinions, however much they differ from mine. It’s interesting to hear someone who’s changed their attitudes; I wish we could all at least TRY to have the attitude you describe as having come to yourself. I know I could do a helluvalot better. It’s not an excuse, but a reason that I’m not: I was so frustrated and angry during the Dumbya years, and astonished that my country would follow him so blindly, that both that and the way the right-wing is behaving today has pushed me further and further left.

I’ve never participated in political forums before coming to the other Firefly board I was on, and then this one. While I TRY to be as civil and fair as I can most of the time, I admit that sometimes I give in to my baser tone, and it doesn’t bother me as much as it should. . .see it if you will as letting out some of what I’ve felt for so long. Hopefully if/when things get more reasonable, my vituperative feelings will have spent themselves and I’ll be less ideologically slanted. I hope so; mostly because that would mean things got less insane.

Sorry Niki. As I posted to Kwicko earlier, I did over-react. You have generally been civil and fair, and no one can expect more than that.

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 8:21 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Nothing to apologize for; I've rarely had any problem communicating with you, and I thought your initial feelings were reasonable, if the poll actually was badly slanted.

I'd still like to know; do you give the poll any more credence because it was Research 2000 that actually conducted it? Do you know anything about them that would indicate a slant? I recognize any poll can be slanted, but I found that one very interesting, in that the questions seemed to be asked fairly reasonably and I found some of the responses educational--tho' some not in a good way!

I actually don't blame you for reacting the way you did; I put it up as a "huh!", but if it was seriously slanted and untrue, I'd have liked to know. For the most part, I most definitely did NOT want to believe it is the accurate, it is terribly disheartening. I've clung to the belief that MOST Republicans are thinking people who have resisted the more absurd shit flying around; this poll really depressed me. So I was sad to find, upon checking it out, that an apparently respectable firm actually conducted it; I'd have LOVED to find out it was just bullshit. Sigh...

Oh, and Mike, I was interested to hear what you said about Rasmussen. I'll try to remember that. IF Rasmussen Research 2000 is connected, and as you say they're right-biased, my gawd, what does THAT say about the poll???

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 8:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Nothing to apologize for; I've rarely had any problem communicating with you, and I thought your initial feelings were reasonable, if the poll actually was badly slanted.

I'd still like to know; do you give the poll any more credence because it was Research 2000 that actually conducted it? Do you know anything about them that would indicate a slant? I recognize any poll can be slanted, but I found that one very interesting, in that the questions seemed to be asked fairly reasonably and I found some of the responses educational--tho' some not in a good way!

I actually don't blame you for reacting the way you did; I put it up as a "huh!", but if it was seriously slanted and untrue, I'd have liked to know. For the most part, I most definitely did NOT want to believe it is the accurate, it is terribly disheartening. I've clung to the belief that MOST Republicans are thinking people who have resisted the more absurd shit flying around; this poll really depressed me. So I was sad to find, upon checking it out, that an apparently respectable firm actually conducted it; I'd have LOVED to find out it was just bullshit. Sigh...

Oh, and Mike, I was interested to hear what you said about Rasmussen. I'll try to remember that. IF Rasmussen Research 2000 is connected, and as you say they're right-biased, my gawd, what does THAT say about the poll???

I couldn't believe that poll no matter who conducted it. Did you know there was a brand new poll done by a respected "liberal" organization that ranked Fox News as the most trusted news outlet in America? It was something like 49%. No one else was even close. I'd like to believe that one, but I really don't. It was first reported by O'Reilly this week, and then even Olbermann put it on the screen the next night. One has to wonder what the hell it all means anyhow. I think poll results are designed by nature to move us, to compel us, to direct us in some way. As if to say, hey dummy, see what everyone else believes?! How the questions are phrased is often left out of the results, and often that makes all the difference.

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 8:48 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Sorry you think I'm a disingenuous coward.

I don't. I was illustrating what you were doing, saying something by saying you wouldn't say that. I would never say you were a disingenuous coward!

Quote:
I did not phrase that section of my post the way it was intended, so yeah it was dumb by me to say it that way.

Yup, me too.

Quote:
As for the rest, I guess you missed the last part of my post where I said I would question a Fox poll posted here too. As to Rasmussen, he did accurately predict the Obama victory to a tenth of a point, 52.7% to 47.3% to be precise. But I accept your statement that all pollsters may be biased in some way.

I believe 538.com called it the same way, if memory serves. And for all I know, they may have been calling Massachusetts for Coakley up until that fateful Tuesday... As they say, even a stopped watch is right twice a day! :)

Quote:

Cut to the chase.....You can believe what you want, and you can believe and trust Media Matters, MSNBC, and Daily Kos. I think that's great! America is all about individual freedom of choice.

I do watch a bit of MSNBC (not TOO much, though - the wife can't stand politics!), but I've never really checked out Media Matters or Daily Kos; I may have looked at a story linked there before, but they're not in my bookmarks and I'm not on their mailing lists. I gather they're left-leaning groups. Since I *AM* on the HuffPost mailing list (and their emails tend to go straight into the trash 99% of the time), I figure most of the big stuff is going to get summarized there. I don't really feel the need to be in a left-wing echo chamber, as I feel surrounding yourself with ideologues is a quick way to lose touch with reality (Just ask Dubya!)

Quote:
Forgive me if some of your recent posts gave me an incorrect impression that you had softened a bit from your past hard-line attitudes.

Bah. We've both moderated a bit in our views, and we both slip back into partisanship on some stuff. No harm, no foul on that.

Quote:
I guess you're more likely to extend a friendly hand if the other person is agreeing with you. That's just human nature. I will never always agree with you, and vice-versa I'm sure. That's why we get along so not well. Have a great one!

Not so well, but we've been in worse messes than this and gotten through 'em.

Also, you must know this about me: I love an argument. I'll argue with you, or Wulf, or Niki, or "Hero", or even Frem. And as often as not, I don't have a horse in the race; I'm often not arguing a strongly-held position, as much as I'm asking uncomfortable questions that we really SHOULD think about, and which may impact our decisions on things. That's what I was trying to get at when I asked if you'd respect the polling numbers if they came from another source. F'rinstance, if you heard a Rasmussen poll that said the exact same things, would you brush it off so easily, or would you say, in effect, "Oh shit - we've got trouble right here in River City!"?

My feeling on hearing those kinds of numbers associated with those kinds of attitudes is that the party is in big trouble, but I've been saying that for years, so it sounds *to me* like a confirmation of truths I already held to be self-evident. As always, your mileage may vary.

And it certainly doesn't mean I'm ready to write off the Republican party, or count them out; they're still a threat. In fact, if anything, if the far-right fringe looney-tunes whackabuckets are truly in charge and dragging the rest of y'all down with them, then the party is a BIGGER threat to America than ever before. And THAT is what I want to watch and keep an eye on.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 9:41 AM

Thanks Kwicko. That's a great post. I wouldn't worry too much about the power or future of the Tea Party. It looks to me that it's coming apart at the seams. No leadership, huge regional bickering and jockeying for power, no "real" money, and no platform outside of ecomonic issues. Their signs display too much hatred and insanity for me to stomach. I don't want Obama impeached...that is absurd. I don't think he's not a citizen...that's absurd. I don't think he's out to destroy the country. The RNC, chaired by Michael Steele doesn't really offer anything new. If they're going to come up with candidates like McCain, then I'm gone. I think they're going to rope-a-dope for the next 8 months, and then hope to regain power in Congress. But I've seen absolutley nothing from the RNC to indicate what they will do then.

You mentioned yesterday about how I became disillusioned with Bush towards the end. That was quite astute of you to remember that. It wasn't just him; the entire Administration and Republicans in general basically just gave up. They surrendered to their own incompetence, and we all just watched the economy tank further and further every day. His lame-duck session was one of the most painful I've ever lived through, and I thought the Republican Party was kaput after that. They never even had the guts to go out and fight and defend anything the media was angry at them for. At least Obama and his staff don't hide and cower under their desks when they're attacked or blamed for something. They fight back. I can respect that.

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 10:01 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I, on the other hand, find polls interesting in that they sometimes reflect things I didn't know or believe, as this one did. I know they're not that often right, and can be slanted, but I don't think they're all that wrong--at least not far enough wrong to completely ignore. Just find them interesting...until something like this comes along which totally blows me out of the water.

I do check on the ones I take at all seriously to find out the details and info on who conducted it, but I definitely don't think, for me at least, they're a way of saying what I should be thinking. Never once considered them that way; my opinions are formed before I see a poll, and if anything, I view it somewhat as telling me what OTHERS think

Quote:
I'd like to believe that one

Yes, I saw the Fox poll...are you telling me you actually WANT to believe Faux News is the most trusted news outlet in America????

I can't...even...Omygawd...

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 10:03 AM

FREMDFIRMA

That's one of the glorious things about having an obvious agenda, you don't even have to pretend to be impartial...

That said, polls are bunk, especially in that case cause I toldja eighteen months ahead of time exactly how it was gonna go, because I know how the system *works*, the smoke and mirrors and obfuscation, backroom dealmaking and whatnot that produces the electors and how they vote - and YOU, lowly peons, have no say in it, cause the districts are so bloody gerrymandered that they'll get the result they want or diebold themselves a convincing fake that won't ever be examined till it no longer matters anyways.

It's just like the dog and pony show that is the so called "justice" system, it's all decided in advance long before they let you peons in there to play-pretend like you actually have some influence on the matter, let you think you matter.

Yes, I am pasted, sure, but it doesn't make those facts untrue - if you REALLY wanna change things, you gotta get somewhere, or someone, upstream from the decision making process and put the damn squeeze on, instead of participating in the farce.

ALL polls are loaded, the results are bullshit anyhows without the statistical data, who was sampled, where and when, how were they selected, how many just ignored you, what was the EXACT TEXT of the questions asked, and in what order ?

And mostly, they don't tell you that, cause they're all fekkin push-polling and we know it.

And given that one of em called me the other day, I rather think that "I'd rather see em both swingin from a rope" got either discarded, or translated into "undecided", cause one must remember, those giving the polls often have their own bent, and are every bit as likely to nudge things themselves.

So why anyone would put a single ounce of credibility into these charades is beyond me.

-F

PS. Well aware of the fact that I sound like Spider Jerusalem when pasted, no need to remind me.

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010 2:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Thanks Kwicko. That's a great post. I wouldn't worry too much about the power or future of the Tea Party. It looks to me that it's coming apart at the seams. No leadership, huge regional bickering and jockeying for power, no "real" money, and no platform outside of ecomonic issues. Their signs display too much hatred and insanity for me to stomach. I don't want Obama impeached...that is absurd. I don't think he's not a citizen...that's absurd. I don't think he's out to destroy the country. The RNC, chaired by Michael Steele doesn't really offer anything new. If they're going to come up with candidates like McCain, then I'm gone. I think they're going to rope-a-dope for the next 8 months, and then hope to regain power in Congress. But I've seen absolutley nothing from the RNC to indicate what they will do then.

See Jongs, that's the problem you have: You're REASONABLE. That just doesn't seem to have a place in your party these days, and I'm damned sad to see it. Yet where so many see nutbags and whackos, I see opportunity. There's still time, and there's still a chance to save the Republican party from within. The MODERATE Republicans and the MODERATE tea-party people and the MODERATE independents and libertarians can pull together (you listening, Ron Paul?) and form a more centrist Republican party, and it can cast out the nuts. What we're seeing here is a fight for the soul of the party, and its future. And frankly, it worries me. I'm in no hurry to see any one party get too much power, because no good ever comes of that.

Quote:
You mentioned yesterday about how I became disillusioned with Bush towards the end. That was quite astute of you to remember that. It wasn't just him; the entire Administration and Republicans in general basically just gave up. They surrendered to their own incompetence, and we all just watched the economy tank further and further every day. His lame-duck session was one of the most painful I've ever lived through, and I thought the Republican Party was kaput after that. They never even had the guts to go out and fight and defend anything the media was angry at them for. At least Obama and his staff don't hide and cower under their desks when they're attacked or blamed for something. They fight back. I can respect that.

I don't really give Obama as much credit as you do. I keep hoping he'll take the fight to the Republicans (and even more so, to the Tea-Baggers), but he hasn't shown much in the way of guts just yet. He's had his moments, and they've been refreshing, but they're too few and far between. I want better from my President than I've gotten for... hell, I don't even remember when. The last really golden moment I can remember for a President came, ironically, from the one I probably hate the most, at least of those in recent memory: it was Dubya's "megaphone moment" at Ground Zero on September 12th, when he just spoke extemporaneously and off-the-cuff, and with real feeling and heart. And dammit, I was totally with him then. I had my doubts about him (I'm Texan, remember, and we already had a history with him), but goddam if I didn't want him to be the leader we needed at that moment. And for a second there, he kinda was.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

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

Friday, February 5, 2010 2:36 AM

My first post on this had a huge error. It was not Media Matters, but The Daily Kos which did this survey. Media Matters just gets it out there for outlets to pick up on or not. The fact that it originated with Daily Kos however, makes it even more suspect. But after many of the posts yesterday I'm not going to harp on it any longer.

Both major parties have to deal with their own extremists. On the other thread about Rahm Emmanuel calling the hard-Left "f'ing retards", I'm quite sure people like Rove and Cheney called whackos on the Right things just like that too.

And Kwicko, I think "reasonable" is the only way to be these days. Reasonable in all aspects of life. It means you can still believe in what you hold true, but you also keep an open and respectful ear to those that you disagree with.

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

Friday, February 5, 2010 7:57 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
And Kwicko, I think "reasonable" is the only way to be these days. Reasonable in all aspects of life. It means you can still believe in what you hold true, but you also keep an open and respectful ear to those that you disagree with.

Amen, but with the caveat of keeping one hand ready for a smack upside the head when someone takes being reasonable as "weakness" and an excuse to get malicious at you.

http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20080303
http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20080305

Seriously, no bullshit, those two comics kinda sum up WHY I come off like I do much of the time, cause it's too bloody true, it is!

-F

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

Friday, February 5, 2010 8:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
My first post on this had a huge error. It was not Media Matters, but The Daily Kos which did this survey. Media Matters just gets it out there for outlets to pick up on or not. The fact that it originated with Daily Kos however, makes it even more suspect. But after many of the posts yesterday I'm not going to harp on it any longer.

I wouldn't call that a "huge" error, especially since it was doubtless posted on both sites. As far as I can gather, they're just about interchangeable in their views anyway, and they didn't actually CONDUCT the poll, just commissioned it (though that is still a very easy way to "fix" a poll and make it say what you want it to, just in the way you ask the questions, and what questions you're demanding be asked).

Quote:

Both major parties have to deal with their own extremists. On the other thread about Rahm Emmanuel calling the hard-Left "f'ing retards", I'm quite sure people like Rove and Cheney called whackos on the Right things just like that too.

No doubt. Heck, they probably called their boss that from time to time. :)

Quote:

And Kwicko, I think "reasonable" is the only way to be these days. Reasonable in all aspects of life. It means you can still believe in what you hold true, but you also keep an open and respectful ear to those that you disagree with.

I'm tryin', Jongs; I really am. Some days are better than others, definitely. But I'm still here, still standing upright. Leonard Cohen said it better than I ever could:

Quote:
I'm sentimental, if you know what I mean
I love the country but I can't stand the scene.
And I'm neither left or right
I'm just staying home tonight,
getting lost in that hopeless little screen.
But I'm stubborn as those garbage bags
that Time cannot decay,
I'm junk but I'm still holding up
this little wild bouquet:
Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

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

Friday, February 5, 2010 9:44 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yeah, no need to feel bad, I clarified that way up the thread, Jong, as well as another matter: It's called the "Daily Kos Republican Poll", but it was actually CONDUCTED by "Research 2000". So to be accurate, we have to determine whether Research 2000 is slanted in their polling; Daily Kos only published it, and it went from there.

I'm still waiting to hear whether anyone knows anything about Research 2000 and any potential leanings; which doesn't change the fact that any poll can be bullshit.

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

Friday, February 5, 2010 9:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
And Kwicko, I think "reasonable" is the only way to be these days. Reasonable in all aspects of life. It means you can still believe in what you hold true, but you also keep an open and respectful ear to those that you disagree with.

Amen, but with the caveat of keeping one hand ready for a smack upside the head when someone takes being reasonable as "weakness" and an excuse to get malicious at you.

A good smack is sometimes required!

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

Friday, February 5, 2010 9:51 AM