The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: deportliberals on October 26, 2009, 12:14:21 PM
-
Continuing their June/July poll of 160,000 americans(huge poll by any standard) where 47 out of 50 states reported more conservatives by significant margins, the link below shows Gallup again recording similar findings with conservatives at 40%, moderates at 36% and libs at 20%...16 surveys to produce these findings.
No doubt there are more illegal aliens living in this country than american leftists.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123854/Conservatives-Maintain-Edge-Top-Ideological-Group.aspx
-
Wonder if Gallup will use these new figures as a polling basis for their next poll on presidential popularity, instead of grossly oversampling democrats like they usually do?
Never happen..........
doc
-
I'm well aware of the N.Y. Times getting caught overloading their sampling with democrats and just last week ABC got caught doing the samething.
My advice to all is to ignore ALL news polls as they routinely produce politically skewed results...stay with the professionals, Rasmussen, Gallup, Zogby, etc.
I've never heard of Gallup skewing their data? Their survey of some 160,000 americans is one of the largest(if not THE largest) opinion survey done in this country. If it was their intent to skew in favor the democrats they sure missed that objective given their findings were a horror story for the democrats...47 out 50 states are conservative and only 20% report to be liberal with 5% of that group defining themselves as "left."
I don't know how anyone can say those results were skewed in favor of the dems.
-
I'm well aware of the N.Y. Times getting caught overloading their sampling with democrats and just last week ABC got caught doing the samething.
I've never heard of Gallup skewing their data?
I don't know how anyone can say those results were skewed in favor of the dems.
I've seen both Gallup and Zogby skew their polls in favor of democrats when you look at the internals......happens all the time, depending on who their client is......
Rasmussen....not so much......
doc
-
Show one instance of Gallup ever skewing data?? As for Rasmuseen, their methodolgy has been independently reviewed and the results made public which you can easily find(links) at the bottom of their tracking poll.
Rasmussen came in among the top three pollsters for results in the '2000, '2004, 2006 elections and was the most accurate pollster for the 2008 election outcome. You don't do that by skewing data. And you don't stay in the polling business for long skewing data for politics.
News polls are the exception and most sane people know they are being lied to when looking at a news poll.
-
Show one instance of Gallup ever skewing data?? As for Rasmuseen, their methodolgy has been independently reviewed and the results made public which you can easily find(links) at the bottom of their tracking poll.
Rasmussen came in among the top three pollsters for results in the '2000, '2004, 2006 elections and was the most accurate pollster for the 2008 election outcome. You don't do that by skewing data. And you don't stay in the polling business for long skewing data for politics.
News polls are the exception and most sane people know they are being lied to when looking at a news poll.
Gallup was just in the news for asking people to side w/ healthcare during a poll... miss that?
-
Show it! I just did a goggle search and found no such claims levied at Gallup. As a matter of fact, if you key in "Gallup skewing healthcare poll" you get Gallup showing Obamacare falling out of favor and then holding.
There are reports about ABC skewing it's healthcare poll as I mentioned earlier.
So give me a "cite" a "source" or a "link" so I can confirm your accusation.
-
Show it! I just did a goggle search and found no such claims levied at Gallup. As a matter of fact, if you key in "Gallup skewing healthcare poll" you get Gallup showing Obamacare falling out of favor and then holding.
There are reports about ABC skewing it's healthcare poll as I mentioned earlier.
So give me a "cite" a "source" or a "link" so I can confirm your accusation.
Mustang? Is that you?
Relax dude. Clearly you work for or are associated with Gallup. I heard it on the radio. I have no desire to do research for you or anyone else. Don't get all PO'd because someone doesn't agree that Gallup is pure as driven snow.
-
Mustang? Is that you?
Relax dude. Clearly you work for or are associated with Gallup. I heard it on the radio. I have no desire to do research for you or anyone else. Don't get all PO'd because someone doesn't agree that Gallup is pure as driven snow.
I remember reading where Gallup tend to over poll Demonrats in most polls, and they sometimes use push polling depending on who commissions a given poll.
-
I remember reading where Gallup tend to over poll Demonrats in most polls, and they sometimes use push polling depending on who commissions a given poll.
Quite correct, although Gallup is the nation's oldest pollster, their skirts are far from clean........and you can't rate a pollster by the accuracy of their results the day before an election.......they are all going for an accurate result then as their credibility is at stake.
To evaluate a pollster's bias, just read the internals of their polls a month or two BEFORE an election to determine where they are pointing the results, as well as read the questions when they are made available in the internals......you can skew a poll simply by the manner in which you ask a question.......having been polled a couple of times by Gallup, I know that to be the case......the subtlest form of "push polling", is asking a "loaded" question.........
And no, (deportLiberals) I won't provide LINKS........do your own research.......
doc
-
Quite correct, although Gallup is the nation's oldest pollster, their skirts are far from clean........and you can't rate a pollster by the accuracy of their results the day before an election.......they are all going for an accurate result then as their credibility is at stake.
To evaluate a pollster's bias, just read the internals of their polls a month or two BEFORE an election to determine where the are pointing the results, as well as read the questions when they are made available in the internals......you can skew a poll simply by the manner in which you ask a question.......having been polled a couple of times by Gallup, I know that to be the case......the subtlest form of "push polling", is asking a "loaded" question.........
And no, (deportLiberals) I won't provide LINKS........do your own research.......
doc
I'm also a firm believer that the left leaning pollsters deliberately skew their methods before an election in the belief that many people are sheep like and will vote for the presumed winner in an election, and that it will make opponents tend to stay home.
-
I'm also a firm believer that the left leaning pollsters deliberately skew their methods before an election in the belief that many people are sheep like and will vote for the presumed winner in an election, and that it will make opponents tend to stay home.
Correct.....as an example, I was one of those polled by Gallup on the national healthcare issue........
The pollster's FIRST question (after telling me that responding to the poll would require about 20 minutes of my time) was:
Do you believe that every American has a right to quality healthcare?
I answered: NO
Pollster's response: Thank you very much for participating (click)
doc
-
Mustang? Is that you?
Relax dude. Clearly you work for or are associated with Gallup. I heard it on the radio. I have no desire to do research for you or anyone else. Don't get all PO'd because someone doesn't agree that Gallup is pure as driven snow.
I am not associated with or work for any polling organization. I am well eduated in reading polls and understanding the basic methodologies. However, that is NOT the issue here. The issue here is someone trying to pass off rumor/ineundo as fact!
It's bad enough that the lying leftists use rumor and inuendo as their facts & propaganda but for conservatives to do it is just outrageous. A claim was made that Gallup skews data for democrats. I asked for proof...source, examples, etc and the poster couldn't bring anything to the table. Where I come from opinions without supporting facts are called B.S.
-
And no, (deportLiberals) I won't provide LINKS........do your own research.......
doc
YOU made the claim! Hence you backup your claim with facts or hang it up. Fact is you can't find any data to support your claim. Given that my link above shows Gallup polls repeatedly ripping the democrats a new one on the political demographics of this nation, your claim about Gallup supporting the dems with skewed data/methodologies rings hollow.
Let me know when you'd like to discuss this using facts vs rumor?
-
YOU made the claim! Hence you backup your claim with facts or hang it up. Fact is you can't find any data to support your claim. Given that my link above shows Gallup polls repeatedly ripping the democrats a new one on the political demographics of this nation, your claim about Gallup supporting the dems with skewed data/methodologies rings hollow.
Let me know when you'd like to discuss this using facts vs rumor?
Fact is, this is a subject that has been discussed recently. You might simply want to do a search here on CC and find links that have been posted already.
-
BTW TVDOC...here is an example of what skewing the data looks like...not hard to find...curious you couldn't produce a single example to back up your claim, huh?
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-2304-DC-Republican-Examiner~y2009m7d29-Another-hideously-skewed-New-York-Times-poll-still-shows-very-bad-news-for-Obama
-
The Little Goons at DemocratUnderground.com complain about Gallup too:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x661403
It must be true. It MUST!
-
I am not associated with or work for any polling organization. I am well eduated in reading polls and understanding the basic methodologies. However, that is NOT the issue here. The issue here is someone trying to pass off rumor/ineundo as fact!
It's bad enough that the lying leftists use rumor and inuendo as their facts & propaganda but for conservatives to do it is just outrageous. A claim was made that Gallup skews data for democrats. I asked for proof...source, examples, etc and the poster couldn't bring anything to the table. Where I come from opinions without supporting facts are called B.S.
Hate to bust your bubble, kid, but the results of a poll are usually determined by who is paying the bills.
I can (and have seen) instances when two identical questions were asked in two different ways, and the results were wildly different. Pollsters know that.
-
BTW TVDOC...here is an example of what skewing the data looks like...not hard to find...curious you couldn't produce a single example to back up your claim, huh?
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-2304-DC-Republican-Examiner~y2009m7d29-Another-hideously-skewed-New-York-Times-poll-still-shows-very-bad-news-for-Obama
Why are you so butt-hurt?
-
YOU made the claim! Hence you backup your claim with facts or hang it up. Fact is you can't find any data to support your claim. Given that my link above shows Gallup polls repeatedly ripping the democrats a new one on the political demographics of this nation, your claim about Gallup supporting the dems with skewed data/methodologies rings hollow.
Let me know when you'd like to discuss this using facts vs rumor?
I was "push polled" by Gallup, and gave you a specific example with exact quotes of what occurred up-thread.....personal experience........If you choose to ignore it, that is your option.
I too have a great deal of experience evaluating polls, as well as statistical analysis in general......the suggestion was made that you might read some other threads where this has been extensively discussed in the past on this board......it would save you some embarrassment, as well as saving the rest of us time.
Typically it is good board etiquette to spend some time reading, and evaluating discussions that have been ongoing before on a specific topic, when you are new to a forum, rather than barging in and making an ass of yourself before you have accumulated a dozen posts.
All here are welcome, and the mods are pretty lenient, but it is always wise to get to know the folks before challenging them, as most of us have been here since the board was founded, and migrated here from another particular forum prior to that......just saying......therefore a lot of these discussions are "old hat" to an extent.
doc
-
Why are you so butt-hurt?
So my bringing facts and links to the board to back up my claims makes me a butt hurt??? Strange you're not going after the person who shot off his mouth but couldn't bring any facts to support his claim.
Keep YOUR personal bias to yourself! I am here to discuss issues using FACTS, SOURCES, CITES, QUOTES AND LINKS!! I thought this was a conservative site, not some B.S. competitor for the leftist B.S. sites.
-
I was "push polled" by Gallup, and gave you a specific example with exact quotes of what occurred up-thread.....personal experience........If you chose to ignore it, that is your option.
WRONG!! You made an empty claim that you cannot back up with facts and you putting idiot quote marks around some made up statement without sourcing it so I can go check your facts is NOT, under any circumstances anywhere, an example of quoting anything. Personal anecdotes or wild claims mean nothing in the arena of debate.
It's real simple...bring your facts to the table as I have done with my Gallup claims and with my N.Y. Times/CBS poll claims. How hard is that?? If I can do it why can't you?
And your threat about the mods does not impress me and the only one here embarassing himself is you! It is YOU (not me) who cannot back up your own claim with any facts. In what reality is that NOT embarassing?
-
Looks like our buddy is about to be shown the door, having overstayed his own visa.
-
WRONG!! You made an empty claim that you cannot back up with facts and you putting idiot quote marks around some made up statement without sourcing it so I can go check your facts is NOT, under any circumstances anywhere, an example of quoting anything. Personal anecdotes or wild claims mean nothing in the arena of debate.
It's real simple...bring your facts to the table as I have done with my Gallup claims and with my N.Y. Times/CBS poll claims. How hard is that?? If I can do it why can't you?
And your threat about the mods does not impress me and the only one here embarassing himself is you! It is YOU (not me) who cannot back up your own claim with any facts. In what reality is that NOT embarassing?
You're making an ass of yourself. Period. Shut up and start searching and reading. You might live to see tomorrow that way.
Just sayin'.
-
Hate to bust your bubble, kid, but the results of a poll are usually determined by who is paying the bills.
I can (and have seen) instances when two identical questions were asked in two different ways, and the results were wildly different. Pollsters know that.
Hate to burst your bubble but polls are done two ways. The user prepares the questions or the pollster does. Most professional pollster prepare the questions. Most news polls prepared their own questions.
-
Um, your random all-caps, excessive use of question marks and exclamation points, and incessant need to call others and their ideas and contributions "idiot" or "idiotic" = you're butt-hurt.
Stop being a douche just because someone disagreed with you.
-
You're making an ass of yourself. Period. Shut up and start searching and reading. You might live to see tomorrow that way.
Just sayin'.
The only people making assess out of themselves are the ones backing and supporting a person who cannot bring any facts to the table to back his claim over the person who has repeatedly brought facts and links to support his claim.
When conservatives put facts and truths behind popularity contests they're no better than the leftists...that's exactly what they do.
-
Um, your random all-caps, excessive use of question marks and exclamation points, and incessant need to call others and their ideas and contributions "idiot" or "idiotic" = you're butt-hurt.
Stop being a douche just because someone disagreed with you.
Poor reading skillls, I see. There was nothing incessant about my one statement noting an unsourced unsearcable quote to be idiotic...that's high school english...
As for my sentence graphics, that's a matter of personal preference...still allowed I understand.
-
WRONG!! You made an empty claim that you cannot back up with facts and you putting idiot quote marks around some made up statement without sourcing it so I can go check your facts is NOT, under any circumstances anywhere, an example of quoting anything. Personal anecdotes or wild claims mean nothing in the arena of debate.
It's real simple...bring your facts to the table as I have done with my Gallup claims and with my N.Y. Times/CBS poll claims. How hard is that?? If I can do it why can't you?
And your threat about the mods does not impress me and the only one here embarrassing himself is you! It is YOU (not me) who cannot back up your own claim with any facts. In what reality is that NOT embarrassing?
You apparently didn't take kindly to my opening remark on page one where I stated that since Gallup has now come to the conclusion that conservatives outnumber liberals in this country by two to one (according to their own poll, and your link).....that it would seem logical that in future presidential approval polls (or any other for that matter), they apply that same methodology to the sample.........they typically don't......
Now for the LINKS issue.........Gallup does not publish the internals on their daily presidential tracking poll (to which I directly referred), so no link can be provided, but in past presidential issue polls their sample (when published) is usually around 35% democrat, 24% Republican, and the balance either "independent", or nonspecific regarding ideological specification.
My statement was simply that since a "respected" pollster like Gallup has NOW arrived at a definite conclusion as to the ideological makeup of the country, then it should follow that the sample in all subsequent polls should reflect that "exact" ideological makeup......or they are biased........correct?
doc
-
The only people making assess out of themselves are the ones backing and supporting a person who cannot bring any facts to the table to back his claim over the person who has repeatedly brought facts and links to support his claim.
When conservatives put facts and truths behind popularity contests they're no better than the leftists...that's exactly what they do.
Okay, Keyboard Commando, now that you've succeeded in painting yourself as an overzealous, butt-hurt troll wannabe, it's real simple.
Just push the keyboard away. Slowly. It hurts, I know, but you can do it.
Then pick up your mouse or other pointing device and click on that very useful tool called "Search." It really isn't that difficult. Enter in a few key words and chances are you'll find exactly what you're looking for.
Smart people read and study before they run their yap. You are starting to look like an idiot, but you can still recover if you're smart.
-
Yeah, continued douchiness will really help your cause here.
Don't start championing your English and reading skills and then purport to be able to write however you damn well please, either.
What I'm essentially driving at is: you could make friends here and still have lively debate, or you could be a snide, condescending asshat because you were met with opposition. You choose.
-
The only people making assess out of themselves are the ones backing and supporting a person who cannot bring any facts to the table to back his claim over the person who has repeatedly brought facts and links to support his claim.
When conservatives put facts and truths behind popularity contests they're no better than the leftists...that's exactly what they do.
And yet you've to bring a single "fact" or source to support your thesis. Were I grading your term paper, you would have already failed.
-
You apparently didn't take kindly to my opening remark on page one where I stated that since Gallup has now come to the conclusion that conservatives outnumber liberals
You never made such a statement! Further, it was your one-line remark that YOU have seen gallup polls that skewed data for democrats that started all this. I still challenge you to produce a single source, fact or link that backs up your claim.
Now for the LINKS issue.........Gallup does not publish the internals on their daily presidential tracking poll (to which I directly referred), so no link can be provided
Now, you're lying outright! Go to their site right now! Their current Oct 27, 2009 tracking poll has their metholodolgy, samples and interviews ALL POSTED AT THE BOTTOM!! THEY EVEN HAVE A BLUE HIGHLIGHTED LINK THAT SAYS "SEE METHODOLOGY." Want the link???????????
-
And yet you've to bring a single "fact" or source to support your thesis. Were I grading your term paper, you would have already failed.
I've brought three links and provided two sources! Where are your facts? Do tell me which of my facts you want to dispute??? Let's see your stuff?
-
Don't start championing your English and reading skills and then purport to be able to write however you damn well please, either.
Yes I will write as I damn well please and use syntax and sentence graphics as I damn well please. Let's hope all conservatives at a conservative web site can do that...the least we can expect, right?
What I'm essentially driving at is: you could make friends here and still have lively debate, or you could be a snide, condescending asshat because you were met with opposition. You choose.
Asking a poster to produce facts/links to support his/her statements is NOT being snide or condescending. It is what anyone would expect at a conservative web site. That all of you now have chosen to align yourselves with "popularity" over facts shows the same herd mentality we conservatives face at leftie web sites. Might want to check yourselves! I am here to discuss facts & history with adults.
-
I've brought three links and provided two sources! Where are your facts? Do tell me which of my facts you want to dispute??? Let's see your stuff?
Oh, let's see, how about some of the assorted writings of Bernard Goldberg, Christopher Hitchens, and Dick Morris, then get back to me.
And then there's THIS, (http://newsbusters.org/node/8523) AND THIS (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/20/wapoabc-poll-uses-skewed-sample-to-show-public-option-support/) AND THIS. (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_10/020518.php)
And those are just from the FIRST page of my Google search.
-
Yes I will write as I damn well please and use syntax and sentence graphics as I damn well please. Let's hope all conservatives at a conservative web site can do that...the least we can expect, right?
Asking a poster to produce facts/links to support his/her statements is NOT being snide or condescending. It is what anyone would expect at a conservative web site. That all of you now have chosen to align yourselves with "popularity" over facts shows the same herd mentality we conservatives face at leftie web sites. Might want to check yourselves! I am here to discuss facts & history with adults.
I sense you are not long for this community. Begone, seagull.
-
I've brought three links and provided two sources! Where are your facts? Do tell me which of my facts you want to dispute??? Let's see your stuff?
After reading all of your replies, I once again ask...
Why so butt-hurt? Friggen relax. Your attempts at intellectual muscle flexing is doing nothing more than making you look like a condescending, igorant a-hole.
BTW - since you're so big on "this is what the Libs do!" mantra, keep in mind that they are also often the first to say "I know you are but what am I?" and "I don't care what you say, I know I'm right and you're an idiot for disagreeing - I don't care about your personal experience..." Kind of like your posts.
-
Now, you're lying outright! Go to their site right now! Their current Oct 27, 2009 tracking poll has their metholodolgy, samples and interviews ALL POSTED AT THE BOTTOM!! THEY EVEN HAVE A BLUE HIGHLIGHTED LINK THAT SAYS "SEE METHODOLOGY." Want the link???????????
Friend, below listed is what Gallup provides as their data for the Presidential Approval poll........this is not an "Internal", nor does it provide enough data on the sample to determine whether or not a bias exists.......stop talking out of your ass........show me an ideoloogical breakdown of their sample.......
doc
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123806/Obama-Quarterly-Approval-Average-Slips-Nine-Points.aspx
Survey Methods
Results are based on aggregated telephone interviews with 45,987 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted July 20 through Oct. 19, 2009, as part of Gallup Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones and cellular phones.
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
-
Okay, Keyboard Commando, now that you've succeeded in painting yourself as an overzealous, butt-hurt troll wannabe, it's real simple.
None of my posts are troll posts! Problem is your good buddy in this one thread can't back up his mouth with facts. That is not an example of me being a troll.
Smart people read and study before they run their yap. You are starting to look like an idiot, but you can still recover if you're smart.
Oh...do show me where I am wrong? My thread is about Gallup finding that conservatives outnumber libs by two to one. The poll was just released and covered by FOX last night. I also cited Gallup's June/July poll showing 47 out of 50 states to be conservative. Do tell me what research I need to do?
-
Yes I will write as I damn well please and use syntax and sentence graphics as I damn well please. Let's hope all conservatives at a conservative web site can do that...the least we can expect, right?
Of course, just as I'm free to point out how stupid it makes you look. OMG YOU'RE NOT LISTENING TO ME WTF GRR!!!!???? Are you this guy?
(http://www.voiceofarizona.com/users/308/rage.jpg)
Asking a poster to produce facts/links to support his/her statements is NOT being snide or condescending.
Of course not, but this is:
"Poor reading skillls, I see."
"that's high school english..."
"...not hard to find...curious you couldn't produce a single example to back up your claim, huh?"
"...you cannot back up with facts and you putting idiot quote marks around some made up statement..."
Basically, you claim to come here looking for a discussion about conservatism and healthy debate, no? Then don't start off by calling people you don't know liars and acting like an enraged, condescending asshole.
Clearly we've established your freedom to do as you please, just don't act all surprised and butt-hurt when you're told to go get bent.
EDIT: typo.
-
deportliberals
Newbie
Posts: 29
Please try and remember your place, won't you? Sort of a two-minute rule for teh Interwebz.
-
You never made such a statement!
Please re-read the second post on page one of this thread to refresh your memory
doc
-
Friend, below listed is what Gallup provides as their data for the Presidential Approval poll........this is not an "Internal", nor does it provide enough data on the sample to determine whether or not a bias exists.......stop talking out of your ass........show me an ideoloogical breakdown of their sample.......
It is a JOB APPROVAL RATING poll! Essentially two questions are asked in daily tracking polls on "job approval"...do you approve or not? Rasmussen differs from the rest in that they ask multiple questions for their job approval polls. The political demographics usually are not a factor in daily tracking polls. They are in issue polls.
In this poll, Gallup shows a nine point drop in Obama's approval rating and notes that this nine point drop in the largest in their polling history for any president in his 2nd/3rd quarter...some skewing of data in favor of the democrats, huh??? Gallup openly states that Obama is their biggest loser in all their polling history for a 3rd quarter president...gee...that's really favoring the democrats, huh???
-
Oh, let's see, how about some of the assorted writings of Bernard Goldberg, Christopher Hitchens, and Dick Morris, then get back to me.
Do show us the passages that covers data skewing by Gallup...waiting?
And then there's THIS, (http://newsbusters.org/node/8523) AND THIS (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/20/wapoabc-poll-uses-skewed-sample-to-show-public-option-support/) AND THIS. (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_10/020518.php)
What does your first link on Reuters have to do with Gallup??? Your second link I already covered above...you're late to the game. Your third link has nothing to do with data skewing or Gallup skewing anything. You do have a high school diploma, right?
-
Oh...do show me where I am wrong? My thread is about Gallup finding that conservatives outnumber libs by two to one. The poll was just released and covered by FOX last night. I also cited Gallup's June/July poll showing 47 out of 50 states to be conservative. Do tell me what research I need to do?
So far no one has refuted that point at any time during this conversation........but that doesn't seem to be what you're pissed about..........
Inquiring minds would like to know actually WHAT you are pissed about?? Could it be that your little ego is so fragile that anyone that does not immediately accept the infallibility of your wondrous wisdom, is beneath your contempt.........
Could it be that we must all cower in awe of your presence as the savior of modern conservatism?
Could it be that the mere presence of such a massive intellect should immediately result in no one daring to discuss the issue that you bring forward to avoid being the subject of your righteous wrath.......
Strange.......the only other person that I've been exposed to recently that shares your "attitude" is the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, WDC........
doc
-
After reading all of your replies, I once again ask...
Why so butt-hurt? Friggen relax. Your attempts at intellectual muscle flexing is doing nothing more than making you look like a condescending, igorant a-hole.
This must be a leftist site. The only places I see such immature outrage & resentment over the posting facts and/or attempts to insist that facts be part and parcel of the discussion are on lib-fascist web sites.
Any since you think I'm an ignorant ahole why don't you and me have a little debate on any point of history or current events? We'll see who is really ignorant!
-
Ah yes, I see who you are now.
You're what's referred to on FR as a "100 percenter".
We have another term for you and your ilk: TROLL. That and his Native American cousin, "He who shall soon be banned."
I'd ease up if I were you, if you want to make it here very long.
-
Of course not, but this is:
"Poor reading skillls, I see."
"that's high school english..."
"...not hard to find...curious you couldn't produce a single example to back up your claim, huh?"
"...you cannot back up with facts and you putting idiot quote marks around some made up statement..."
You left out where your buddies called me a duchebag, ahole, stupid, etc. Why did you do that, hypocrite??? Tell me why you left all that out?
Basically, you claim to come here looking for a discussion about conservatism and healthy debate, no?
No...I came to what I thought was a conservative web site (not to talk about conservatism since I assumed everyone here already knows what that is) but to discuss/debate american history, current events, founding principles, constitution, etc.
Then don't start off by calling people you don't know liars and acting like an enraged, condescending *******.
I always call liars liars when I can show it. I like the word...should be used more often in politics like Joe Wilson did and Websters has it under "L."
-
Let's just be clear about the progression here...
Now for the LINKS issue.........Gallup does not publish the internals on their daily presidential tracking poll (to which I directly referred), so no link can be provided, but in past presidential issue polls their sample (when published) is usually around 35% democrat, 24% Republican, and the balance either "independent", or nonspecific regarding ideological specification.
doc
To which you responded with:
Now, you're lying outright! Go to their site right now! Their current Oct 27, 2009 tracking poll has their metholodolgy, samples and interviews ALL POSTED AT THE BOTTOM!! THEY EVEN HAVE A BLUE HIGHLIGHTED LINK THAT SAYS "SEE METHODOLOGY." Want the link???????????
TVDOC answered your accusation that he was a liar with:
Friend, below listed is what Gallup provides as their data for the Presidential Approval poll........this is not an "Internal", nor does it provide enough data on the sample to determine whether or not a bias exists.......stop talking out of your ass........show me an ideoloogical breakdown of their sample.......
doc
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123806/Obama-Quarterly-Approval-Average-Slips-Nine-Points.aspx
Survey Methods
Results are based on aggregated telephone interviews with 45,987 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted July 20 through Oct. 19, 2009, as part of Gallup Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones and cellular phones.
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
And you, faced with the opportunity to show exactly where Gallup released their sampling methodology, chose instead to say:
It is a JOB APPROVAL RATING poll! Essentially two questions are asked in daily tracking polls on "job approval"...do you approve or not? Rasmussen differs from the rest in that they ask multiple questions for their job approval polls. The political demographics usually are not a factor in daily tracking polls. They are in issue polls.
In this poll, Gallup shows a nine point drop in Obama's approval rating and notes that this nine point drop in the largest in their polling history for any president in his 2nd/3rd quarter...some skewing of data in favor of the democrats, huh??? Gallup openly states that Obama is their biggest loser in all their polling history for a 3rd quarter president...gee...that's really favoring the democrats, huh???
Do you see how that works? We're talking sampling accuracy and methodology, and you instead choose to abandon your "hard facts" and imply that because the poll results don't favor Democrats, methodology and sampling no longer matters. You also never did produce that link showing Gallup's methodology for their Daily Presidential Tracking poll.
To summarize, go pound sand.
-
Please re-read the second post on page one of this thread to refresh your memory
doc
Quoting your post:
"Wonder if Gallup will use these new figures as a polling basis for their next poll on presidential popularity, instead of grossly oversampling democrats like they usually do?
Never happen..........
doc"
Yep..that's you accusing Gallup of...quoting..."oversampling democrats like they usually do." Got it! Any questions about what you said??? So...again...do show us where Gallup oversamples in favor of democrats??? Where???
-
You left out where your buddies called me a duchebag, ahole, stupid, etc. Why did you do that, hypocrite??? Tell me why you left all that out?
Hell, I did it myself, because you are acting like all of those things. TVDOC related a personal anecdote, and you called him a liar right out of the gate. Do you see the difference or do I need to use smaller words?
No...I came to what I thought was a conservative web site (not to talk about conservatism since I assumed everyone here already knows what that is) but to discuss/debate american history, current events, founding principles, constitution, etc.
Fair enough. You get a big +1 for being able to mince words. Might I suggest that you don't seem to have the temperament for a discussion of anything beyond favorite commercials? I would love to be corrected on this point, but that would require you toning it down about 78 levels.
I always call liars liars when I can show it. I like the word...should be used more often in politics like Joe Wilson did and Websters has it under "L."
As I said before, you haven't shown it. You've just flung accusations at people you don't know when they were engaging you in good faith. If you're truly here to "discuss/debate american history, current events, founding principles, constitution, etc." then you're going about it in a piss-poor manner.
-
None of my posts are troll posts! Problem is your good buddy in this one thread can't back up his mouth with facts. That is not an example of me being a troll.
Oh...do show me where I am wrong? My thread is about Gallup finding that conservatives outnumber libs by two to one. The poll was just released and covered by FOX last night. I also cited Gallup's June/July poll showing 47 out of 50 states to be conservative. Do tell me what research I need to do?
You're exhibiting classic troll behavior when you're given guidance and direction in which to find the information you're demanding, and yet you bray and trumpet because you're not being spoon-fed links. This entire thread is full of your drivel. Do your own research, and the best place to start - as it was suggested to you - is right here on CC.
Instead of sitting back and listening to what you're being told, you continue to run your yap. That's troll-like after awhile. I'd suggest you've already crossed that line.
Trolls aren't limited to moonbat liberals. I'd classify you as a raving lunatic conservative wannabe. You've found a pet subject and you're beating it into the ground, despite the argument and rationale that you're being presented.
Common sense should tell you to follow the money. You always follow the money. If Gallup is being paid by XYZ corporation to conduct a poll, don't you think it's in Gallup's interest to conduct said poll with an eye toward the guy who's writing the check?
If you can't see that, you need to go out in the world and see things with your own eyes for awhile. Then come back and tell TVDOC he's wrong.
:whatever:
-
So far no one has refuted that point at any time during this conversation........but that doesn't seem to be what you're pissed about..........
That was my response to two unsolicited insults by one of the deadheads posting here...you know...couldn't address or discuss the issues so he just launched into personal insults against me.
Inquiring minds would like to know actually WHAT you are pissed about??
I'm not pissed about anything and if you read all my other posts you will clearly see that. YOU started this crap in this one thread by making a totally unsupported accusation against Gallup. I am not pro or con for Gallup. I prefer Rasmussen based on their methodology and accuracy rating.
Could it be that your little ego is so fragile that anyone that does not immediately accept the infallibility of your wondrous wisdom, is beneath your contempt.........
Nah...my ego is just fine. It is your ego and your perceived position at this site that is threatened...by me apparently. Evidently you're not used to being challenged or questioned on your statements. I only do facts and am only interested in facts. I don't care about personalities like you do or some of the others do. I have no problem asking you or any other conservative to produce facts...the mature ones have no problem producing them either.
-
That was my response to two unsolicited insults by one of the deadheads posting here...you know...couldn't address or discuss the issues so he just launched into personal insults against me.
I think that if you review the thread, you will find that the insults began after you blatantly called me a liar.....as any good trial judge would say, "counselor, you opened the door......" As an aside, nowhere in this thread did I ever call you a derogatory name, until my last post
I'm not pissed about anything and if you read all my other posts you will clearly see that. YOU started this crap in this one thread by making a totally unsupported accusation against Gallup. I am not pro or con for Gallup. I prefer Rasmussen based on their methodology and accuracy rating.
You obviously have some kind of an issue with Gallup......most of us here are skeptical of ALL polls, therefore the detail that we will resort to to determine how the pollster arrived at the results....Oh, and I have reviewed all of your posts, and am still asking myself why a newbie would come to an established board, and start a bunch of threads without first determining the "tone" of the membership, and the style of the discussion.
Nah...my ego is just fine. It is your ego and your perceived position at this site that is threatened...by me apparently. Evidently you're not used to being challenged or questioned on your statements. I only do facts and am only interested in facts. I don't care about personalities like you do or some of the others do. I have no problem asking you or any other conservative to produce facts...the mature ones have no problem producing them either.
I'm challenged quite frequently.....that is how I learn, and BTW this is the internet.....I have no personality, or ego, at least that you can discern......and so far as this site is concerned there are many members here that have a hell of a lot higher post count than I do.......I generally tend to listen to them, rather than shooting my mouth off, and ultimately shooting myself in the foot....
See comments above........
doc
-
Did a new chew toy show up?
-
Did a new chew toy show up?
Yeah, another 100 percenter. Next thing you know he'll be telling us how "TEH JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSS!" have screwed up the world.
-
Hmmm...
Anyone seen Mustang lately?
LOL
-
Hmmm...
Anyone seen Mustang lately?
LOL
Repost! :tongue:
I'll say this... this deportliberals guy is entertaining, if not incredibly myopic.
-
Enter the screen name into an internet search engine such as Google.
-
Enter the screen name into an internet search engine such as Google.
Whoopsie!
http://liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php?/user/11958-deportliberals/
http://www.bearpit.net/lofiversion/index.php/t8843.html
Also, a few Stormfront links that are NSFW and I'm not about to click on.
Throw in our little Ohio State boards, an expired deportliberals.com domain from 2008, you get the idea.
-
Enter the screen name into an internet search engine such as Google.
Interesting discussion, if rather shrill and :hyper:
Lib Forum (http://liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php?/topic/26192-the-deficit-the-deficit-the-deficit/)
-
Interesting discussion, if rather shrill and :hyper:
Lib Forum (http://liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php?/topic/26192-the-deficit-the-deficit-the-deficit/)
Don't have the "polite conversation" thing quite down yet do they?
doc
-
Hmmmm...seems our little troll has had his fill and has run along to pollute some other board.
-
Hmmmm...seems our little troll has had his fill and has run along to pollute some other board.
Nah....he's still around.....started a thread about events leading up to the "War of Northern Aggression", and is aggressively attempting to goad Mr. Snugs into arguing with him.......again, as though we haven't had a number of discussions on this issue in the past year.......he has trouble with the "search" function.....and with 37 or so posts, still hasn't figured out how to maintain a reasonable profile......
doc