Gallup Continues To Show Lib-Leftist A Minority In This Country

[Chump]

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.

[deportliberals]

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.

[deportliberals]

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.

[Doc]

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

[Eupher]

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.

[Chump]

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.

[NHSparky]

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.

[deportliberals]

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???????????

[deportliberals]

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?

[deportliberals]

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.

[NHSparky]

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, AND THIS AND THIS.

And those are just from the FIRST page of my Google search.

[NHSparky]

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.

[bkg]

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.

[Chris_]

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.

[deportliberals]

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?

[Chump]

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?

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.

[NHSparky]

deportliberals
Newbie

Posts: 29

Please try and remember your place, won't you?  Sort of a two-minute rule for teh Interwebz.

[Chris_]

You never made such a statement! 

Please re-read the second post on page one of this thread to refresh your memory

doc

[deportliberals]

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???

[deportliberals]

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, AND THIS AND THIS.

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?

[Doc]

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

[deportliberals]

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!

[NHSparky]

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.

[deportliberals]

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."

[Chump]

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.