Americans Are With The Republicans on Debt...

Using the author’s own numbers, some 89% of Americans are clearly against raising taxes alone to solve the current budget crisis. Yet, that is - and has been - Obama and Pelosi’s very position. Would be nice if you had a link to back that statement up. Not some bullshit blog that presents one side of the issue with no links proving anything.




http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2747881/posts Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Any insight why a link like the above would even be posted?

How do we even know that the polls are even close to being accurate. Has anyone here ever been contacted by a pollster for a national poll? Polls are statistical analysis, they can be skewed just by the question being asked.

If I wanted to get a poll that was favorable to the inner city schools, who would ever be the wiser if they didn't poll a city that has a great inner city school system over a poorly ran school system? I can't deny I've looked at polls or even used them to attempt getting a point across. however, it's fairly obvious there are polls on both sides of the political spectrum that are favorable and/or unfavorable. We will never be able to convence someone of "public opinion" when polls brought to light are opposite the original poll being pushed. The left will never believe a poll coming from a source on the right and vice-versa.

The old adage of three types of lies has statistics as the third type of lie. Polls are a tool used when a group would like to sway public opinion. how many times has someone looked at a poll and said, "well, if the rest of the country says ok, it must be a good thing" instead of researching the polled question. Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Reputable polls publish/make available the wording of the questions and the methods used for contact while conducting a poll.

How the hell do you figure Bush didn't start two wars?

How the hell do you figure Bush didn't start two wars? Originally Posted by TexTushHog

A good lawyer should be able to figure out his opponents arguments.....the answer to this question is simple but you aren't smart enough to figure it out.....HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! Possibly the only people dumber than you are the people who hire you to represent them! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
:woot_ju mp::woot _jump::w oot_jump:

Would be nice if you had a link to back that statement up. Not some bullshit blog that presents one side of the issue with no links proving anything. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Evidently you do not have any math skills. Look at the poll and add the numbers for yourself.

It’s a disingenuous article... Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Sounds like projection. The disingenuous article is the one you linked to on freerepublic.

The author clearly distorts the results for his own political purpose.... Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Actually, the 'political distortion is in the article you linked to

If the "Anointed One"... Originally Posted by I B Hankering

When you say "anointed", do you mean "elected by a majority of Americans"? Because I can understand then, how you'd want to differentiate him from, say, George W. Bush.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2747881/posts Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The link you posted on freerepublic just reprints an article from cnsnews.com which is a fake news organization operated by the Media Research Center, a right-wing front group started by regular Faux News contributor Brent Bozell. Go to http://www.cnsnews.com, read the headlines, and tell me that you don't see, not just conservative bias, but straight-up propaganda.

As far as Nate Silver's concerned, he's about the best in the business when it comes to analyzing polling data.

Don't pay attention to anything going on now. That man behind the curtain who holds our future doesn't matter, instead we will distract the gullible with talk of past things.

What does it matter right now about anything that transpired in the past? The issue is what is happening today. While blinded zealots distract with what are out of context questions about wars and tax cuts (all of which had a basis at the time), an argument not too differently than exclaiming, " oh yeah?, well your momma wears combat boots!", obama's intransigency and attempt to re-make America has us in peril.

It's not about yesterday, it's not about obama's world view and past purposeful machinations, it is about right now. And right now, he continues in his errors. the word continue is the operable word.

But just as an aside, bush's deficits, as bad as they were (and they were bad) pale in comparison to the scarlet shock to the conciousness of caring Americans of obama's deficits. Bush's deficits averaged maybe 500 billion a year, while obama's (first thing Obama did was, besides his union worker payback wasted stimulus, was jump all spending 20% just cuz) average over 1.5 trllion. And the galling thing is it's without shame, remorse or mid-course correction.

Don't pay attention to anything going on now. That man behind the curtain who holds our future doesn't matter, instead we will distract the gullible with talk of past things.

What does it matter right now about anything that transpired in the past? The issue is what is happening today. While blinded zealots distract with what are out of context questions about wars and tax cuts (all of which had a basis at the time), an argument not too differently than exclaiming, " oh yeah?, well your momma wears combat boots!", obama's intransigency and attempt to re-make America has us in peril.

It's not about yesterday, it's not about obama's world view and past purposeful machinations, it is about right now. And right now, he continues in his errors. the word continue is the operable word.

But just as an aside, bush's deficits, as bad as they were (and they were bad) pale in comparison to the scarlet shock to the conciousness of caring Americans of obama's deficits. Bush's deficits averaged maybe 500 billion a year, while obama's (first thing Obama did was, besides his union worker payback wasted stimulus, was jump all spending 20% just cuz) average over 1.5 trllion. And the galling thing is it's without shame, remorse or mid-course correction. Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

The only reason the past matters at this point is to try to point out that continuing down a path of destruction is fruitless. Both parties are guilty of cronyism. Both parties have seen their share of corruption. Insanity is continuing to vote for the politicans who have only been caught doing "minor" things because we like SOMEthing about them. I'd say lets start voting for those that cannot raise a lot of campaign cash, that way we know they aren't in someone's pocket and they definatley aren't in the "in crowd."

I'm a conservative and libertarian and I can't stand people like McCain, Romney, Huckabee, Huntsman, et.al. and I would never vote for them. Politicians are destroying the country, not the letter they represent.

We need to know who not to support.

Reputable polls publish/make available the wording of the questions and the methods used for contact while conducting a poll. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Have you ever been contacted by a national poll? It wouldn't be hard to make up some crazy questions and answers to publish. People have a tendency to believe what they here from their "reputable" news sources even if it's made up, see Dan Rather.

I know it's sounds like conspiracy theory BS, but it's out there on the net for you to research, but have you ever heard of VNR's, Video News Releases? They can be a commercial designed as a news segment that are played in a market. The newscasters are given a script to make it appear like it's a local news story. It, like polls, are designed to get you to purchase/agree with a product or idea.

It's not like news sources are supposed to be biased or anything, right? Apply that to the polling sources and you begin to wonder what market they actually used to attain the results of their polls. Who's running the show, the businesses creating reaction or the "un-"biased researcher.

Where do the pollsters get their funding? I've heard the left complain that the Koch brothers fund all of the pro-right polls and vice versa with funding from Soros. If I can't believe the polls or news sources that Soros funded, I have to be just as sceptical of the opposing news sources funded by right leaning funders. If someone on the right can be sceptical of news sources on the right, how long will it be before the left can question the authenicity of the sources on the left?

I disagree with you, but appreciate the direct answer. I don't think Obama needs a constitutional fight at this point. He can simply not borrow more money (afterall without an offical debt ceiling agreement lenders won't lend at current rates) continue to service the debt out of the revenue, and begin cutting non-essential services. It puts Obama in a similar position as you opine, but without the constitutional fight.


But the bigger point we both agree on, I think, is that the Democrats mantra of "we will default (on Aug. 2nd) if we don't raise the debt ceiling" is bogus !! Originally Posted by Whirlaway

1. Obama wants a deal which will enable him to be unshackled from the Constitution. He really wants the McConnell plan...but I think the 100 Tea Partiers in the House called him out on it. Once free of Constitutional controls, he can therefore start using Executive Orders to govern and make Congressional law irrelevant. He can cite THIS example to seize other powers.

2. There is sufficient revenue coming in to service the national debt. More than sufficient. There is also sufficient revenue to pay full Social Security/Medicare, military active duty, veteran's disability, as well as government civil service employees. There will be a significant amount left over, much of what is spent on hardware, travel, given away as grants, given out as "income support", subsidies, maintenance, fuel, dining out, business trips, and go through all of these departments. (I understand that military and civil service retirement pensions are actually paid from a trust fund, which came up the last time we were "shut down".) There will be no DEFAULT unless Obama orders little Timmy to stop payments. But the short fall will occur in all of these miscellaneous programs....but Obama wants to cut Grandma off, but keep sending money to projects in Kenya?

3. Social Security and other payments will only cease if someone orders them halted. The beauty of computers....they automate everything. So someone had to make that choice.

4. It's clear the threat of stopping Social Security and Medicare payments are designed to scare that segment of the population to action to encourage Republicans to go along with this government who is eating 25% of the economy (and increasing) and impose a massive tax increase...because he can use that as COVER and rally the hard Left back to his side. The idea is to make 25% or higher government PERMANENT. I don't believe it's catching on....and I believe Obama will blink first next week. This will effectively end the Obama Regime and his program of bloated government.

A good lawyer should be able to figure out his opponents arguments.....the answer to this question is simple but you aren't smart enough to figure it out.....HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! Possibly the only people dumber than you are the people who hire you to represent them! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
:woot_ju mp::woot _jump::w oot_jump: Originally Posted by Marshall

Think what you want. But I can count to two.

I will go with the vaulted CBS/NY Times data since it is the most recent. BTW, the Washington Post/ABC News poll is pretty damning on Obama's handling of the economy. And it also shows that declining support for raising taxes to pay for the defecit and increasing support for only cutting taxes. A trend that leads up to the CBS/NYTs polling data.

My point of the post is that the Repubicans probably believe they are on the right side of the issue with regard to electorate support. That remains to be seen. So the polling data aside, what will Obama do if the Republicans hold firm and the August 2nd date approaches?

Will Obama cave in? or,

Will Obama default on our debt? Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Your CBS poll is from Apr. 21, 2011

Evidently you do not have any math skills. Look at the poll and add the numbers for yourself. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

My math skills are fine. There is a link to the numbers.

You claim the President only wants taxes increased without cutting spending. Post a link that shows that position.

"Using the author’s own numbers, some 89% of Americans are clearly against raising taxes alone to solve the current budget crisis. Yet, that is - and has been - Obama and Pelosi’s very position."

Whirl i think this is one the Republicans wont win. Most of them say they wont vote for an increase in the house period. Next you got senators who say they will filibuster it in the senate. No one knows what will happen on aug 2 or 3 for that matter but you better pray for the best because if the worst happens your party just lost the 2012 elections. If the stock market goes down and people start to see it in their 401k, interest rates increase thur the roof the finger pointing will start really fast and everyone will start pointing toward the Tea party people. I know some of you showed polls to back up your point of view on your position but they are but a snap shot in time. Those same people who say don't raise it will be the same people who later call you crazy for not raising it.

If you want to win in 2012 here is some advice.

Start early voting now because the same fools with you today might not be with you then.

Your CBS poll is from Apr. 21, 2011 Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Whirlway you tried to fool us with any old poll! Wow! Now thats cheap.