The ..2012.... Political thread
-
SusyLuvsPaul:
There's no way you can know that she only gets news from The Daily Kos, you've been caught in another fallacy, another illogical statement or so it appears.
And oh yeah - you haven't addressed the fact that the article we're discussing was factually inaccurate
-
'Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone'
-
You can't even make this stuff up:
-
rich n:
You can't even make this stuff up:
A more truthful OWS report than most of the media 60 Minutes should have been the first to break this story
-
This talks for itself.
-
rich n:
SusyLuvsPaul:
There's no way you can know that she only gets news from The Daily Kos, you've been caught in another fallacy, another illogical statement or so it appears.
And oh yeah - you haven't addressed the fact that the article we're discussing was factually inaccurate
Okay rich, verify what you just stated re the article I linked to. I will not let you off on this...you pull your statements out of thin air.
-
The article YOU posted (which called into question the intellence level of those who watch FOX news) stated that it was the Egyptian people who overthrew the gov't...which is absolutely FALSE...Although I gave a brief synopsis of what actually happend a page or two ago, I will NOT do your homework for you if you're truly that ignorant
-
Does Obama really want to win : ... brazen attacks on American voters, who, he has said, have ?fallen behind,? lost their ?ambition and imagination,? gotten ?lazy? and ?a bit soft? - this is a guy seeking the support of America?! ... Chris Matthews, ... the MSNBC cheerleader said, ? ? I think everybody feels an absence of communication from the time he?s been elected. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/27/curl-does-obama-really-want-to-win/
-
Andy_Shofar:
Does Obama really want to win : ... brazen attacks on American voters, who, he has said, have ?fallen behind,? lost their ?ambition and imagination,? gotten ?lazy? and ?a bit soft? - this is a guy seeking the support of America?! ... Chris Matthews, ... the MSNBC cheerleader said, ? ? I think everybody feels an absence of communication from the time he?s been elected. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/27/curl-does-obama-really-want-to-win/
I really don't have the energy to get into another screaming match, but you've got a biased, misleading column there. To be fair, it's not your fault for taking it at face value as it does use actual quotes from President Obama. But the "lazy" and a "bit soft" comments weren't made in public forums on the de facto campaign 2012 trail, but rather to an assembled group of executives from various American industries and were meant to sum up and take ownership of how America has been passed in some respects by foreign producers and manufacturers and how our industries can refocus and put the U.S. back at the forefront. If I'm not mistaken, I believe Mitt Romney referenced these comments and later recanted when given the proper context (I could be wrong on his apology, but it was pointed out that the president's comments weren't so inflammatory when given context). It's kind of like Romney's latest controversy, his ad in which he includes a quote from President Obama that says "If we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose." What the ad fails to mention is that it's from 2008, and then-Senator Obama's full quote is actually this: "Senator McCain's campaign actually said, and I quote, 'If we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose." This is a blatant lie meant to misdirect voters. I will freely admit that these types of tactics aren't exclusive to Republicans, but in both the case provided in your link and in this Romney ad the President has had quotes taken out of context in order to gibe with a conservative slant. I don't want to sound like I'm on some sort of moral high-horse, as I love a good political scrum as much as anyone, but why even post the link here unless you just want to get people riled up? If that's your intent, by all means go ahead; heated debate is fun. But really, who cares of a conservative columnist thinks Obama should throw in the towel and not run? The only thing that makes the article noteworthy is the out-of-context quote, and in my opinion, that demeans your point. I'm sure my words will come across as smug, but I'm really trying a kinder, gentler approach here.
-
Looks like it's hard to reason with those hard heads (sorry about the name calling) who insist on working against their own best interests by siding with "the man" the establishment, the banks, big business, the corporations, the "ruling class" etc. and not with the people, with "the little guy" struggling to get by.
-
rich n:
The article YOU posted (which called into question the intellence level of those who watch FOX news) stated that it was the Egyptian people who overthrew the gov't...which is absolutely FALSE...Although I gave a brief synopsis of what actually happend a page or two ago, I will NOT do your homework for you if you're truly that ignorant
I couldn't help myself, I have to jump in here. This is reminiscent of Jon Stewart's comments that FOX News viewers were the most consistently misinformed media consumers, a quote that the non-partisan PolitiFact deemed as a false statement. FOX trumpeted this decision as a victory over liberally biased media outlets the world over, but what they failed to mention is that while claiming that FOX viewers are the most consistently misinformed is false, PolitiFact noted that in many surveys and polls, FOX News viewers are the most misinformed, in others they are second- or third-most and in general they rank below the national average in being informed on the news. To be fair, many shows on the other side of the political aisle, including some found on NPR and especially MSNBC, have viewers that show poor retention of basic, factual political knowledge, but in most surveys FOX viewers are well below the national average. Just take a look at the recent controversy over the president's Thanksgiving address, where at least three FOX shows devoted substantial time to discussion the omission of God from the president's remarks. What they failed to acknowledge is that Obama did reference God in his written address, but not in the abridged version that he recorded as a YouTube video. Also, it was ignored on all but one FOX show that even President George W. Bush gave one such address that omitted any inclusion of God. Also, I'll have to disagree on your assertion that Egyptians didn't overthrow their government. If you want to quibble that merely saying 'Egyptian' is too broad a term, fair enough, but you seem to argue that civilians sat idly by while their government was overthrown when in fact they (especially the youth) provided a staggering amount of support for the revolution. Additionally, while the article may have originated from a blog that leans left of center, the quote in question was taken (in context) from an independent, nonpartisan article that discussed results from extensive survey research which they (Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind research group) conducted. I'm no expert, but having taken a class specifically devoted to public polling (in which we spent weeks designing questions to erase any hint of bias) I'm fairly confident given the group's respected standing (they've released several prescient surveys in recent memory, including one that predicted President Obama's meteoric rise to his party's nomination in 2008 by offering extensive research to show that an overwhelming number of Americans simply didn't believe the country was ready for a woman president) that they have a good handle on the topic (Egyptian government overthrow) for which they asked the question.
-
Bottom line after all that is that a FOX viewer was more in tune with the correct details of what happened in Egypt...To now broaden it to 'Egyptian government overthrow' after the article itself had specifically and inaccurately described the events is just an attempt to throw water on the fire. As far as Fairleigh Dickinson University, their reputation as something less than credible stands tall before them...and no, if you're freely willing to accept their garbage as gospel, I won't do your homework for you and tell you why (that's your job - you seem somewhat well educated and where I not only have one degree, but at 47 y/o shooting for another, I know you can find stuff without being spoon fed...LOL)...Just google their name with the word 'reputation' and see what you might find
-
Well - I'm currently running reports at work and thus, I have a moment to do your homework for you afterall - first, without even addressing the specific issue of the poll, the school's reputation sucks beyond belief (I though maybe they had straightened their act from years ago)...the only positive reviews were testimonials posted on their own site...LOL. Secondly, addressing the article in question, he's a fair counter point to that article which offers even further explaination of the Egyptian situation http://bigjournalism.com/epokroy/2011/11/24/fdu-poll-fox-news-makes-you-stupid-ignore-our-margin-of-error/ FDU continues to blow smoke
-
service_gamer:
Andy_Shofar:
Does Obama really want to win : ... brazen attacks on American voters, who, he has said, have ?fallen behind,? lost their ?ambition and imagination,? gotten ?lazy? and ?a bit soft? - this is a guy seeking the support of America?! ... Chris Matthews, ... the MSNBC cheerleader said, ? ? I think everybody feels an absence of communication from the time he?s been elected. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/27/curl-does-obama-really-want-to-win/
I really don't have the energy to get into another screaming match, but you've got a biased, misleading column there. To be fair, it's not your fault for taking it at face value as it does use actual quotes from President Obama. But the "lazy" and a "bit soft" comments weren't made in public forums on the de facto campaign 2012 trail, but rather to an assembled group of executives from various American industries and were meant to sum up and take ownership of how America has been passed in some respects by foreign producers and manufacturers and how our industries can refocus and put the U.S. back at the forefront. If I'm not mistaken, I believe Mitt Romney referenced these comments and later recanted when given the proper context (I could be wrong on his apology, but it was pointed out that the president's comments weren't so inflammatory when given context). It's kind of like Romney's latest controversy, his ad in which he includes a quote from President Obama that says "If we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose." What the ad fails to mention is that it's from 2008, and then-Senator Obama's full quote is actually this: "Senator McCain's campaign actually said, and I quote, 'If we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose." This is a blatant lie meant to misdirect voters. I will freely admit that these types of tactics aren't exclusive to Republicans, but in both the case provided in your link and in this Romney ad the President has had quotes taken out of context in order to gibe with a conservative slant. I don't want to sound like I'm on some sort of moral high-horse, as I love a good political scrum as much as anyone, but why even post the link here unless you just want to get people riled up? If that's your intent, by all means go ahead; heated debate is fun. But really, who cares of a conservative columnist thinks Obama should throw in the towel and not run? The only thing that makes the article noteworthy is the out-of-context quote, and in my opinion, that demeans your point. I'm sure my words will come across as smug, but I'm really trying a kinder, gentler approach here.
We are not going to agree - So I will instead let someone else from NJ share their thoughts ...
-
Christie rips Obama over deficit talks: 'What the hell are we paying you for?' By Justin Sink - 11/29/11 08:27 AM ET ... ?Why the president of the United States refuses to do this (get directly involved instead of making speaches) is astonishing to me. If he wanted to run for Senate again and just be one of a hundred, I?m sure he could have gotten reelected over and over again in Illinois,? Christie said. ?He?s the one in Washington, and he?s got to get something done here. And it?s not good enough just to say, ?Well, I?ll get it done after the election.' " http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/195823-christie-rips-obama-for-supercommittee-failure-what-the-hell-are-we-paying-you-for
-
Andy_Shofar:
Christie rips Obama over deficit talks: 'What the hell are we paying you for?' By Justin Sink - 11/29/11 08:27 AM ET ... ?Why the president of the United States refuses to do this (get directly involved instead of making speaches) is astonishing to me. If he wanted to run for Senate again and just be one of a hundred, I?m sure he could have gotten reelected over and over again in Illinois,? Christie said. ?He?s the one in Washington, and he?s got to get something done here. And it?s not good enough just to say, ?Well, I?ll get it done after the election.' " http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/195823-christie-rips-obama-for-supercommittee-failure-what-the-hell-are-we-paying-you-for
I have a few questions (let's say, for Governor Christie 1) Would the governor have been totally fine if the president pushed for his desired outcome, rather than encouraging compromise/"doing nothing"? 2) Did the governor forget that the president laid out his deficit reduction plans and threatened to veto anything that didn't fit his general vision? It's seems like the president's detractors want to have their cake and eat it too here. This my-way-or-the-highway stance taken by the administration early on was considered too polarizing and divisive; now, the president is an apathetic spin doctor, shirking his duties in preparation for the 2012 election? Which is it, exactly? 3) Was the governor not aware that several supercommittee members, both Republicans and Democrats alike, cautioned the White House that presidential involvement could only halt progress at this point in time?
-
service_gamer:
Andy_Shofar:
Christie rips Obama over deficit talks: 'What the hell are we paying you for?' By Justin Sink - 11/29/11 08:27 AM ET ... ?Why the president of the United States refuses to do this (get directly involved instead of making speaches) is astonishing to me. If he wanted to run for Senate again and just be one of a hundred, I?m sure he could have gotten reelected over and over again in Illinois,? Christie said. ?He?s the one in Washington, and he?s got to get something done here. And it?s not good enough just to say, ?Well, I?ll get it done after the election.' " http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/195823-christie-rips-obama-for-supercommittee-failure-what-the-hell-are-we-paying-you-for
I have a few questions (let's say, for Governor Christie 1) Would the governor have been totally fine if the president pushed for his desired outcome, rather than encouraging compromise/"doing nothing"? 2) Did the governor forget that the president laid out his deficit reduction plans and threatened to veto anything that didn't fit his general vision? It's seems like the president's detractors want to have their cake and eat it too here. This my-way-or-the-highway stance taken by the administration early on was considered too polarizing and divisive; now, the president is an apathetic spin doctor, shirking his duties in preparation for the 2012 election? Which is it, exactly? 3) Was the governor not aware that several supercommittee members, both Republicans and Democrats alike, cautioned the White House that presidential involvement could only halt progress at this point in time?
sometimes reading or hearing the same (type of) message from several different sources if helpful ... (read on)
-
Obama's Job Approval Drops Below Carter's November 29, 2011 President Obama's slow ride down Gallup's daily presidential job approval index has finally passed below Jimmy Carter, earning Obama the worst job approval rating of any president at this stage of his term in modern political history. http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/11/29/obamas-job-approval-drops-below-carters
-
rich n:
Well - I'm currently running reports at work and thus, I have a moment to do your homework for you afterall - first, without even addressing the specific issue of the poll, the school's reputation sucks beyond belief (I though maybe they had straightened their act from years ago)...the only positive reviews were testimonials posted on their own site...LOL. Secondly, addressing the article in question, he's a fair counter point to that article which offers even further explaination of the Egyptian situation http://bigjournalism.com/epokroy/2011/11/24/fdu-poll-fox-news-makes-you-stupid-ignore-our-margin-of-error/ FDU continues to blow smoke
I'm taking great pains to avoid confrontational phrasings, and I also recognize that it's easy to lose sight of how things are received when typed rather than spoken, but the repeated use of "do your homework" is getting really old, for what it's worth. No offense, but you linked to a conservative blog to refute the FDU report. That's not "doing one's homework" for them. The irresponsibility from posting politically biased blog postings as fact holds true on both sides of the political aisle. I didn't defend the anti-FOX News article in question (and believe that I even acknowledged the liberal bias of the blog), I only said that it took its data from an FDU report; to be completely honest, I only looked at the 'Egyptian overthrow' question that drew your ire and argued that it's not necessarily a factually inaccurate way of asking the question. If there is more erroneous information, my bad, but frankly I've already acknowledged the lack of credibility on the lefty blog, I'm not sure what else you are looking for. Now, back to FDU. You drop another 'do your homework' reference in regards to researching their reputation, which is rather insulting. Especially considering your recommendation to Google 'FDU reputation;' clearly, that's what you've done considering you claim that the university is a joke that only has positive testimonials from their site. You also make the vague assertion that 'maybe they'd changed their act,' but clearly haven't, yet through 12 pages of Google results, 'FDU reputation' doesn't lead to reports of effusive praise, nor does it lead to any strong critiques; it's pretty blase to be honest. So I 'did my homework' and tried to find another method...that came in the form of U.S. News and World Report's college rankings. FDU ranks #81 out of 200 in regional schools (it doesn't get lumped in with larger schools with more doctoral programs, but that doesn't mean that regional schools aren't better than some national schools, unless you want to argue that, say, Arizona State is undeniably stronger in academics and reputation than Villanova), which isn't out-of-this-world great, but sort of poo-poos the notion that the university is a joke. It also gives more credence to their polling data, data from researchers that have other respected reports under their belt (which I have already noted). Nevertheless, we can play devil's advocate that the report is a bogus joke. Maybe it was unfair, after all, only the FDU people know how fair or unfair the survey was. This is why I made a big reference to the PolitiFact report, which keeps track of numerous surveys on the subject and acknowledged that FOX News doesn't always have markedly dumber viewers than other outlets, but that it still performs poorly nearly all of the time in comparison to the national average of political and news retention. Now, more important than all this political bickering, may I ask what you are going for on your second degree? I went for journalism myself, but considering the jobs landscape, I might as well have majored in 'pizza business' since it's looking like I'm going to help expand my parent's restaurant to another location
-
Andy_Shofar:
Obama's Job Approval Drops Below Carter's November 29, 2011 President Obama's slow ride down Gallup's daily presidential job approval index has finally passed below Jimmy Carter, earning Obama the worst job approval rating of any president at this stage of his term in modern political history. http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/11/29/obamas-job-approval-drops-below-carters
Trust me, I'll be the first to tell you that Obama isn't in the best of shape. But while the article is telling, it's also important to remember that none of the GOP candidates are polling worth a damn against the president (of the ones I've looked at, at best, Obama only trails by a point or two). It's going to be a very interesting year to be sure.