U.S. Politics XL--Double Down it

[Jaxtile]

Part of me wants the poll to be 100% infalliable, as I think teabaggers aremorons, but I do see where LC and FLOW are coming from.

[Elrick]

I also wanted to add something else that I heard. Scott Brown decided not to attend the local tea party event hosted by Sarah Palin. I wander why this is. Isn't he the guy that the tea party wanted to win and said he'd stand for their ideals?

I guess he doesn't want to associate himself with Palin because maybe he considers her a little to radical for him unsure though.

[Shryke]

Could you please outline why the results necessarily mean that? I mean, as a matter of logical progression. If A, then B, A, therefore B kind of stuff. Because what you're saying is not actually a disputation of FLoW's statement, in the sense of a reasoned, constructed argument, but merely a flat refusal to accept his interpretation, without any description why your evaluation is any better.

If the question is put to me, "White people tend to be really smart -- agree or disagree?" and then I say, "Well, being white has nothing to do with it either way," I'm going to answer, "Disagree," right? But according to your logic, that means I must be anti-white. Are you seeing the distinction being drawn, now, as to why the questions are bad and the results don't tell us what you think they do?

Um, because that's exactly what the results say.

Like, literally the results are nothing more then a graph of how people who said supported or hated the Tea Party answered a bunch of questions on race and such.

As for the "issue" FLOW brought up, it's fucking ridiculous. Unless you believe there is a magical like 20 fucking percent difference between how Tea Party Supporters and Tea Party Haters interpret those questions.

It's laughable.

[lokisnow]

lots of interesting stuff happening with Mercury, Corporate Disclosure, republican v white house Supremes strategy, and Lehman info, and Wamu info as well.

too many articles to link.

I would like to add that Obama would have a lot EASIER time getting Wood or Kagan confirmed if they were the most conservative judges of a batch of extremely liberal judges considered. Don't start in the middle and lean left. Start left and lean middle.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

As for the "issue" FLOW brought up, it's fucking ridiculous. Unless you believe there is a magical like 20 fucking percent difference between how Tea Party Supporters and Tea Party Haters interpret those questions.

It's laughable.

Unless you believe that more than 40% of the whites who "strongly oppose" the Tea parties are not only racists, but essentially willing to admit as much to pollsters, it's the poll that's laughable.

[TrackerNeil]

I would like to add that Obama would have a lot EASIER time getting Wood or Kagan confirmed if they were the most conservative judges of a batch of extremely liberal judges considered. Don't start in the middle and lean left. Start left and lean middle.

Last summer I was reading a really neat book by Jan Crawford Greenburg, entitled, "Supreme Conflict." She's convinced me that the most important quality in a justice is not being a "liberal lion", but being the kind of justice who can bring colleagues around to his/her way of thinking. Naturally, we liberals want someone who shares our values (oh, wait...I forgot that good justices never let their political inclinations shape their rulings) but we don't want a justice like Scalia or Thomas who, I understand, often took such extreme positions that it was difficult for justices like O'Connor and Kennedy to agree with them. A few more Republican presidents, however, and we might have a court in which Scalia and Thomas look like moderates.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Last summer I was reading a really neat book by Jan Crawford Greenburg, entitled, "Supreme Conflict." She's convinced me that the most important quality in a justice is not being a "liberal lion", but being the kind of justice who can bring colleagues around to his/her way of thinking. Naturally, we liberals want someone who shares our values (oh, wait...I forgot that good justices never let their political inclinations shape their rulings) but we don't want a justice like Scalia or Thomas who, I understand, often took such extreme positions that it was difficult for justices like O'Connor and Kennedy to agree with them. A few more Republican presidents, however, and we might have a court in which Scalia and Thomas look like moderates.

That's a good point, and one of the reasons why Roberts was a much better choice for CJ than elevating Scalia. Roberts had the right judicial philosphy coupled with a moderate demeanor and persuasive personality.

[TerraPrime]

Wow. You cannot even write the script better if you hire someone to do it. A racist, sexist millionaire is billing himself as the champion of a "small-government" "grassroot" movement.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

All I need to know about the Tea partiers, is that the guy who should be their big cheese (Ron Paul) thinks they're crazy and doesn't really hang with them. When Ron Paul thinks you're too out there, ur doin it wrong.

[Shryke]

Unless you believe that more than 40% of the whites who "strongly oppose" the Tea parties are not only racists, but essentially willing to admit as much to pollsters, it's the poll that's laughable.

Look man, I'm sorry the poll shows your previous "No, Tea Party people aren't racist" stance is full of shit. I'm sure it hurts.

But the simple fact is, any issue you have with the questions would have been systemic. EVERY PERSON WHO ANSWERED THEM would have had that issue.

So unless you can come up with some reason why Tea Party Supporters would interpret the question the way you described 20% more then Tea Party Haters, your objection is full of shit. Why are 20% more people who are pro-Tea Party thinking "Man, I don't like to stereotype!" in your magical world?

It doesn't matter what the specific numbers are, the important part is the DIFFERENTIAL.

And the differential is stark.

[Shryke]

All I need to know about the Tea partiers, is that the guy who should be their big cheese (Ron Paul) thinks they're crazy and doesn't really hang with them. When Ron Paul thinks you're too out there, ur doin it wrong.

That's thinking I can get behind.

Also, Ron Paul's people will always have my love for chasing Sean Hannity through the streets like the scum he is.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Wow. You cannot even write the script better if you hire someone to do it. A racist, sexist millionaire is billing himself as the champion of a "small-government" "grassroot" movement.

Yeah, quite the D-bag.

That's the problem with mass movements. I have some sympathy for people who do the tea party thing because they're sick of the two major parties. The problem is that there is no process possible to screen or exclude "membership" because it is not a formal party. So you never know what jackass you may find yourself aligned with.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

But the simple fact is, any issue you have with the questions would have been systemic. EVERY PERSON WHO ANSWERED THEM would have had that issue.

And your evidence of that is....?

So unless you can come up with some reason why Tea Party Supporters would interpret the question the way you described 20% more then Tea Party Haters, your objection is full of shit. Why are 20% more people who are pro-Tea Party thinking "Man, I don't like to stereotype!" in your magical world?

It doesn't matter what the specific numbers are, the important part is the DIFFERENTIAL.

And the differential is stark.

Okay, Shryke, I'll accept your logic to make the point. Let's just focus on the differential, which is you give as 20%. And let's assume that all of those people actually are racist. That means right off the bat, you're conceding that 80% of even the "strong" Tea Party supporters are not racist. And let's say that as many as half of the people don't just identify themselves as "supporters", but as strong supporters. That still would mean that 90% of Tea Party supporters are not racist. Which means that labelling Tea Partiers in general as racists isn't even remotely correct.

[Shryke]

And your evidence of that is....?

YOU are the one making the positive claim. You must prove to me why Tea Party Supporters are 20% more likely to misinterpret the question then Tea Party Haters.

Okay, Shryke, I'll accept your logic to make the point. Let's just focus on the differential, which is you give as 20%. And let's assume that all of those people actually are racist. That means right off the bat, you're conceding that 80% of even the "strong" Tea Party supporters are not racist. And let's say that as many as half of the people don't just identify themselves as "supporters", but as strong supporters. That still would mean that 90% of Tea Party supporters are not racist. Which means that labelling Tea Partiers in general as racists isn't even remotely correct.

And again, you are not reading the results right.

They say Tea Party Supports are MORE racist then Tea Party Haters. By quite a large spread.

Again, it's not a matter of "X% of Tea Party Supporters are racist", it's the differential that matters. That's all this poll was looking at.

The question they wanted to pose with this poll was "How do the views on race of Tea Party Supporters differ from the views on race of Tea Party Haters?". And the results are show that Tea Party Supporters are significantly more racist.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

You must prove to me why Tea Party Supporters are 20% more likely to misinterpret the question then Tea Party Haters.

Someone's feeling pretty important. But no, Shryke, I don't have to prove anything to you. Your opinion doesn't matter to me. I posted on the topic only to point out to more fair-minded people the flaws in this survey. If you've noticed, even people who despise the Tea Partiers have acknowledged those flaws and you're standing alone.

[Shryke]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/13/oklahoma-tea-party-plans_n_535412.html

Frustrated by recent political setbacks, tea party leaders and some conservative members of the Oklahoma Legislature say they would like to create a new volunteer militia to help defend against what they believe are improper federal infringements on state sovereignty.

Well that's .... interesting.

Someone's feeling pretty important. But no, Shryke, I don't have to prove anything to you. Your opinion doesn't matter to me. I posted on the topic only to point out to more fair-minded people the flaws in this survey. If you've noticed, even people who despise the Tea Partiers have acknowledged those flaws and you're standing alone.

:rofl: Sure thing boy, whatever you need to tell yourself. You come back when you actually have an argument to make. I'll be waiting.

[Trebla]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/13/oklahoma-tea-party-plans_n_535412.html

Well that's .... interesting.

:rofl: Sure thing boy, whatever you need to tell yourself. You come back when you actually have an argument to make. I'll be waiting.

Bold mine. Come on, no need for that.

As far as the link, I keep seeing more and more of that kind of talk. And it it just empty, angry talk or should we start to become concerned?

[Shryke]

As far as the link, I keep seeing more and more of that kind of talk. And it it just empty, angry talk or should we start to become concerned?

It depends on what you wanna be concerned about really.

The sentiment itself is a little concerning maybe, but their ability or willingness to actually DO anything is pretty fucking low afaik.

But still, you could probably keep thinking they aren't gonna do anything till they actually .... do something.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Bold mine. Come on, no need for that.

He evidently thinks there is, which is fine by me.

As far as the link, I keep seeing more and more of that kind of talk. And it it just empty, angry talk or should we start to become concerned?

For the most part, I'd go with the empty, angry talk, but that's not saying there aren't some nutbags out there too. There are always nutbags, on both sides. Which ones come out at a given time depend on which side is in power, and which issues are at the forefront.

I don't know all that many people who've been to Tea Parties in my state, but every single one I do know not only supported Ken Blackwell (who happens to be black) when he ran for governor, but was either a volunteer or paid person on his campaign. More generally, I'd suspect that the folks who voted for him are disproportionately likely to be "Tea Partiers" as well.

http://townhall.com/columnists/KenBlackwell/2010/03/28/demonizing_everyday_americans

The whole "you don't like Obama because you're a racist" argument was a bit of an odd one to make in my state because most of the folks who voted against Obama in 2008 voted for Ken Blackwell in 2006.

[awesome possum]

http://townhall.com/columnists/KenBlackwell/2010/03/28/demonizing_everyday_americans

:rolleyes: