| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| How polls are intellectually lazy | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 24 2003, 09:53 AM (459 Views) | |
| benetil | Sep 24 2003, 06:58 PM Post #16 |
|
Unregistered
|
I know, I know - I picked up on the stalking horse bit (I was trying to ignore it!). Oh, god - I'll just puke if General Clark is nothing more than a front for that (my opinion) distasteful shrew, Hillary Clinton. |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| nztrekkie | Sep 24 2003, 07:03 PM Post #17 |
|
Lieutenant
|
ahhhhhhh......I am a powerful being then aren't I ??? I can MAKE YOU be angry from all the way down here, just with a few words on a computor screen. and you mustn't be - just trying to be logical, because you see there is nothing you or anyone else can say on this board which will make me very angry or uptight. George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld by their actions have made me a bit angry in recent times, but I think the barely legal, unprovoked attack of a sovereign nation, against the wishes of the majority of the world is a little more provocative than a few of my words IMHO. You need to watch your fellow Texan Dr Phil - he'l tell you why I can't MAKE YOU do anything. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Sep 24 2003, 07:06 PM Post #18 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
From what I can analyze, if Dean gets the nomination out of the field of ten, and then wins the election in 2004, then he becomes the de facto head of the Democratic Party. This means that he can name a replacement for Terry McAuliffe, who is a friend of the Clintons. Replacing McAuliffe drains the Clintons of a lot of political power. Secondly, Hillary does want to run, either in 2004 or 2008. If she runs in 2008, and a Democrat won in 2004, she'd be going against an incumbent and lose. If she runs in 2008 against Bush's second term successor (probably Condaleezza Rice), she has a chance, because there is no incumbent (Dick Cheney is doubtful, just because of his health... he'd be a very OLD 69 years old in 2008). If she runs in 2004, it'll be with Clark as HER Vice President. She wants him out in front now to see how the public likes him (he fills voids in her resume, and she would fill voids in his). |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Sep 24 2003, 07:10 PM Post #19 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Words mean things. Remember that. You might read the Terms of Service as well. As for the attack on Iraq, you'd rather see Saddam Hussein still in power, torturing and murdering hundreds of thousands? Hey, the allies attacked Germany, which was a sovereign nation, during WWII. Were you against that one too? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| nztrekkie | Sep 24 2003, 07:15 PM Post #20 |
|
Lieutenant
|
words mean things..........really ???? :lol: also, you have raised another issue I had forgotten about - the killing and torturing of Saddam. Can you provide links which give a good (documented) idea of the extent of his treachery ? ie: nothing from the Pentagon then. someone months ago refferred to "hundreds of thousands" killed EVERY year and when I said this sounded a bit high, I was assured it was correct. Yes, he gassed 20,000 Kurds, who committed the ultimate sin of treason and fought against the state at the behest of the US govt, but apart from this, what numbers did he generally torture to death - on average - each year ???????? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Sep 24 2003, 07:34 PM Post #21 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Here's one from your favorite source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/corr...ent/2785095.stm The title is "Saddam's mass graves" Your problem is, if I gave you documented truth, you would say I was lying to you. NOTHING will convince you short of going there yourself. Here's another: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/20...rets-usat_x.htm Titled "Iraqis pour out tales of Saddam's torture chambers" I understand that some people to this day deny the Holocaust. Are you one of them? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| benetil | Sep 24 2003, 07:45 PM Post #22 |
|
Unregistered
|
Here's my opinion of an item related to the 2004 elections. President Bush's stock would go up (in my eyes) if he dumped Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Attorney General John Ashcroft. Being the decent guy that he genuinely seems to be, President Bush could just let both of these individuals "pursue other interests" rather than publicly trouncing them. I agree with you that Vice President Dick Cheney is a definite "no go" as far as continuing President Bush's legacy. I like Condoleezza Rice very much - I sincerely think I would vote for her (in spite of the fact that she would run as a Republican). I remember well your "Hillary Clinton" prediction from a while back - if you're right, we'll need to make arrangements for you to receive a bottle of Courvassier VSOP (my treat). |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| nztrekkie | Sep 24 2003, 08:45 PM Post #23 |
|
Lieutenant
|
No. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| nztrekkie | Sep 24 2003, 09:02 PM Post #24 |
|
Lieutenant
|
You didn't read my question properly - at least I hope that is the issue. I acknowledged that Sadam killed 10,000 's Kurds in the north and Shia in the south after the uprisings that occurred at each place. My question was, APART FROM THESE "ONE OFF" INCIDENTS, are there any links which document the claim by some people that Sadam killed HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Iraqis, each and EVERY year ??????? Bear in mind what Colin Powell said in the BBC article - "There's strong evidence and no question about the fact there are weapons of mass destruction," Powell said." Also, the USA today article said that when Saddam took power in 1979, he killed 10,000's presumably to achieve power and order. Even after seizing power, the death figure is one-tenth that which some claim were killed EVERY year. I'm not belittling this type of killing at all, but I am trying to get a more accurate picture of what went on in Iraq under Saddam. Claims which wildly exaggerate the extent of the killing there are not helpful. How many other countries, including current allies of the US and the West could stand up to such scrutiny as Iraq ? Pakistan perhaps ? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ANOVA | Sep 24 2003, 09:58 PM Post #25 |
|
Vice Admiral
|
Sorry I'm late into the fray. benitil quotes the question posed to people as: If retired General Wesley Clark were the Democratic Party's candidate and George W. Bush were the Republican Party's candidate, who would you be more likely to vote for — Wesley Clark, the Democrat or George W. Bush, the Republican? In polling this is not a neutral question. If a person has no strong opinion in the may be tempted to answer with the first choice. Sounds silly, but it is one of the reasons a question like this should be rephrased so that each choice occurs in a different order. Thus, there would be four questions. Since each name appears twice and each appearance must be reworded. there are 2^2 ways that this question should be read to different subjects. Another way a poll can be effected adversley is by the order of questions. Does anyone know if there were other questions in this poll and if the order of questions were randomized? Finally, can anyone give a legitimate reason why non-voters were polled. This seems odd. A way for polling organisations to keep their reputations while skewing the curve? The media has in the past ignored polls that didn't go their way. During the Republican debates the media ignored the fact that a Black candidate was winning the debates. What would happen to the liberal claim that Republicans were a bunch of angry white men if the President were a black conservative. All in good (vote early,vote often) fun ANOVA |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| benetil | Sep 24 2003, 10:01 PM Post #26 |
|
Unregistered
|
Hi, ANOVA. Interesting. I've heard that the "last mentioned" slot in a series can also be advantageous. I'm not a psychologist - and my "human brain" user's manual had some of the pages missing when I received it - so I could be wrong.
|
| | Quote | ^ | |
| benetil | Sep 24 2003, 10:06 PM Post #27 |
|
Unregistered
|
ANOVA: the poll was random - the target was adults. The poll differentiated between registered voters and not register voters just to add a layer of detail (I suppose). I personally think it is fine to allow adults who aren't currently registered to vote to participate in this poll. There is still plenty of time for any of them to register - so their opinions are valid (in my mind). |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| ANOVA | Sep 24 2003, 10:09 PM Post #28 |
|
Vice Admiral
|
Either way it's a flawed methodolgy. I'm still voting none of the above if asked. All in good fun ANOVA You got an operators manual? I sent in my 3 boxtops and a proof of purchase years ago and I'm still waiting.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| benetil | Sep 24 2003, 10:11 PM Post #29 |
|
Unregistered
|
Ha! I'd offer you a copy of mine - but it (my copy) would probably make things worse for you! Take care. |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Sep 24 2003, 10:15 PM Post #30 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Of course I understood your question, NZ. I just showed how easy it was to find evidence of Saddam Hussein's atrocities. Those were the first two at the top of two different searches (using "Saddam+torture" and "Saddam+mass graves" as parameters). Both were recent, too, so this is not "recycled news" or supposed "innuendo" from March or April (as you'd probably accuse me). IN ADDITION, I alluded to thousands of Iraqis killed by Saddam... here's one example I pulled from the net: http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/marsharabs1.htm It is from Human Rights Watch, and discusses the deaths of 190,000 Marsh Arabs in southern Iraq for the decade following 1991. If you'd like, I'm quite sure I can find more, but... you have fingers so GO LOOK FOR YOURSELF! THESE ARE NOT "ONE OFF" INCIDENTS. You remind me of a guy I heard in a commercial for a local radio station. The guy says, "So we keep finding evidence of mass graves, but Bush had no right..." The host of the show cuts in with, "There IS NO "BUT" after the term 'mass graves!'" What will it take to convince you that WE WERE RIGHT IN REMOVING SADDAM HUSSEIN? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |


- so I could be wrong.

2:31 PM Jul 11