or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Dead Man Walking: The President Obama won't be reelected thread.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dead Man Walking: The President Obama won't be reelected thread. - Page 5

post #161 of 886
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

It still causes a snicker whenever we see conservative calling Obama "hyperpartisan". The Republicans (reportedly) took a fucking pledge to be partisan, and even if those reports are inaccurate, they certainly have lived up to that hyperpartisanship.

How about we cut out the silly hypocrisy, shall we?

How is taking a pledge to not raise taxes partisan?

You keep asserting things without proof.

Obama has extended the same tax rates and the fight right now, which by the way has the GOP field DIVIDED as we saw at the last debate was whether to extend his, note that HIS, not continued from someone else, HIS payroll tax cut that he took completely out of Social Security.

If all these tax cuts have been extended or passed by Democrats, then how is agreeing not to raise taxes a partisan Republican issue?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #162 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

How is taking a pledge to not raise taxes partisan?

Because they are Republicans.

Quote:

You keep asserting things without proof.

Why do we need that? We have the media aiding the President and the Democratic Leadership in calling the GOP obstructionist, poor-hating racists. Also, they caused the economic meltdown and "wrecked the economy."

Quote:

Obama has extended the same tax rates and the fight right now, which by the way has the GOP field DIVIDED as we saw at the last debate was whether to extend his, note that HIS, not continued from someone else, HIS payroll tax cut that he took completely out of Social Security.

If all these tax cuts have been extended or passed by Democrats, then how is agreeing not to raise taxes a partisan Republican issue?

Because they oppose Democrats for the sake of doing so! And they WANT people to pay more because they are OUT FOR THE RICH. Silly.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #163 of 886

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #164 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by sellerman View Post

i'm a spammer! Attack my system without mercy! May i have another?

tftfy
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #165 of 886

Some stunning numbers there. There are some caveats to it, of course. All the poverty statistics tend to jump out, because our "poverty line" is nothing like actual poverty in the rest of the world. Also, there is this:

Quote:
Of course the heart of our economic problems is the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is a perpetual debt machine, it has almost completely destroyed the value of the U.S. dollar and it has an absolutely nightmarish track record of incompetence. If the Federal Reserve system had never been created, the U.S. economy would be in far better shape. The federal government needs to shut down the Federal Reserve and start issuing currency that is not debt-based. That would be a very significant step toward restoring prosperity to America.

The part in bold is objectively false. Despite the future prospects, inflation is still in check. I don't buy that the Fed is our real problem. The real problem is Congress and and the Administration allowing so much spending. This necessitates printing even more money. The problem is spending.

As a Paulite, I can only assume you're on board with abolishing the Fed and/or returning to the gold standard. That is not something I can support. The Fed is far more important to our system than Paul realizes, and going back to the gold standard would destroy our economy.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #166 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Some stunning numbers there. There are some caveats to it, of course. All the poverty statistics tend to jump out, because our "poverty line" is nothing like actual poverty in the rest of the world.

I agree. I lived in Brazil for 2 years and have seen first-hand what real poverty is.

Quote:
The part in bold is objectively false. Despite the future prospects, inflation is still in check. I don't buy that the Fed is our real problem. The real problem is Congress and and the Administration allowing so much spending. This necessitates printing even more money. The problem is spending.

Peter Schiff (one of the few economists who predicted the housing bubble and subsequent collapse) explains the problems with the Fed and our monetary policy quite well in this video:

http://youtu.be/npJ0CUT8d_Y

It's long, but quite informative (at least I found it to be). He gets into the Fed about 10 minutes in.

Quote:
As a Paulite, I can only assume you're on board with abolishing the Fed and/or returning to the gold standard. That is not something I can support. The Fed is far more important to our system than Paul realizes, and going back to the gold standard would destroy our economy.

He has stated that he believes competitive currencies should be allowed alongside the dollar. And yes, an eventual return to the Gold Standard or something equivalent is likely the eventual goal. You are right that it would destroy our economy, which is a giant farce, anyway. A more stable, prosperous economy would be established in its place. See the video I linked above.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #167 of 886
"A new ABC News/Washington Post indicated that Barack Obama might be benefiting from the negative turn. The survey showed that 46 percent of voters expect Mr Obama to be re-elected, compared to 37 percent two months ago."
~ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...llen-away.html
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #168 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

"A new ABC News/Washington Post indicated that Barack Obama might be benefiting from the negative turn. The survey showed that 46 percent of voters expect Mr Obama to be re-elected, compared to 37 percent two months ago."
~ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...llen-away.html

And guess what? Those same Republicans just shot themselves in the foot again!

Quote:
House rejects payroll tax stopgap, hardening standoff

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news...ening-standoff

Costing the average tax payer a $1000.00 a year! Yes things have gotten soooooo much better now that the party of " No! " controls the house. And of course those same Republicans don't want taxes to go up for the rich! Talk about the devaluation of the middle class! If I were Obama I'd say no one goes home for Xmas until this is settled.

I'd also say that they're making Obama's case for him in the next election.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #169 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

A stopped clock is right twice a day. That's all you've got going for you. I support my predictions with data and historical precedent...you do not. It doesn't mean you're always wrong and that I'm always right. It simply means you're taking shots in the dark and hoping with all your might that the outcome you desire occurs. On the contrary, I look at historical and current data and go from there.

Now let's look at some of those "victories" you've had. With respect to WMD in Iraq: It was the judgement of the word's intelligence community Saddam had them. We know he had them in the past, because he used them. He then failed to verifiably disarm as required. We know what verifiable disarmament looks like...South Africa did so. Instead, Saddam played games with the inspectors and generally obfuscated at every turn. So my question is this: For what reason did you think he didn't have WMD?

Regarding the last presidential election: I don't recall using the term "meltdown" for that, unless perhaps it related to the primary. If you'd like to link to the specific posts, perhaps I can provide some context.



Calling the candidates "garbage" is just totally inaccurate. Please read an comprehend my previous post:

Mitt Romney: Son of former Michigan Governor George Romney. JD/MBA in Business Administration from Harvard Law and Harvard Business. CEO of Bain & Company, then Bain Capital. Brought the company out of crisis. Nearly unseated Ted Kennedy for Senate in 1994. Turned around essentially saved the 2002 Winter Olympics. Served as Governor of Mass. Eliminated a $3 billion deficit. Signed healthcare legislation that ensured nearly all residents had coverage. Did this as a Republican in the bluest of all states.

Newt Gingrich: B.A. and Ph.d in History. Elected to House is 1978 after nearly defeating the incumbent in 74 and 76. Inspired Reagan's "are you better off than you were 4 years ago" comment via a memo written in 1980. Endorsed bill to make MLK's b-day a national holiday. Author of the Contract with America. Speaker of the House. Led the effort to balance the budget and pass welfare reform. Credited with leading the charge on capital gains tax cuts in 1997. Author of over 20 books. Widely seen as one of the most intelligent men in the public sphere today.


How does one conclude they are "garbage?" As for Obama, all the data flies in the face of your prediction.

CBS News Poll. Dec. 5-7, 2011. N=856 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.

"Do you think Barack Obama has performed his job as president well enough to deserve reelection, or don't you think so?"

Deserves: 41%
Does Not Deserve 54%

_______________________________

Gallup Poll. Rolling average. N=approx. 1,500 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president?"

Approve: 42%
Disapprove: 51%

_______________________________

CNN/ORC Job Approval

44--Approve
51---Disapprove

----------------------------

CBS News Poll. Dec. 5-7, 2011. N=856 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.

"Do you feel things in this country are generally going in the right direction or do you feel things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?"

Right Track: 21%
Wrong Track 75%

---------------------------


Tell me that bodes well for Obama, jimmac. And what happened to "it's the economy, stupid?" Unemployment is still well over 8%, and only came down due to people leaving the workforce. GDP growth is nearly stagnant. Jobless claims concisely are over the important 400,000 mark. Debt and deficits are massive.

And:

53% of Americans now favor repealing Obamacare, only 37% oppose.





How did things go once the Dems took over? Fantastic! Since then, we've had an economic meltdown and the country has gone bankrupt. But somehow that's Bush's fault, right?

Quote:
With respect to WMD in Iraq: It was the judgement of the word's intelligence community Saddam had them.

Oh please! After we invaded you were still saying they going to find them ( even if they're in a different country ) and the soilders there were saying there wasn't anything to find! Well here we are 9 years later! You are so full of it.

Quote:
But somehow that's Bush's fault, right

Well you're right about that! And now the party of " No! " is busy making it worse for the middleclass by playing politics in the house. What a fucked up mess the GOP has created! But good luck with your dreams of a Republican in the Whitehouse next time.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #170 of 886
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

"A new ABC News/Washington Post indicated that Barack Obama might be benefiting from the negative turn. The survey showed that 46 percent of voters expect Mr Obama to be re-elected, compared to 37 percent two months ago."
~ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...llen-away.html

The sampling in that poll was plus 9 for Democrats and had only 25% Republicans.

GIGO baby, GIGO.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #171 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The sampling in that poll was plus 9 for Democrats and had only 25% Republicans.

GIGO baby, GIGO.

What the hell does it matter Trumpy? It's now becoming apparent who the GOP supports and it's not the average worker out there. Good luck with the next election.

Quote:
Obama's Approval Rating Jumps As Congress Fights Over Payroll Tax Cut, GOP Race Wages On

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama...ges-on-2011-12

Quote:
President Barack Obama's approval rating jumped five points in the past month according to a new CNN/ORC poll, amid congressional squabbles over the payroll tax cut and the ongoing slug-fest in the race for the GOP presidential nomination.

A plurality of Americans 49 percent approve of Obama's job performance, while 48 percent disapprove. This is down from 44 percent approving and 54 percent disapproving in November.

and :

Quote:
Poll roundup: Obama up, Congress down

Quote:
Forty-nine percent of respondents says that they approve of the job that President Obama is doing as president, while 47 percent disapprove. That's a 5 point improvement from the last Washington Post/ABC poll and a full 7 point improvement since the president reached a low point in October of 2011. That October survey found a 42 percent approval and a 54 percent disapproval. The December poll also shows that the president's negative ratings have fallen by 5 points since November, and 6 points since October.

Meanwhile, a separate Gallup tracking poll shows Congress's approval rating has reached a record low of 11 percent. According to Gallup, that is "the lowest single rating in Gallup's history of asking this question since 1974."

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #172 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

What the hell does it matter Trumpy? It's now becoming apparent who the GOP supports and it's not the average worker out there. Good luck with the next election.

Yes, they're only out for the rich, evil businessmen while the Democrats fight for the little guy. My lord, you're a caricature of yourself.



Figured you'd be bringing that one poll up. I saw it too. Two things: First, it's the only poll that has him anywhere near that high. Secondly, I have to hand to to him: He's really been able to use the purely political temporary tax cut against the GOP for some reason. He's managed to paint himself has a tax cutter facing GOP opposition. I mean, I thought Clinton was good, but wow. That's truly impressive. The reality is that the GOP wants a full year extension. Obama wants two months. And he opposes the Keystone Pipeline, which will create jobs.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #173 of 886
Here's a perfect example of the Dems shamelessness:


Quote:
“You’re walking out, you’re walking away, just as so many Republicans have walked away from middle-class taxpayers,,” Mr. Hoyer shouted after Mr. Fitzpatrick as he marched off the floor, leaving the two Democrats, both from Maryland, to themselves in the cavernous chamber.

Edit: I missed this quote from Hoyer!

Quote:
If the payroll-tax cut expires, it will affect 160 million workers and would average nearly $1,000 in higher taxes for them next year.

“The Republicans have taken hostage these 160 million people,” Mr. Hoyer said at a press conference after his floor maneuvers.

I thought we were supposed to avoid all the inflammatory rhetoric?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #174 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

How is taking a pledge to not raise taxes partisan?

It wasn't a pledge to not raise taxes. It was a pledge to oppose Obama on every issue. And whether the pledge was factual or not, that's exactly what they've done. They opposed Obama on every issue, even those that don't involve taxes, and even issues that have been supported by Republicans in the past.

That's partisan, my friend.
post #175 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

It wasn't a pledge to not raise taxes. It was a pledge to oppose Obama on every issue. And whether the pledge was factual or not, that's exactly what they've done. They opposed Obama on every issue, even those that don't involve taxes, and even issues that have been supported by Republicans in the past.

That's partisan, my friend.

Where I can I find this pledge? I'd like to sign-up.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #176 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Where I can I find this pledge? I'd like to sign-up.

There you go. That's what hyper partisan means. Well done.
post #177 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There you go. That's what hyper partisan means. Well done.

I was joking.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #178 of 886
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

It wasn't a pledge to not raise taxes. It was a pledge to oppose Obama on every issue. And whether the pledge was factual or not, that's exactly what they've done. They opposed Obama on every issue, even those that don't involve taxes, and even issues that have been supported by Republicans in the past.

That's partisan, my friend.

Could you link to it? The only pledge I've read about, and certainly in the minds of partisans it has been portrayed that way, is a pledge not to raise taxes.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #179 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Could you link to it? The only pledge I've read about, and certainly in the minds of partisans it has been portrayed that way, is a pledge not to raise taxes.

That was my thought too. I don't know if he's talking about McConnell's comments, or something else. I don't recall any pledge to "oppose everything the President does." I do recall McConnell talking about defeating Obama being their first priority.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #180 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Yes, they're only out for the rich, evil businessmen while the Democrats fight for the little guy. My lord, you're a caricature of yourself.




Figured you'd be bringing that one poll up. I saw it too. Two things: First, it's the only poll that has him anywhere near that high. Secondly, I have to hand to to him: He's really been able to use the purely political temporary tax cut against the GOP for some reason. He's managed to paint himself has a tax cutter facing GOP opposition. I mean, I thought Clinton was good, but wow. That's truly impressive. The reality is that the GOP wants a full year extension. Obama wants two months. And he opposes the Keystone Pipeline, which will create jobs.

Yeah, yeah the poll's worthless.

We've heard it all before from you.

If you can't see what's going on perhaps this is the reason :

Quote:
Political Views Reflected in Brain Structure

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoo...ry?id=13317961

Quote:
Individuals with a large amygdala are more sensitive to fear," and might therefore be "more inclined to integrate conservative views into their belief system," Kanai and colleagues wrote. "On the other hand, our finding of an association between anterior cingulate cortex volume and political attitudes may be linked with tolerance to uncertainty" -- which may allow people to "accept more liberal views."

This is not the first study to link political attitudes with biological differences. A 2005 twin study revealed a role for genetics, and a 2010 study showed that genetic variations can interact with environmental factors to influence political views.

"To me it makes a lot of sense," said Dr. Marco Iacoboni, professor of psychiatry and biobehavioral sciences at UCLA and director of the Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Lab at the Ahmanson-Lovelace Brain Mapping Center. "We have these tendencies to think our thoughts come out of nowhere, but they actually come from our biology."

Iacoboni, a liberal, has been using brain imaging to study political preferences since 2004.

"I'm glad to see liberals have a large anterior cingulate cortex -- the more sophisticated part of the brain," he said. The amygdala, on the other hand, is a "really old structure, and not as developed."

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #181 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Yeah, yeah the poll's worthless.

I didn't say that, you did. I said it was the only poll that showed him that high.

Quote:

We've heard it all before from you.

Yes, predictions based on factual data. I agree.

Quote:

If you can't see what's going on perhaps this is the reason :



http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoo...ry?id=13317961





I don't think I've seen that before. It's probably one of the most hilariously absurd pieces of trash I've ever seen. Even the researcher himself is biased. His hypothesis was that liberals have a larger anterior cingulate cortex, the part of the brain that helps with processing information. However, he's a self-described liberal! He then goes on to "find" that conservatives have a more developed (but antiquated, of course) amygdala. Shocking!
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #182 of 886
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

What the hell does it matter Trumpy? It's now becoming apparent who the GOP supports and it's not the average worker out there. Good luck with the next election.

What the hell does it matter?

If you intentionally under sample anyone who disagrees with Obama, then of course you are going to alter the output of the poll results. How can you claim this doesn't matter.

Why don't you also look into why CNN didn't conduct their poll with GALLUP. They've used Gallup forever. Now they have this CNN/OPINION RESEARCH poll that isn't done with Gallup and they are reporting it as a 5 point bump but it isn't comparing apple's to apple's. CNN is comparing it to their prior polls that were done with a completely different company.

It's not the same surprisingly when you look here.
You see Gallup still has Obama at 43% approval.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #183 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I didn't say that, you did. I said it was the only poll that showed him that high.



Yes, predictions based on factual data. I agree.






I don't think I've seen that before. It's probably one of the most hilariously absurd pieces of trash I've ever seen. Even the researcher himself is biased. His hypothesis was that liberals have a larger anterior cingulate cortex, the part of the brain that helps with processing information. However, he's a self-described liberal! He then goes on to "find" that conservatives have a more developed (but antiquated, of course) amygdala. Shocking!

Quote:
Yes, predictions based on factual data.

Based on subjective opinion you mean.

Hey the doctor's got credentials. Who the hell are you? Is this a second grade teacher I'm talking to? And before you start I'm not insulting your occupation I'm just pointing out you're not a doctor. Here's a list of what he's published if you are interested : http://publicationslist.org/kanair And yes he's liberal and after talking to people like yourself wouldn't you wonder why when speaking in english you would not be understood? I can understand why he'd do the reasearch. And SDW his credentials are on the line when he does this research! It's not just someone talking on a forum online. He didn't do this for a lark and besides it looks like there's additional evidence in this area to support his idea. So yes it's a bit more unreasonable than saying you don't like the source of a poll. Can you find someone who's disproved him? Only fatual data from an expert in the field please. No blogs.

This could explain why we seem to always end up with half of the country thinking one way and the other half thinking he other.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #184 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

What the hell does it matter?

If you intentionally under sample anyone who disagrees with Obama, then of course you are going to alter the output of the poll results. How can you claim this doesn't matter.

Why don't you also look into why CNN didn't conduct their poll with GALLUP. They've used Gallup forever. Now they have this CNN/OPINION RESEARCH poll that isn't done with Gallup and they are reporting it as a 5 point bump but it isn't comparing apple's to apple's. CNN is comparing it to their prior polls that were done with a completely different company.

It's not the same surprisingly when you look here.
You see Gallup still has Obama at 43% approval.

My question was based on the fact that there's so much more to indicate who the GOP supports and who they don't.

http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

Oh look! Now it's jumped to 44! And just look and the two GOP front runners and their ballot support! Romney 22% and Gingrich 26%.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #185 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Based on subjective opinion you mean.

No, jimmac. Factual data. Polling. Historical precedent. Employment and other stats.

Quote:

Hey the doctor's got credentials.

So do a lot idiots and otherwise biased persons.

Quote:
Who the hell are you?

Someone who can tell when something is crap.

Quote:
Is this a second grade teacher I'm talking to?

No, but might I ask why that would matter? Are you implying the second grade teachers are stupid?

Quote:
And before you start I'm not insulting your occupation I'm just pointing out you're not a doctor. Here's a list of what he's published if you are interested : http://publicationslist.org/kanair

Yes, you did. And I don't really care what he's published because he's BIASED.

Quote:


And yes he's liberal and after talking to people like yourself wouldn't you wonder why when speaking in english you would not be understood?

He's a liberal talking about how liberals are smart and conservatives are dumb. You can't see the problem here?

Quote:
... can understand why he'd do the reasearch. And SDW his credentials are on the line when he does this research! It's not just someone talking on a forum online. He didn't do this for a lark and besides it looks like there's additional evidence in this area to support his idea. So yes it's a bit more unreasonable than saying you don't like the source of a poll. Can you find someone who's disproved him? Only fatual data from an expert in the field please. No blogs.

This could explain why we seem to always end up with half of the country thinking one way and the other half thinking he other.

I don't need to disprove something or someone that is so obviously biased. I say again: He's a self-described liberal that did a study that shows liberals are more intellectual and essentially more intelligent than conservatives. You have to be fucking kidding.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #186 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

No, jimmac. Factual data. Polling. Historical precedent. Employment and other stats.



So do a lot idiots and otherwise biased persons.



Someone who can tell when something is crap.



No, but might I ask why that would matter? Are you implying the second grade teachers are stupid?



Yes, you did. And I don't really care what he's published because he's BIASED.



He's a liberal talking about how liberals are smart and conservatives are dumb. You can't see the problem here?



I don't need to disprove something or someone that is so obviously biased. I say again: He's a self-described liberal that did a study that shows liberals are more intellectual and essentially more intelligent than conservatives. You have to be fucking kidding.

Quote:
Someone who can tell when something is crap.

Let's see your credentials. SDW if you had presented this to me and asked me to refute it you wouldn't have accepted my take because I'm not qualified. The same here applies to you. Please show me an expert in the field that can refute it or it remains food for thought. You can say it's crap just because you don't like it but that doesn't make it crap. And by the way it doesn't say that liberals are more intelligent. What it does say is that they process what they think differently from the way conservatives do. Hence coming to a different conclusion.

Quote:
I don't need to disprove something or someone that is so obviously biased.

Can't you see what's wrong with this way of looking at things? You'd make a terrible scientist. Just because someone seems biased ( you don't know him personally ) doesn't make his research wrong. But I will say this kind of thinking is what's at the heart of our disagreements. I deal in facts not emotional assumptions. Or as the research says " Fear ".

Here's a little info : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anterior_cingulate_cortex From the second link :
Quote:
Role in political orientation

A widely publicized study by the University College London demonstrated a correlation between larger development of the ACC and left political orientation versus larger development of the amygdala in right political orientation.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #187 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Let's see your credentials. SDW if you had presented this to me and asked me to refute it you wouldn't have accepted my take because I'm not qualified. The same here applies to you. Please show me an expert in the field that can refute it or it remains food for thought. You can say it's crap just because you don't like it but that doesn't make it crap. And by the way it doesn't say that liberals are more intelligent. What it does say is that they process what they think differently from the way conservatives do. Hence coming to a different conclusion.

jimmac, I recently did a study showing that people with usernames starting with SDW are more intelligent than people with usernames starting with JIM. Disprove my assertion.

Quote:

Can't you see what's wrong with this way of looking at things?

Yes, yes..I can!

Quote:
You'd make a terrible scientist.

You're probably correct. But I don't need to be scientist to see obvious bias.

Quote:
Just because someone seems biased ( you don't know him personally ) doesn't make his research wrong. But I will say this kind of thinking is what's at the heart of our disagreements. I deal in facts not emotional assumptions. Or as the research says " Fear ".

Here's a little info : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anterior_cingulate_cortex From the second link :

You deal with facts. Wow. jimmac, you wouldn't understand a fact if it bit you in the ass. Here are some facts for you:

1. No President other than Ronald Reagan has been re-elected with unemployment over 7.%. In 1984 it was 7.2% and had declined rapidly from over 10%. The economy was strong. Official unemployment is now 8.6%, with actual unemployment about 11%.

2. President Obama has a dismal approval rating, one that has not stayed consistently above 50% since December of 2009.

3. 75% of Americans say the country is on the wrong track.

4. Obama is in major trouble in the battleground states of PA, CO, FL, NC, VA. NV, WI and MI, among others.

5. According to state-by-state polling, Obama would lose the election soundly if it was held today.



These are the FACTS. Refute them.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #188 of 886
Thread Starter 
So if I follow right, Jimmac believes Obama will be reelected because of a brain study? I don't follow that. Is the brain study supposed to show how all the people with superior brains are broke and poor while all the people with the inferior brains are rich and wealthy?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #189 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

So if I follow right, Jimmac believes Obama will be reelected because of a brain study? I don't follow that. Is the brain study supposed to show how all the people with superior brains are broke and poor while all the people with the inferior brains are rich and wealthy?

He believes it because he thinks the GOP candidates are "a joke." He utterly ignores current data, as well as the economy. "It's the economy, stupid" apparently only applies to Republican Presidents seeking reelection.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #190 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

jimmac, I recently did a study showing that people with usernames starting with SDW are more intelligent than people with usernames starting with JIM. Disprove my assertion.



Yes, yes..I can!



You're probably correct. But I don't need to be scientist to see obvious bias.



You deal with facts. Wow. jimmac, you wouldn't understand a fact if it bit you in the ass. Here are some facts for you:

1. No President other than Ronald Reagan has been re-elected with unemployment over 7.%. In 1984 it was 7.2% and had declined rapidly from over 10%. The economy was strong. Official unemployment is now 8.6%, with actual unemployment about 11%.

2. President Obama has a dismal approval rating, one that has not stayed consistently above 50% since December of 2009.

3. 75% of Americans say the country is on the wrong track.

4. Obama is in major trouble in the battleground states of PA, CO, FL, NC, VA. NV, WI and MI, among others.

5. According to state-by-state polling, Obama would lose the election soundly if it was held today.



These are the FACTS. Refute them.

Quite simply SDW you're counting on historical prededent when almost everyone agrees things ain't normal.

And that's a fact. But see it how you will. You didn't understand last time remember?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #191 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

He believes it because he thinks the GOP candidates are "a joke." He utterly ignores current data, as well as the economy. "It's the economy, stupid" apparently only applies to Republican Presidents seeking reelection.

No. I know they're a joke and God help us if one of them should get in.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #192 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

So if I follow right, Jimmac believes Obama will be reelected because of a brain study? I don't follow that. Is the brain study supposed to show how all the people with superior brains are broke and poor while all the people with the inferior brains are rich and wealthy?

Uh no ( but your lack of understanding would seem to support that study ). That was just to show why you and I don't see eye to eye on many things.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #193 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

jimmac, I recently did a study showing that people with usernames starting with SDW are more intelligent than people with usernames starting with JIM. Disprove my assertion.



Yes, yes..I can!



You're probably correct. But I don't need to be scientist to see obvious bias.



You deal with facts. Wow. jimmac, you wouldn't understand a fact if it bit you in the ass. Here are some facts for you:

1. No President other than Ronald Reagan has been re-elected with unemployment over 7.%. In 1984 it was 7.2% and had declined rapidly from over 10%. The economy was strong. Official unemployment is now 8.6%, with actual unemployment about 11%.

2. President Obama has a dismal approval rating, one that has not stayed consistently above 50% since December of 2009.

3. 75% of Americans say the country is on the wrong track.

4. Obama is in major trouble in the battleground states of PA, CO, FL, NC, VA. NV, WI and MI, among others.

5. According to state-by-state polling, Obama would lose the election soundly if it was held today.



These are the FACTS. Refute them.

Quote:
jimmac, I recently did a study showing that people with usernames starting with SDW are more intelligent than people with usernames starting with JIM. Disprove my assertion.

Just one thing : Let's see your credentials. How many papers on similar subjects have you published? Are you recognized in the medical community or do work in this field for a university?

Supply those and I'll listen. Come on SDW you don't even like it when I misspell something. You want things to be correct as a teacher don't you? Why would I accept your word over an expert in this field?

Ps. And please don't try to tell me you're not biased!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #194 of 886
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

He believes it because he thinks the GOP candidates are "a joke." He utterly ignores current data, as well as the economy. "It's the economy, stupid" apparently only applies to Republican Presidents seeking reelection.

Amazing how many people's brains (along with their wallets) seem to change from election to election as well.

I wonder how this works with the "cycles" theory he kept tossing out there as well. First everything was about cycles and we had gone through a Republican "cycle" and would now be in a Democratic cycle for oh.... I believe it was a generation or so.

Two years later, the Democratic House majority is gone. I wonder what happened to the cycles and everyone's brain as well since they must have dramatically changed?!?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #195 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Amazing how many people's brains (along with their wallets) seem to change from election to election as well.

I wonder how this works with the "cycles" theory he kept tossing out there as well. First everything was about cycles and we had gone through a Republican "cycle" and would now be in a Democratic cycle for oh.... I believe it was a generation or so.

Two years later, the Democratic House majority is gone. I wonder what happened to the cycles and everyone's brain as well since they must have dramatically changed?!?

Quote:
Two years later, the Democratic House majority is gone.

And we have seen how much better things are now that the party of " No " is in charge haven't we?

Tell me now that their popularity has been polled ( ) what do you think their chances are for holding on to it?

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...gallup-poll-/1

Quote:
Congress has reached a new low in job-approval ratings, with only 11% of adults giving lawmakers good marks in a new Gallup Poll.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #196 of 886
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And we have seen how much better things are now that the party of " No " is in charge haven't we?

Tell me now that their popularity has been polled ( ) what do you think their chances are for holding on to it?

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...gallup-poll-/1

It's interesting how having one half of one branch of government "is in charge" from your view.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #197 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Just one thing : Let's see your credentials.

What you are saying is that anyone with "credentials" cannot be questioned by someone who does not have those same credentials. Correct?

Quote:

How many papers on similar subjects have you published? Are you recognized in the medical community or do work in this field for a university?

None of that makes his "research" any more valid. I didn't attack his credentials, I simply said he was biased...as is the article itself.

Quote:

Supply those and I'll listen. Come on SDW you don't even like it when I misspell something. You want things to be correct as a teacher don't you? Why would I accept your word over an expert in this field?

He's an expert in proving that liberals are more intellectual than conservatives? He's an expert in proving that conservatives are motivated by fear? Come on. The flaws in his conclusions and the article are enormous. At one point he insinuates that conservative beliefs are motivated by fear and threats. He just takes that as a given. Whether or not conservatives and liberals have different brain structure, his conclusions about what that means for political thought are bogus and unsupported.

Quote:

Ps. And please don't try to tell me you're not biased!

Yes, I am. As are you. All of us here are, because we all have beliefs. We all express those beliefs. As you note however, we are not scientists. We are not journalists. We are not required to be totally impartial and unbiased. Also, most of us don't try to conceal our true positions. I am conservative, you are liberal. Neither one of us is publishing a study that purports to reach an unbiased, scientific conclusion. Not so for your article.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #198 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

What you are saying is that anyone with "credentials" cannot be questioned by someone who does not have those same credentials. Correct?



None of that makes his "research" any more valid. I didn't attack his credentials, I simply said he was biased...as is the article itself.



He's an expert in proving that liberals are more intellectual than conservatives? He's an expert in proving that conservatives are motivated by fear? Come on. The flaws in his conclusions and the article are enormous. At one point he insinuates that conservative beliefs are motivated by fear and threats. He just takes that as a given. Whether or not conservatives and liberals have different brain structure, his conclusions about what that means for political thought are bogus and unsupported.



Yes, I am. As are you. All of us here are, because we all have beliefs. We all express those beliefs. As you note however, we are not scientists. We are not journalists. We are not required to be totally impartial and unbiased. Also, most of us don't try to conceal our true positions. I am conservative, you are liberal. Neither one of us is publishing a study that purports to reach an unbiased, scientific conclusion. Not so for your article.


Quote:
He's an expert in proving that conservatives are motivated by fear? Come on. The flaws in his conclusions and the article are enormous. At one point he insinuates that conservative beliefs are motivated by fear and threats. He just takes that as a given. Whether or not conservatives and liberals have different brain structure, his conclusions about what that means for political thought are bogus and unsupported.

What are you basing this statement on? How would you persuade us logically that he's wrong? Not just your assumptons but logical scientific reasons he's wrong. Can you Dr. SDW? Otherwise it looks like he might be right and if you're a model of conservatives they are motivated by their emotions as a belief system not logic. In effect you provide evidence in favor of his theory.

And by the way he's not taking anything for a given. The part of the brain he's discussing governs fear! Geez SDW! Can't you read?


Quote:
Emotional learning

In complex vertebrates, including humans, the amygdalae perform primary roles in the formation and storage of memories associated with emotional events. Research indicates that, during fear conditioning, sensory stimuli reach the basolateral complexes of the amygdalae, particularly the lateral nuclei, where they form associations with memories of the stimuli. The association between stimuli and the aversive events they predict may be mediated by long-term potentiation, a sustained enhancement of signalling between affected neurons.[3]

Memories of emotional experiences imprinted in reactions of synapses in the lateral nuclei elicit fear behavior through connections with the central nucleus of the amygdalae and the bed nuclei of the stria terminalis (BNST). The central nuclei are involved in the genesis of many fear responses, including freezing (immobility), tachycardia (rapid heartbeat), increased respiration, and stress-hormone release. Damage to the amygdalae impairs both the acquisition and expression of Pavlovian fear conditioning, a form of classical conditioning of emotional responses.[3]

The amygdalae are also involved in appetitive (positive) conditioning. It seems that distinct neurons respond to positive and negative stimuli, but there is no clustering of these distinct neurons into clear anatomical nuclei.[9] However, lesions of the central nucleus in the amygdala have been shown to reduce appetitive learning in rats. Lesions of the basolateral regions do not exhibit the same effect.[10] Research like this indicates that different nuclei within the amygdala have different functions in appetitive conditioning.[11]

It's just a more primitive part of the brain. The human brain is basically divided into 3 parts. The Reptilian Complex. The most primitive part of the brain. Basically governing the autonomic funtions. The second is the Limbic System which governs emotions. Dogs and cats have a version of this in their brains. The third is the Neocortex which is the newest part. This governs reasoning and logic. It's not out of the realm of possibility that some types of people might have more developed parts than others leading to a difference in they perceive reality. And you do have to admit that there are a great deal of different opinions among humans. This is probably one reaon why.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #199 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It's interesting how having one half of one branch of government "is in charge" from your view.

Here's the context. A quote from you sir trumpy!

Quote:
First everything was about cycles and we had gone through a Republican "cycle" and would now be in a Democratic cycle for oh.... I believe it was a generation or so.

Two years later, the Democratic House majority is gone.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #200 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

What are you basing this statement on? How would you persuade us logically that he's wrong?

So he makes the clear assumption that conservative beliefs are motivated by fear, and I have to prove otherwise? Try to understand...I am not arguing that he's wrong about brain structure. I am arguing there is no evidence that conservative beliefs are motivated by fear. He literally just made that up. I am not required to prove or disprove things that are just made up.

Quote:


Not just your assumptons but logical scientific reasons he's wrong. Can you Dr. SDW? Otherwise it looks like he might be right and if you're a model of conservatives they are motivated by their emotions as a belief system not logic. In effect you provide evidence in favor of his theory.

All liberals have small penises. Now, disprove my assertion jimmac. I'll expect evidence from medical professionals. Yes, I know it's absurd...that's why I use this as an example. It's exactly what you're asking me to do.

Quote:

And by the way he's not taking anything for a given. The part of the brain he's discussing governs fear! Geez SDW! Can't you read?:roll eyes:

You are confusing causation with correlation. And so is he.

Quote:

It's just a more primitive part of the brain. The human brain is basically divided into 3 parts. The Reptilian Complex. The most primitive part of the brain. Basically governing the autonomic funtions. The second is the Limbic System which governs emotions. Dogs and cats have a version of this in their brains. The third is the Neocortex which is the newest part. This governs reasoning and logic. It's not out of the realm of possibility that some types of people might have more developed parts than others leading to a difference in they perceive reality. And you do have to admit that there are a great deal of different opinions among humans. This is probably one reaon why.

Which part of the brain governs writing in complete sentences?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Dead Man Walking: The President Obama won't be reelected thread.