Poll: Shutdown damaging GOP/Tea Party, actually HELPING Obamacare....

[kia75]

national polls vs local polls. I'd like to see what the republicans are seeing at home from their voters vs this overall noise.

no one California is voting for curze.

This right here. The shutdown isn't going to hurt a single Tea Party Member, it will hurt the Republican party though. Sadly, what will probably happen is the more moderate Republicans will now be picked of by Democrats leaving an even more radicalized Republican party.

 

[Incorruptible]

Denying the truth as a vast liberal media conspiracy. How did that work for you in the last election?

I never voted republcian in the last election and I expected that POS obama to win. Do you doubt that the media prefers obama?

 

[dank69]

This right here. The shutdown isn't going to hurt a single Tea Party Member, it will hurt the Republican party though. Sadly, what will probably happen is the more moderate Republicans will now be picked of by Democrats leaving an even more radicalized Republican party.

You are forgetting "smaller Republican party." They can be as radical as they want as long as they lose the House Majority.

 

[Bowfinger]

Denying the truth as a vast liberal media conspiracy. How did that work for you in the last election?

14 year old Canadian trolls don't get to vote in U.S. elections.

Your point is spot on. It's hilarious, but also a bit sad, to see the usual suspects in their usual deep denial, just like a year ago. The factual evidence is overwhelming that this is damaging the Republican party. Nonetheless, Fox and the other nutter bubble media keep stringing the faithful on with non-stop propaganda, and they swallow it again and again and again. It must be the same psychological defect that leads abused women to keep coming back, some sort of perverse emotional dependency that suppresses reason.

 

[trenchfoot]

This right here. The shutdown isn't going to hurt a single Tea Party Member, it will hurt the Republican party though. Sadly, what will probably happen is the more moderate Republicans will now be picked of by Democrats leaving an even more radicalized Republican party.

Well, IMO it may financially hurt those TP members that are furloughed working middle class, but as your commentary suggests, it won't hurt their fanatical outlook, politically speaking. IMO they feel it's high honor to martyr themselves as they attempt to take the despised Obama down with them while completely ignoring the fact that they're probably also taking the nation's, if not the world's economy down with them too. No sacrifice is too great to themselves and especially to those who don't see things through TP tinted eyewear.

Yeah, that'll teach us all a lesson or two in the finer aspects of Political Zealotry 101.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

This poll is really biased.

Look up their % of gov. employees.

 

[Bowfinger]

This right here. The shutdown isn't going to hurt a single Tea Party Member, it will hurt the Republican party though. Sadly, what will probably happen is the more moderate Republicans will now be picked of by Democrats leaving an even more radicalized Republican party.

I hope you're wrong, though not optimistic. Mainstream Republicans still outnumber the lunatic fringe, but it's the loons who turn out to vote. Tea Party candidates win primaries because they pander to that passionate fringe. The key to exterminating the Tea Party is to beat them at their own game. The (largely silent) majority of conservatives need to step up and take their party back. That means getting off their complacent butts and actually getting out to vote in their primaries, supporting rational candidates.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Don't worry, Republicans have a plan to turn this around; by attacking Medicare:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/11/gop-debt-limit-offer_n_4085291.html

 

[First]

Do you consider yourself a supporter of the Tea Party Movement? Yes 20 No 70

Poll
Republican leaning - 32
Democrat Leaning - 43
Voted Obama(D) - 44
Voted Romney(R) - 35

General Election
Voted Obama(D) - 48.8%
Voted Romney(R) - 48.1%

Poll skewed to the left on a left leaning site supporting what the left wants to hear. Color me shocked :-O

ummm, link your bullshit General Election numbers. Real numbers 2012 General election numbers were actually 51-47. And there are more registered Dems and people who lean Dem, a well known fact since 2008. It's a new country, old man.

 

[monovillage]

and immediately after the Newtown shootings there were polls that said an overwhelming majority of people wanted strict and extreme Federal laws passed for gun control. How did that work out you guys?

 

[dank69]

and immediately after the Newtown shootings there were polls that said an overwhelming majority of people wanted strict and extreme Federal laws passed for gun control. How did that work out you guys?

Not too well considering Republicans hold the House while representing a minority of the population.

 

[Mxylplyx]

and immediately after the Newtown shootings there were polls that said an overwhelming majority of people wanted strict and extreme Federal laws passed for gun control. How did that work out you guys?

So you are bragging that Republicans are successfully able to thwart the will of the voting majority, yet you are shocked when they lose elections?

 

[monovillage]

So you are bragging that Republicans are successfully able to thwart the will of the voting majority, yet you are shocked when they lose elections?

You mean like the majority of the citizens that were opposed to Obamacare, but the Democrats passed it anyways without a single republican vote?

 

[NaughtyGeek]

ummm, link your bullshit General Election numbers. Real numbers 2012 General election numbers were actually 51-47. And there are more registered Dems and people who lean Dem, a well known fact since 2008. It's a new country, old man.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

But even using your preferred numbers, the poll is still skewed to the left. Lets do some basic math:

Total respondents identifying R or D = 75
% respondents identifying D = 43/75*100 = 57.33
% respondents identifying R = 32/75*100 = 42.67

Using you numbers, 51-47 showing a 4% spread between D and R yet the poll has a 15% spread in the direction of the position the poll is trying to support. You're right, it is a new country, one where people no longer need to recognize statistical manipulation cause they want to believe they're right.

 

[First]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

Huh? Why did you just link a source that refutes your original numbers and completely validates mine? See:

General Election Results 51.1 47.2 Obama +3.9
RCP Average 10/31 - 11/5 -- -- 48.8 48.1 Obama +0.7

So try reading more critically.

But even using your preferred numbers, the poll is still skewed to the left. Lets do some basic math:

Total respondents identifying R or D = 75
% respondents identifying D = 43/75*100 = 57.33
% respondents identifying R = 32/75*100 = 42.67

Using you numbers, 51-47 showing a 4% spread between D and R yet the poll has a 15% spread in the direction of the position the poll is trying to support. You're right, it is a new country, one where people no longer need to recognize statistical manipulation cause they want to believe they're right.

For one, link the NBC/WSJ poll in question as I don't want to waste time digging to support your numbers.

Two, polls are based on respondent's answers, this isn't an LV (i.e. likely voter) model. So if there are more self-identifying Dems, then that's just a consequence of the populace offering up that information, not poll bias.

Try harder next time.

 

[Mxylplyx]

You mean like the majority of the citizens that were opposed to Obamacare, but the Democrats passed it anyways without a single republican vote?

Only difference is Obama was elected on that platform and established universal healthcare as a priority of the democratic ticket, and they achieved a super majority to get it through. That is called a MANDATE my friend, just like Bush achieved a mandate to lower taxes and got it passed. Furthermore, Obama handily won reelection against an opponent who's stated goal was to repeal the ACA. That my friend is an AFFIRMATION. The supreme court upholding it was just a cherry on top.

Do you really think there is anything for the Republicans to gain by trying to wage a battle that has already been lost? No matter how many times you tell yourself that it can still be won, it cant, any any politician you vote for that tells you otherwise is flat lying to you, something tea party voters are now hopefully coming to grip with, though I suspect they are just going to label their current rep as a RINO and elect the next radical that tells them what they want to hear. Universal healthcare is now part of the social contract. Get over it.

 

[NaughtyGeek]

For one, link the NBC/WSJ poll in question as I don't want to waste time digging to support your numbers.

You mean the one linked in the OP? Don't want to waste my time supplying information already provided.

Two, polls are based on respondent's answers, this isn't an LV (i.e. likely voter) model. So if there are more self-identifying Dems, then that's just a consequence of the populace offering up that information, not poll bias.

100 people != a good cross section of the population by any stretch. If the poll doesn't represent the populace in an equal manner, it is skewed. If you believe for one second that the people providing that poll didn't have a good idea what answers they were going to get before they polled you're uneducated in political polling and targeted journalism. All statistics can be skewed and likely are. Should I go to FOX News and see if they have a poll that contradicts the NBC/WSJ poll? If they did, what would your response be?

 

[xBiffx]

100 people != a good cross section of the population by any stretch. If the poll doesn't represent the populace in an equal manner, it is skewed. If you believe for one second that the people providing that poll didn't have a good idea what answers they were going to get before they polled you're uneducated in political polling and targeted journalism. All statistics can be skewed and likely are. Should I go to FOX News and see if they have a poll that contradicts the NBC/WSJ poll? If they did, what would your response be?

Don't let dank catch you saying this especially the bolded.

 

[monovillage]

Only difference is Obama was elected on that platform and established universal healthcare as a priority of the democratic ticket, and they achieved a super majority to get it through. That is called a MANDATE my friend, just like Bush achieved a mandate to lower taxes and got it passed. Furthermore, Obama handily won reelection against an opponent who's stated goal was to repeal the ACA. That my friend is an AFFIRMATION. The supreme court upholding it was just a cherry on top.

Do you really think there is anything for the Republicans to gain by trying to wage a battle that has already been lost? No matter how many times you tell yourself that it can still be won, it cant, any any politician you vote for that tells you otherwise is flat lying to you, something tea party voters are now hopefully coming to grip with, though I suspect they are just going to label their current rep as a RINO and elect the next radical that tells them what they want to hear. Universal healthcare is now part of the social contract. Get over it.

Go fuck yourself, my Rep. and many Republicans were elected to oppose Obamacare. They are doing exactly what they were elected to do, what they said they'd do and what their constituents want.

 

[Moonbeam]

I hope that liberals remember that those defects this thread verifies to exist in conservative brains are founded on deep moral principles that were and are a part of why human beings have had a winning survival strategy. These brains are more deeply committed to group think than liberals are and when the group is under attack it is the groups with the greater conservative collective loyalty to their group that more often allows its members to pass their genes to the next generation.

The fact that these folk see Obama not as the President of their group but a foreign enemy player that makes them dangerous at this time in history. This is going to cost them membership because a human group also needs reason to survive. So in our current condition of lack of external threat, reason tells us to ignore conservative morality and paranoid thinking, but we have in future as in the past to be ready to hear these cackling geese. paranoia is valuable when enemies abound.

Don't forget that we are evolutionarily equipped to compete with other groups and to see them as threat as we evolved into larger and larger collectives, carrying with us the potential seeds of our own destruction, seeds if fully eliminated might lead to another kind of destruction. That is why the thrust and function of human conscious evolution today must, in my opinion, be the inclusion of all of humanity as a single human group. The aim and goal of conscious evolution should in my opinion be, learning how to see the other as the self. We can't teach conservatives brotherhood if our aim is to destroy them. They are us and we are them.

Conservatives are good people who have a limited notion of the value of others. They have problems liking others because they have some problems liking themselves. They love members of their own group and are outstandingly loyal and generous to them. They are people, whom if they like you, you can trust. They feel that liberals are a threat to that and that is why they oppose us. To love your neighbor is good and it's that notion they defend. But to not know who your neighbor really is, is kind of sad. We are all the same and we have all been deeply hurt. To love is to also love yourself and the more you love yourself, I think, the more you will love the other.

So conservatives are motivated by a morality of good that can get even better. All they struggle to protect and defend can never be taken. The only thing that change and the evolution of thinking brings is that the good gets bigger and bigger.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

So at what point are you going to get mad and let loose one of your infamous profanity laced tirades that's indicative of angry democrat/progressive brain defect.

 

[dank69]

GOP starts eating their own

All aboard the failboat.

 

[dank69]

Don't let dank catch you saying this especially the bolded.

Hmmm, yesterday you said when I claimed you said all statistics are useless and/or false you claimed I went full retard, but here you seem to be agreeing with someone who is claiming that all statistics are likely skewed. Yet you still think I am the joke.

 

[First]

100 people != a good cross section of the population by any stretch.

What are you blathering about, the poll had 800 respondents.

If the poll doesn't represent the populace in an equal manner, it is skewed. If you believe for one second that the people providing that poll didn't have a good idea what answers they were going to get before they polled you're uneducated in political polling and targeted journalism. All statistics can be skewed and likely are. Should I go to FOX News and see if they have a poll that contradicts the NBC/WSJ poll? If they did, what would your response be?

Yeah, hate to break it to you, but you quoted my post without actually responding to it. These respondents, from the way the poll methodology was described, self-identified, meaning the LV model and even actual turnout in the 2012 election (which you got flat wrong, btw) aren't even relevant. It simply shows a higher engagement for the Dems than the Repubs among a cross-section of 800 Americans. If it was an LV model, they would have then done much more statistical manipulation to get turnout more in-line with what has been the historical norm (which, as my CNN link showed, is still not good for Repubs, with 51-47 rejecting Romney and Dems garnering 1.2M more House votes).

 

[BoberFett]

Only difference is Obama was elected on that platform and established universal healthcare as a priority of the democratic ticket, and they achieved a super majority to get it through. That is called a MANDATE my friend, just like Bush achieved a mandate to lower taxes and got it passed. Furthermore, Obama handily won reelection against an opponent who's stated goal was to repeal the ACA. That my friend is an AFFIRMATION.

Not really. People didn't vote on ACA. They voted for a president. There is more than one issue. You're conflating issues, and calling a small majority a mandate for a single policy. That's a pretty big stretch.