The Deluge of Absurdity, Ignorance, and Bad Posts

[Simfan34]

Was conveniently posted directly into the goldmine, but I will make it official.

A new SUSA poll shows these awful numbers for Christie:

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Chris Christie is doing as Governor?
Approve 38%
Disapprove 56%

Should Governor Chris Christie run for President of the United States in 2012? Not run for President? Or do you not know enough to say?
Should Run 15%
Should Not 73%

Compared to Barack Obama, would Christie be a better President? A worse President? Or would he be about the same?
Better 29%
Worse 53%
About The Same 14%

Compared to George W. Bush, would Christie be a better President? A worse President? Or would he be about the same?
Better 25%
Worse 30%
About The Same 32%

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=5ef5275c-3166-493d-aecb-3d856c8705a5

I have a map in progress showing the ability of state governors to get good results for themselves. This looks like an outlier, and it is hard to see how Christie could suddenly become as unpopular as Scott, Kasich, Walker, or Snyder.

Exactly.  This is why I don't trust SurveyUSA polls in the first place.  Their first poll of Christie's approval had him underwater by  33-63% margin, if I remember correctly.

What's so funny about that?  The overwhelming majority of polls aside from SurveyUSA show Christie's job approval at an all-time high after Sandy.  Just because you may not like Christie doesn't mean that you can just ignore that.

[King]

Where do people hear the word "theory" and learn it to be antonym of something based in fact?  It's something that's never been explained. 

I even hear pro-science groups dish out the definition "in science, a theory is not a guess but yada yada yada."    But, outside of science, the word doesn't even mean a guess.    Nobody uses the word theory to mean a guess.  Where do people learn to think of the word theory like this?  It makes about as much as if cook books dished out the disclaimer "in the world of cooking, chicken is not a vegetable."  The definition of the word is universal.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Some people aren't aware of the difference between "theory" and "hypothesis"

A scientific theory by the way (like evolution) is defined as "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment."

[fezzyfestoon]

Some people aren't aware of the difference between "theory" and "hypothesis"

Which makes the debate over teaching Christianity in schools all the more entertaining.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

But it's SurveyUSA, and their polls are garbage.  They also have consistently had Chris Christie's job approval in the low 30s, even when nearly every other poll had him in at least the 50s.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

This thread is a trainwreck.  There comes a point where people are criticizing oldiesfreak as absurd and are being absurd themselves in the way they are doing it.

Did you really just cite a visiting scholar from the American Enterprise Institute in an attempt to make your point?

argumentum ad hominem. Don't dismiss an argument just because the author has a particular association.
If you think the only reason someone would be a Democrat in the 1950s and a Republican a generation later is because of race, you've somehow missed the fundamental restructuring of the role of regionalism and ideology in political parties that is constantly discussed on this forum.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

This thread is a trainwreck.  There comes a point where people are criticizing oldiesfreak as absurd and are being absurd themselves in the way they are doing it.

The only reason I quoted the one above is because of the fact he's obviously referring to a single year and a half old poll from SUSA (which has become a bit of a running joke if you check the Comedy Goldmine.)

[Oldiesfreak1854]

This thread is a trainwreck.  There comes a point where people are criticizing oldiesfreak as absurd and are being absurd themselves in the way they are doing it.

The only reason I quoted the one above is because of the fact he's obviously referring to a single year and a half old poll from SUSA (which has become a bit of a running joke if you check the Comedy Goldmine.)

Exactly.  Why do I have to be bullied by all of you when all I'm doing is daring to speak the truth?

[Kitteh]

I propose we ban Oldiesfreak stuff from the deluge. Regardless of how you feel about him it's cluttering this thread up. I've made a new thread for this.

[justfollowingtheelections]

The Republicans from the 1860s ould be Republicans today  and the Democrats from the old days 1860s would be Liberal Democrats today.

Absolutely they should be if they were around!  And they would be; they never "switched sides", the times (and the meanings of liberal and conservative)  just changed and made Republicans the conservatives and Democrats the liberals.

But it's true.

If you actually believe Strom Thurmond was to the left of Robert LaFollette, yes.

In the Oldiesfreak world Strom Thurmond was to the left of Robert LaFollette.

Until he had a change of heart and became a Republican because of the Democrats' opposition to the Civil Rights Act.

Yeah, but most segregationists never left the Democratic party.  A few became Republicans, but most did not.

And basically all of those are dead today. Or if not dead out of politics and with no influence whatsoever.

Lincoln is dead today as well, but does he seriously not make you more likely to support Republicans?

Paul Broun is alive today, but does he seriously not make you more likely NOT to support Republicans?

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I propose we ban Oldiesfreak stuff from the deluge. Regardless of how you feel about him it's cluttering this thread up. I've made a new thread for this.

Thank you, drj.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Again we witness the specter of intellectually dishonest misquoting.

He said,

"And we're not going to allow minorities to run roughshod over what you people believe in."

You inserted a "the" before "minorities" and deliberately juxaposed it next to "Obama" to twist his remarks into a racial comment.

Love how the crowd cheers the loudest after the 'minorities' part.

Talk about showing your true colors.

Why shouldn't the crowd be free to cheer to their hearts content? If in your own mind you believe that you represent the viewpoint of the majority, why would you allow any minority viewpoint to dominate you?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Again we witness the specter of intellectually dishonest misquoting.

He said,

"And we're not going to allow minorities to run roughshod over what you people believe in."

You inserted a "the" before "minorities" and deliberately juxaposed it next to "Obama" to twist his remarks into a racial comment.

Love how the crowd cheers the loudest after the 'minorities' part.

Talk about showing your true colors.

Why shouldn't the crowd be free to cheer to their hearts content? If in your own mind you believe that you represent the viewpoint of the majority, why would you allow any minority viewpoint to dominate you?

I'm pretty sure we've also got a thread for BSB.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

That's too bad, it would've been nice to have a hot Governor.

[morgieb]

That's too bad, it would've been nice to have a hot Governor.

This is a bad post why exactly?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

That's too bad, it would've been nice to have a hot Governor.

This is a bad post why exactly?

It's absurd to use appearance as even the smallest criterion for such a decision.

Plus, y'know, we already have a few hot Governors.

[Paul Kemp]

RAR RAR JINGOISM AND NATIONALISM RAR

There I just summarized all the people attacking Paul.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Almost as much of an HP as Hitler.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I am not interested in coddling communists. There is no shortage of communists in America, regardless of whether many communists self-identify. Simfan knows it, I know it, you know it, and everybody else knows it. It is time to start discussing what is really happening in America, particularly in the hallowed halls of educational establishments across the country. Tens of millions of minds have been destroyed by the work of these communists, and the nation will not survive if we do not change course...

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

In the running for best President we've ever had.

[Donerail]

In the running for best President we've ever had.

And who would you propose? Roosevelt? Truman? Johnson? Absurdity indeed...

[Antonio the Sixth]

In the running for best President we've ever had.

And who would you propose? Roosevelt? Truman? Johnson? Absurdity indeed...

LOL Libertarians LOL

[Simfan34]

The favorite of the forum Democrats (and real Democrats to an even greater extent) in 2016 seems to be former First Lady/CarpetbaggerSenator/Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Given her name recognition and the fact that she's admittedly done a good enough job as SoS, this current frontrunner status is natural. A lot could change over four years, but it seems likely that she will be in the public eye of speculation for at least the next two years (if she chooses not to run).

I've made it apparent before, but I do not support Hillary Clinton. Though Obama was at least perceived as a progressive and may yet move a little left in his second term, Clinton seems to be fairly "moderate" on domestic policy. If her husband is any indication (plus, you know, the 2008 campaign), she's at best a centrist and at worst a mainstream European conservative. In an effort to counter the crypto-fascist trend of the Republican Party since Reagan, Democratic politicians including Gary Hart and the Clintons have advocated retaining (or doubling down on) cultural liberalism while moving towards a neoliberal economic position.

Though big money has done a good job hiding it, the new attitude of unrestricted free trade, austerity, deregulation, and privatization has fundamentally failed, yet the Democratic Party has failed to move towards sensible leftism on anything besides same-sex marriage and possibly immigration. Obama is being tarnished as a "socialist" at the bare minimum for being marginally to the left of Bill and Hillary.

I will concede that Hillary Clinton would not really be different from Obama in terms of her policy as hypothetical president. If she's the nominee, I'd probably vote for her, and she'd probably be at least an okay president. So what really got me mad? Her supporters. In the forum, in the media (I could make a second rant about how all the liberal talking heads, even the so-called "progressives", are shilling her as much as possible and failing to talk to any Democrat who isn't also on board), and with most of the Democrats I meet. Every other new topic in the 2016 boards is about her.

When anyone, Democratic, Republican, or Independent, says anything remotely negative, they're faced with a swarm of mindless drones, many of whom probably viscerally opposed Hillary's 2008 run (for good reason). The enthusiasm of their support when Obama's second term has just started really reminds me of the hordes of Ron Paul supporters we thankfully won't have to deal with again.

My advice to the Clintards? Before mindlessly jumping on the bandwagon that the voice on the TV is telling you to jump on, take a good look at Hillary's record in the Senate, her statements during the 2008 campaign (also remember that her campaign was the first to dig up the birther crap). If you're still a Hillary supporter, then at least you have something to back it up with.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

The favorite of the forum Democrats (and real Democrats to an even greater extent) in 2016 seems to be former First Lady/CarpetbaggerSenator/Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Given her name recognition and the fact that she's admittedly done a good enough job as SoS, this current frontrunner status is natural. A lot could change over four years, but it seems likely that she will be in the public eye of speculation for at least the next two years (if she chooses not to run).

I've made it apparent before, but I do not support Hillary Clinton. Though Obama was at least perceived as a progressive and may yet move a little left in his second term, Clinton seems to be fairly "moderate" on domestic policy. If her husband is any indication (plus, you know, the 2008 campaign), she's at best a centrist and at worst a mainstream European conservative. In an effort to counter the crypto-fascist trend of the Republican Party since Reagan, Democratic politicians including Gary Hart and the Clintons have advocated retaining (or doubling down on) cultural liberalism while moving towards a neoliberal economic position.

Though big money has done a good job hiding it, the new attitude of unrestricted free trade, austerity, deregulation, and privatization has fundamentally failed, yet the Democratic Party has failed to move towards sensible leftism on anything besides same-sex marriage and possibly immigration. Obama is being tarnished as a "socialist" at the bare minimum for being marginally to the left of Bill and Hillary.

I will concede that Hillary Clinton would not really be different from Obama in terms of her policy as hypothetical president. If she's the nominee, I'd probably vote for her, and she'd probably be at least an okay president. So what really got me mad? Her supporters. In the forum, in the media (I could make a second rant about how all the liberal talking heads, even the so-called "progressives", are shilling her as much as possible and failing to talk to any Democrat who isn't also on board), and with most of the Democrats I meet. Every other new topic in the 2016 boards is about her.

When anyone, Democratic, Republican, or Independent, says anything remotely negative, they're faced with a swarm of mindless drones, many of whom probably viscerally opposed Hillary's 2008 run (for good reason). The enthusiasm of their support when Obama's second term has just started really reminds me of the hordes of Ron Paul supporters we thankfully won't have to deal with again.

My advice to the Clintards? Before mindlessly jumping on the bandwagon that the voice on the TV is telling you to jump on, take a good look at Hillary's record in the Senate, her statements during the 2008 campaign (also remember that her campaign was the first to dig up the birther crap). If you're still a Hillary supporter, then at least you have something to back it up with.

I don't understand why Snowstalker chose to troll this hard today.  My jimmies remain unrustled, though they are a tad disturbed.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Is it partially intended to rile up the Clintards? Yes. But I don't want to see Hillary as our nominee, and I despise how she already has an obsessed fanbase.