Slashdot Mirror

Blame for the economy:
Feb 23, 2011 52% Bush, 41% Obama, according to the Washington Times
May 4, 2011 51% Bush, % Obama Fox News(warning, video)
May 18, 2011 54% Bush, 39% Obama Rasmussen
The above all are right-wing sources, and all put more of the blame on Bush than Obama. So what about other polls?

April 28, 2011 63% Bush, 30% Obama Marist Poll
May 9, 2011 55% Bush, 33% Obama CNN

Unsurprisingly Bush fares even worse.

No, it is only 47%, but 40% strongly disapprove of his performance and only 24% strongly approve.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law which poll are you referring to, since there is still a plurality of people who want to see it repealed, that doesn't seem like an overwhelming majority supporting it...

OK, how do I *not* consign myself to the TSA's procedures if I need to fly somewhere? Go ahead. Tell me. I don't like it, but what do I do? And who is doing it happily? The TSA is the butt of stand up and late night jokes by the shit ton. No one likes those turkeys.

In my haste, I was evidently unclear. I was speaking of the population as a whole rather than of individual citizens. In any case, I am not so sure that the populace is really willing to do away with airport security, even if they do make jokes at its expense. See this poll, for instance.

Meanwhile, most people don't seem to have a problem playing with their phones while doing eighty down the highway.

Yes, *MOST* people support texting and driving. I'm sure you can link to surveys and polls that measured that, right? Right?

I picked a bad example, and you're probably quite correct that more people oppose texting and driving than those who do not. The point I was attempting to illustrate is that people are often disproportionately afraid of an unlikely event's occurrence (for example, a terrorist bombing) while ignoring or downplaying the risks of a higher-probability event's occurrence, such as the possibility of having a car accident for a longtime commuter. This disproportionate fear can often lead to over-reactive, knee-jerk policies that don't really make sense when analyzed in context.

Seriously, dude, you either have a drug warped view of the world, or you just slid in a from another reality.

While I appreciate your feedback, I think you will find that it is not necessary to insult someone in order to disagree or offer objective criticism.

Scott Rasmussen (who is hated by Republicans when his polls lean against them, and by Democrats when his polls lean against them) thinks the major division in Americans is not between left and right, but between the political class and average americans. He says people are tired of being governed by politicians united with business, and want to govern ourselves. I suppose he's right.

One correction - The incumbent in this election for governor is Bill Ritter who is not running for re-election. Maes Democratic opponent is John Hickenlooper who is currently the mayor of Denver

Correction to correction: Dan Maes somehow managed to win the Republican primary so he's the Republican candidate. He's facing Hickenlooper and independent-with-name-recognition Tom Tancredo, who ran for US President in 2008. Usually third-party candidates don't have a chance, but Tancredo has a lot of local support, so right now he's polling 18% with Hickenlooper at about 40% and Maes with about 30%.

As an aside, every time I ride through Denver I see dozens of people out on those cute red bicycles. It's an amazingly successful program, that isn't supported by Federal, State, or local funds, and since the individuals who use the bikes have a financial stake (deposit, credit card info) in keeping the bikes in reasonable shape, it has a much higher chance of being successful in the long-term than many of the other city bike programs that have been floated. Plus, the bikes are keen. They weigh a ton but they have a huge cargo basket, so they're actually useful for lugging stuff. Two weeks ago I saw a couple riding them and they had a kid's bicycle in the basket of one bike, and the kid herself in the basket of the other bike -- not a WISE thing, but indicative of the flexibility the bikes can provide. They have front and rear lights that are always on when the bike's moving, compliments of a hub generator system, so they're quite visible. I think it's a fantastic program.

I can't find the article right now but Dan Maes is on record as saying that Denver's bike program "may threaten our personal freedoms". Once you realize that the last job Maes had was as a used car salesman, his feelings might be more understandable, if not more sensible.

Um, yes, people overwhelmingly want it repealed: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law

How can you gain the knowledge of producing systems to help humans survive in space with robots?

You're begging the question. If we understand that sending humans into space on long exploration missions is not a useful thing to do, then producing systems to keep them alive for such voyages is not useful knowledge. It's as if you were to complain (to steal a concept from someone else in this thread), "We'll never gain the knowledge of how to build popsicle-stick skyscrapers, if we don't build build popsicle-stick skyscrapers!"

Most people interested in space are interested in it because of the possibility of man one day making it possible to live out there for long periods...I don't know what you think on the issue, however if you personally think humans should never go to space then a vast majority disagree with you.

Many people interested in space are interested in it because they think we're going to encounter humanoid aliens a la Star Trek. That's not a justification.

Look, the facts of the matter are not subject to vote, so people's opinions on this do not tell us whether manned exploration is economically viable or not. But your beliefs about those opinions seem to be erroneous. The fact is that most Americans -- by a very slim margin, within the margin of error -- think that a manned mission to Mars should not be a current goal of the space program. Only 45% think that investment in space exploration since the first moon landing has been worth it.

Hey, I would really like it to be economically viable for me, personally, to go into space. But my wants do jack shit to effect physics and economics. There's nothing I could do in space that makes it worthwhile for anyone to send me up there. If an occasional rich person wants to take the ultimate thrill ride, I don't think the government should be subsidizing them. (I also don't think we should have an economic system where the government helps a handful of people assemble billions in wealth while others have trouble with basic necessities, but that's another rant.)

The only economic argument for putting men in space is the same as subsidizing the arts: it creates jobs and people find it inspiring. So, I say again, let's consider manned space flight as just another bit of performance art, put it under the NEA, and let it compete for funding with other art forms.

Also you overlook the fact that the reason we have up until now genuinely sent humans into space instead of robots was because we didn't have the technology available at the time,

Wow. Friend, you need a history review badly. Both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. had robotic probes on the moon before we we put people there. Here's some remedial reading for you: wik pages on the Luna and Surveyor program.

We went men to the moon as part of a pissing contest with the U.S.S.R. That is all.

Also on your point about the wind farm. You're comparing money spent on research that was being pioneered to a complex that was simply being built.

Um, yes. I mentioned that. I'm talking about what else could be done with the money.

The last poll I saw putting forward the "Did Bush know about 9/11 in advance" had democrats at a nice 35% in the affirmative with an additional 26% "not sure". And in case you don't like Rasmussen, Zogby's earlier poll had Dems at 42% for their belief that Bush either participated in or allowed 9/11.

So you and your fellow left wing 'denouncers' are clearly in the minority of your party.

Dramatic events like that with so much conflicting and confusing information released about them always generate conspiracy theories. Much like the Kennedy assassination, people always feel that they aren't getting the full story, and they're probably right about that much. A lot of information remains classified about these things for many years. That helps to fuel the conspiracies. Not much that can be done about that. Looking at the right-wing poll, they hold numerous crazy beliefs based, apparently, on nothing more than crazy talk-show host rants and chain emails. They don't even bother to do basic fact-checking.

This doesn't really excuse belief in conspiracies, but we're generally not doing anything based on those beliefs, while the right is apparently willing to elect someone like Palin. It's like they're actually searching for the dumbest possible candidate. But hey, she's folksy and photogenic, so she's obviously qualified!

The last poll I saw putting forward the "Did Bush know about 9/11 in advance" had democrats at a nice 35% in the affirmative with an additional 26% "not sure". And in case you don't like Rasmussen, Zogby's earlier poll had Dems at 42% for their belief that Bush either participated in or allowed 9/11.

So you and your fellow left wing 'denouncers' are clearly in the minority of your party.

With all of the big corporate entities buying and merging, your radio, newspaper and television media is increasingly controlled by fewer and fewer people.

With the internet it's relatively easy to join the media, the hard part being getting found.

At least in government there's always the threat that a politician will lose his or her job if they displease the people.

Bush only lost his job because of the term limit presidents have. That despite the fact that he started a war many people opposed. I'm still waiting to see those WMDs it was claimed Sadam had. Obama's approval rating isn't good, actually 45% strongly disapprove while 44% approve of Obama's performance as president.

With a corporate entity, they don't have to appease anyone as long as they make money.

Corporate entities, most anyway, only make money when they appease enough to have enough buyers.

Personally as I've been saying for years I want the FCC abolished and people allowed to homestead the airwaves. If I wanted to and could afford it I should be able to start a radio station that is for say model railroad enthusiasts, who were some of the first computer hackers.

Taxpayer-funded national broadcasters, like ABC (Australia), BBC or CBC can be critical of the government in a way that corporate broadcasters cannot be critical of their parent company.

I can't speak about elsewhere but in the US the national broadcasters can be, but aren't always, critical of government. Fox News is pretty critical of Obama, just as it was about Clinton. On the other hand I haven't heard any national news broadcaster, including Fox, ask Bush where all those WMDs Bush said Saddam had are. And with the airwaves homesteaded there could be even more voices to listen to.

Falcon

She is not crazy at all and if you think huffington post is a reliable source of information on conservative candidates then you are crazy.

How about having her describe her opinions instead instead: http://www.sharronangle.com/issues/

Or how about the opinion of the people of Nevada: Angle: 50% Reid: 39%

You mock the parent using huffingtonpost.com as a source of information on conservative candidates and then say shes ahead using rasmussenreports.com as your source?

I think that makes you two even.

She is not crazy at all and if you think huffington post is a reliable source of information on conservative candidates then you are crazy.

How about having her describe her opinions instead instead: http://www.sharronangle.com/issues/

Or how about the opinion of the people of Nevada: Angle: 50% Reid: 39%

Hm, can't find the precise article immediately. Perhaps you could start with

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2010/tea_party_48_obama_44

and move on to consider recent elections, the only polls that matter anyway. Another applicable poll is found here:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2010/34_say_they_or_someone_close_to_them_part_of_tea_party_movement

Some choice quotes:

"58% of Mainstream voters have a favorable opinion of the movement. "

"Fifty-two percent (52%) believe the average member of the Tea Party movement has a better understanding of the issues facing America today than the average member of Congress. "

"51% of Americans had a favorable view of the “tea parties” held nationwide"

Perhaps I spoke a little too strongly with "majority support", as those words can have many meanings. I stand by my claim that the "Tea Party" is now one of the most supported political organizations.

Hm, can't find the precise article immediately. Perhaps you could start with

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2010/tea_party_48_obama_44

and move on to consider recent elections, the only polls that matter anyway. Another applicable poll is found here:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2010/34_say_they_or_someone_close_to_them_part_of_tea_party_movement

Some choice quotes:

"58% of Mainstream voters have a favorable opinion of the movement. "

"Fifty-two percent (52%) believe the average member of the Tea Party movement has a better understanding of the issues facing America today than the average member of Congress. "

"51% of Americans had a favorable view of the “tea parties” held nationwide"

Perhaps I spoke a little too strongly with "majority support", as those words can have many meanings. I stand by my claim that the "Tea Party" is now one of the most supported political organizations.

That doesn't mean they aren't primed for revolution. It just means that revolution isn't worth it for them... yet.

The problem is, that statement is just as true for the United States, and not a few other western nations.

All you're doing is restating the fundamental political question faced by all societies - will upsetting the current order bring a more favorable situation than continuing to tolerate it? And I have seen no evidence the Chinese people have decided that question in favor of revolution, any more than the US has.

Less so, actually. If you consider the results of this poll, it appears the Chinese are a lot more contented with their situation than citizens in most western nations are with theirs.

The majority of America supports health care reform.

56% of likely voters want to appeal healthcare bill

The Democrats have tried to be bipartisan, but the Republicans have stone-walled them.

Democrats change locks in house oversight committee room

I know today was a hard day for you with all the Democratic incumbents being voted out in the primaries I'm sure it has nothing to do with the Democratic party moving so far left that their members can't stand their socialist views, now relax and go back to matching MSNBC.

Show me one survey where 50% + 1 of the people surveyed that like the health care bill that was passed. For everyone that you can find (if any) I'll find several that show otherwise.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

See the right edge. I can see only two "surveys" done there that have an approval rating higher than 50%, most are WELL BELOW, and a big reason why the (D) are probably going to lose the house and possibly even senate in Nov.

What a lot of people are missing about this is that the Hispanics citizens in the state of Arizona largely support this law. Arizona is about 60% Caucasian, and about 30% Hispanic [source]. Rasmussen shows that this law has about a 70% approval rate within the state [source]. That means that is *every* Caucasian person in the state was in favor of this law (which is obviously not true), then more than one in three Hispanic citizen would also favor the law.

In reality, a strong majority of Hispanic citizens in Arizona support this legislation. That's because your skin color doesn't have to be one color to feel the negative effects of illegal aliens in the workforce. In fact, one could argue that the influx of illegals, who are almost entirely Hispanic, has created an expectation that Hispanics are willing to work for less money, thereby hurting the Hispanic citizens of Arizona disproportionately.

Note also that there is a fairly high level of concern over the rights of US citizens -- that's because, contrary to popular belief, the right is composed of lots of libertarians, and libertarian thinking is a part of the Republican party base. That means that effectively, the voters are indeed concerned about negative effects of this law, but feel they will be outweighed by the positive results. If it is abused, those same voters are likely to swing to the other side, and repeal the law.

Not the AC.

"Rethugs", how clever.

Yup, a its about as clever as calling Obama "0". Pot meet kettle.

Not at all. The "0" moniker fits Obama perfectly. Zero good ideas, zero patriotism, zero executive experience...the list goes on and on. Republicans, on the other hand, just aren't known for "thuggish" behavior. Look at how civil the tea party demonstrations have been, for instance. (Granted, they're not all Republicans at those, but the majority probably are.)

Your comprehension of English is abysmal. The "will of the people" is most directly what the majority of the people want. Of course, we don't live in a pure democracy, we live in a republic, but I'm sure you knew that. THAT is why our "elected representatives" have power instead of it being straight majority rule.

This isn't actually true. There was some among the Founders who obviously thought that requiring a simple majority of citizens to pass laws and bills was a bad idea. This is why we're a representative democracy and not a straight democracy. Often times the electorate isn't informed or educated enough to make some decisions (treaties, wars, and such), and sometimes elected representatives are forced to make unpopular decisions for the common good , our system allows for this.

Sure, when the decisions are actually good that's fine. On the other hand, when the decisions are as wrongheaded as many the current Congress and President favor, it's not so good. :-P

To be clear, I wasn't advocating pure democracy. I was pointing out the irony and hypocrisy of the "Democrat" party in not respecting the will of the people.

At any rate, you are dead wrong once again. Check out this Gallup poll [newsweek.com], showing only 36% approve of 0's handling of healthcare. Even the most left leaning of "news" sources can't ignore the facts. Get yours straight next time.

I've seen several polls with widely varying numbers. I've seem single polls on the issue with wildly varing numbers depending on how the question is asked. Which poll do we go by? I know the answer, the one you like and that supports your political tilt. This is true for everyone. I haven't actually seen a well sampled bill (i.e. not on a blag, or news site) that has the opponents of the bill representing a meaningful majority over those that supported it. Generally the percentages work up around 42% in favor, and 46% against (which is about the same margin as most of our elections, incidentally). In these cases things become tricky, since can you really crap on the will of 42% of the electorate to make 46% happy? And of these, probably 90% of each camp don't care strongly, leaving 10% of the population who have very strong opinions and a deep love of waggling their tongues.

Nice job of pulling some statistics out of your nether regions. There's not been a single major poll that shows a majority favor 0care. Gallup, by the way, is particularly respected.

You're also off base as far as your estimate that only 10% have strong opinions. Rasmussen (who's been the most accurate on recent elections) finds that 73% of voters have strong opinions about the President for instance. 30% strongly approve, while 43% strongly disapprove.

. I guess you forgot there was broad bipartisan support for both wars, and almost every country's intelligence agency thought Iraq had a nuclear weapons program. Apparently many have forgotten that UN inspectors actually observed both chemical and biological agents in Iraq.

You managed to make a nice fallacy, and completely ignore the point. Just because something is bipartisan doesn't make it right. If I get some democrats, and some republicans, to agree that we should burn the Constitution does it make it more r

Does it matter why someone disapproves of the current bill? If the majority disapproves (which it does) then it should not be passed and Obama should accept defeat.
Why even give that link when admitting it is old data? How about something new?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/53_remain_opposed_to_health_care_plan
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/55_say_congress_should_start_over_on_health_care

To be honest, I don't know enough about the regulations in the health insurance field to say how much or how little they affect a small business health insurance start-up. I can say that there's more to it than just regulations, though. Health insurance, like any insurance, is a managed risk pool. The bigger the pool, the more risk you can take on. A small business insurance provider simply could not compete with the established, larger corporations as payouts would probably have to be capped at lower levels.

Yes, but there are plenty of poor "big insurance" choices right now. It is rare and an exception to find good coverage at a reasonable price. It is impossible to get individual insurance as good as that provided via an employer, because of government regulation. They are simply not allowed to provide it! What's more - I can't believe this is blamed on greed! Health insurance gets an average of 2-3% profit, which is below standard corporate profit. It is simply not a very profitable business, and its problems are not due to greed - they are lack of competition -- again, because of regulations which were meant to stabilize insurance according to insurance companies.

Compare the health insurance industry to the pharmaceutical industry. Vastly different -- pharma is among the most profitable (nearly as profitable as the oil industry is right now -- ). And is anyone cracking down on them? Nope. McCain and Obama have been helping them with healthcare funding under the pretense of reform -- in fact, one such deal in 2009 involved lower prices of drugs for government officials -- and the elderly, by the PhRMA.

As for the short-sighted executives -- I've seen no such thing in health insurance. How about Banking? Oh hell yes! And guess who got bailed out? Sure there's a lot of fuss about bonuses right now, but this is both after the fact and more bark than bite.

You've provided no source and I haven't been able to find one for you, so I can't speak to the budgeting of Medicare (though I've always been told that it historically comes in under budget). However, in terms of relative GDP, $12 billion in 1965 is approx. $97 billion in 1990; $13.5 billion in 1965 would be about $110 billion in 1990 so it doesn't seem all that bad to me--off by 12% for a 25-year prediction.

A source: http://blog.heritage.org/2009/08/04/health-care-reform-cost-estimates-what-is-the-track-record/ I don't know how you are calculating inflation (it is not a linear or simply process), because in this kind of case there will be many imperfections. The inflation rate itself was definitely influenced by debt incurred by Medicaid failures.

Really? Are you sure the majority of people do not want this? Actually you could be right about this specific bill since it's decidedly not universal healthcare which we were all promised. As you may recall, Obama made a big deal about universal healthcare during his campaign and a majority of people voted for him, leading to his election. If you listened to the conservatives, you'd think that they were the majority, that some of them (apparently) begrudgingly voted for Obama, and then were absolutely shocked when he started doing the things he said he'd do if elected. Despite what you may hear on oxymoronically-titled conservative radio shows like "The Wilkow Majority," you're not necessarily the majority.

Recent polling does not show this kind of reform is wanted. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform .. I don't listen to partisan news radio, it is all trash.

I'm sure you're a fine guy/gal in Real Life but my first encounter wit

And yet... this has nothing to do with Republicans or Democrat. It has to do with the American people and according to recent polls, the majority of American people do not support this bill: Rasmussen Reports 43% support, 53% Oppose.

This bill will

• ... Fundamentally transform how health care insurance is managed in the United States
• ... Probably result in lower standards of health care service, as businesses are forced into tightening their budgets. We already see that Walgreens has decided to drop Medicaid patients because the government is reimbursing them a fraction of wholesale.
• ... Allows the federal government to provide funds for abortions. This is the political sticking point that is fracturing the Democrat party at the moment.
• ... Allows the Republicans to sit on the sidelines and nit-pick, since the House is Democrat controlled, and Senate is 59/100 (but their bill passed already).
• ... Piss off the American public. 53% of the polled public oppose the bill as written.

The bill will probably pass. There is an indication that many Democrats will vote Yes in a "scorched earth" fashion, as many are already polling to lose their positions in November. The Republicans will probably sweep in the fall elections, akin to 1994, stalling Obama's progressive run of the last year and a half. Since his administration has shown no inkling of actually being "bi-partisan", unless he fundamentally changes his approach to politics, Obama will probably be remembered as Jimmy Carter II.

I don't [agree]: constitutional issues trump majority rule in the US

You stated, that police inability to stop pot-growing using legal methods is, in itself, evidence, that pot-growing ought to become legal. This was and remains non-sense: police ought to keep trying to find legal methods to fight the crime until they prevail (or it stops being a crime).

But your idea — that law-enforcement's imperfections ought to mean, the things they fight aren't really crimes — is ridiculous on its own. For obvious examples, consider murder. Or rape. Or theft/burglary. All of these have been illegal for centuries and millenniums, but keep occurring — despite police fighting them and using un-Constitutional (and otherwise really bad) methods for that on occasion.

Do you propose, we just give up and legalize those things?

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/34651/most_americans_support_legalizing_marijuana

The link quotes 53% in favor vs. 43% opposing legalization. Well, if true, then what's the problem in Congress?... Are they too busy nationalizing health-care (despite far fewer people favoring that )? Whatever — if Americans want it legalized, it will happen eventually — but until then, police ought to treat it as a crime it is and keep looking for ways to fight it (legally).

Great post, except the part where you ascribe untruths to the Democratic party. They (we) represent a majority of Americans right now, and are not "far left" and DEFINITELY don't "hate the military". In fact many leaders of the Democrats (including Murtha) are retired military. Heck even many leaders of the far left, including Kos of DailyKos, are retired military. We may disagree about what is best for the military and the country, but please don't assign motives where none exist.

"Untruths"????

Did you not watch the video or read the quotes? Are you denying what is right there for everyone to read? The fact that members of the Democrat Party have, in the past, served, DOES NOT invalidate or absolve them from actions they have taken and things they have said since then.

Stop trying to use "Military Service" as a shield for heinous actions and statements. It's a braindead, strawman argument.

Oh, and the Dems representing a "majority" of the people is BS, complete and total. I mean, how can you POSSIBLY square that circle when poll after poll shows that Americans, OVERWHELMINGLY don't agree with the direction the Democrats are taking the country in, and that they don't trust the Dems?

Yes, Political PARTY affiliation is slightly higher with the Dems than the GOP, Although that is shrinking.

However if you look at IDEOLOGY, Conservative vs Liberal vs Moderate, you will find that Conservatives FAR AND AWAY outnumber Liberals, and the "Moderate" group is shrinking, with more former moderates now identifying as Conservative. The Liberal group is also shrinking.

The nation is moving AWAY from far leftism as rapidly as it can, and Americans are becoming MORE conservative than ever before. So to say that the Far-Let Democrat party "repreresents a majority of Americans" is prevarication of the worst kind. To put it bluntly, you are full of shit and it is laughably easy to prove it.

Great post, except the part where you ascribe untruths to the Democratic party. They (we) represent a majority of Americans right now, and are not "far left" and DEFINITELY don't "hate the military". In fact many leaders of the Democrats (including Murtha) are retired military. Heck even many leaders of the far left, including Kos of DailyKos, are retired military. We may disagree about what is best for the military and the country, but please don't assign motives where none exist.

"Untruths"????

Did you not watch the video or read the quotes? Are you denying what is right there for everyone to read? The fact that members of the Democrat Party have, in the past, served, DOES NOT invalidate or absolve them from actions they have taken and things they have said since then.

Stop trying to use "Military Service" as a shield for heinous actions and statements. It's a braindead, strawman argument.

Oh, and the Dems representing a "majority" of the people is BS, complete and total. I mean, how can you POSSIBLY square that circle when poll after poll shows that Americans, OVERWHELMINGLY don't agree with the direction the Democrats are taking the country in, and that they don't trust the Dems?

Yes, Political PARTY affiliation is slightly higher with the Dems than the GOP, Although that is shrinking.

However if you look at IDEOLOGY, Conservative vs Liberal vs Moderate, you will find that Conservatives FAR AND AWAY outnumber Liberals, and the "Moderate" group is shrinking, with more former moderates now identifying as Conservative. The Liberal group is also shrinking.

The nation is moving AWAY from far leftism as rapidly as it can, and Americans are becoming MORE conservative than ever before. So to say that the Far-Let Democrat party "repreresents a majority of Americans" is prevarication of the worst kind. To put it bluntly, you are full of shit and it is laughably easy to prove it.

It was the Democratic wing of the Democratic party that put Obama into office, period."

They put Obama in as the Dem candidate, but, VOTERS put him in office, and I stick by my assertions on the Independents.

"Unfortunately, the facts don't match that storyline. A majority of Americans favor single payer, not just a "public option"."

Wow..what polls are you getting this from?? Not a single poll I've seen say the majority of US citizens want the public option, much less a govt. single payer option. From what I've seen from multiple polls from multiple sources, it is quite the opposite of what you say. There is close consensus of some kind of public option, but, the single payer thing would be dead the day they actually tried to put that forth.

Sure, I know one can search and find special polls and stats that will argue for any side of any case, but, from what I've seen, there is just not a majority support of the single payer option at all in the US. I do thing the more left leaning side of the Dems DO want this, and know it won't go through immediately. I think they are going the route to slide it in the backdoor over time, if they stay in power that long.

"Oh, so you have some of those teabagging protests in your area? You know, the ones where they thank Obama for making the largest middle class tax cut in history?"

You seem to think something is wrong with people protesting Obama's policies? I think that healthy distrust of the govt is absolutely required to keep the govt. in check by the people, no matter what side you are on. I saw plenty of protest (and yes, some VERY distasteful things said too) back when GW's admin. was in office. I support that kind of protest just as much...I am, however, a bit puzzled why the news doesn't treat the two protest movements the same in their coverage or commentary.

This large middle class tax cut you mention....where and when exactly did this occur? I've certainly not seen this and I'm quite middle class. I actually see a raise by the current administration in my cost of living, due to the coming $$ it will cost us all with the Cap and Trade laws passed. It may not be a tax, but, I'm losing money either way, so I see them the same. I'm also worried about hyper inflation coming down the pipe in a year or two, due to the extremely high deficit spending, the level of which we've not seen before (and GW took it to soaring heights himself which pissed me off).

And unicorns! Don't forget that most Americans believe in unicorns.

That's because republicans and computer rarely meet.

That's funny, cause see I work in an office full of engineers and software programmers, who work on their computers all day and automate their homes for fun (they are automation engineers, btw - you're not a geek until you write drivers in assembly to marry industrial automation hardware with your OS of choice), and every single one of them is a Republican, and some are hard-line conservatives.

It's also odd, considering I just saw on C-SPAN last night a conferance of people belonging to "RightOnline" - a group of right-wing bloggers.

Finally, what really gets me, is that Democrats only make up 36.8% of the population, Republicans make up 33.3%, and Unaffiliated make up 29.9% (everyone is up a point or two except the Dems, btw) as of August 1, according to Rassmusen.

Now, follow allong with me here, the US has a penetration rate of 74.7% according to internetworldstats.com. Assuming Republicans rarely use computers, and Democrats - 36.8% - plus Unaffiliated - 29.9% - equals 66.7%, where's the missing 8%? Well, obviously it must come from Republicans!

Ok, so assuming that's true, around 12% of computer users in the US must be Republicans. You say that's not significant, but look at it the other way! It means that a minimum of 25% or so Republicans use a computer, and that can hardly make a republican owning a computer a rare thing.

Since we've debunked the idea that Republicans owning a computer is rare, and since a large portion of democrats are old people (65% of whome don't own a computer) and elitist erudite snobs who shun technology (look at the senate, seriously, holy frickin cow!), clearly 100% of democrats and 100% of the Unaffiliated is not an accurate figure for computer use.

We can safely assume it's about 75% in each catagory.

In other words, you're an ass.

Actually, Obama's overall approval rating dropped below 50% as early as July, with his Approval Index being below zero every day since June: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history

Warmists

What the fuck?! The only people I've ever seen trying to turn this into a political debate are the people who deny anthropogenic climate exists. If they aren't spouting debunked, unsourced lies like the parent, they're claiming it's a socialist conspiracy to increase taxes. There are rough 6 groups involved in the climate change 'debate':

• Climatologists, who have reached consensus, not only that climate change is certainly happening, is due to human influence, and is actually worse than they dare mention to the public.
• The public, who are heavily swayed by the media and lack the ability to discern the truth for themselves.
• A few non-climatologists scientists who remain sceptical (Dyson being one of them).
• The conspiracy theorists and crackpots who believe climate change is a political scam -- yeah, the Moon landings were fake too, 9/11 inside job, blah blah.
• Oil industry shills who need to keep their businesses going.
• Lazy bastards who will go to great lengths to believe the previous two groups, so they don't have to bother changing their lifestyles or trade in their Hummer.

There is no dissent in the scientific community. The only people politicising this, or even turning it into a debate, are right-wingnuts like you. Really, I'm surprised you didn't get LiberalAsASwearWord(tm) into your post, without even knowing what that means.

Yeah but we have Obama doing God knows what over the next 3.5 years. He's not off to a good start. His approval rating has plummeted. In fact, he just crossed the threshold where disapproval outweighs approval. A huge issue with people is immigration, and I suspect that how Obama decides to handle this issue will play heavily on his approval rating if he does what I fear he may.

I would hardly call Obama a Goliath. Poor comparison. The best thing Obama has going for him is the Republican party's intolerance and ignorance, but that may not be enough after Obama's dealt with the likes of CIA conspiracies and federal transparency -- i.e. secret programs beyond warrantless wiretapping and auditing the Federal Reserve, both for which he's acting suspicious over. If either arrives on his table it will hurt him, almost guaranteed.

Look closer. Obama is popular, but his policies are not.

Most voters (58%) say the nation is heading down the wrong track:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track/right_direction_or_wrong_track

Voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats on six out of 10 key issues, including the top issue of the economy.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues/trust_on_issues

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 49% of voters see health care as a very important issue. That is down from 61% in early May and 62% in April. This is the first time since August 2007 that the majority of voters do not see the issue as very important.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/importance_of_issues2/importance_of_issues

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans favor an across-the-board tax cut for all Americans to stimulate the U.S. economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/economic_stimulus_package/june_2009/51_say_cut_everybody_s_taxes_to_stimulate_the_economy

Most voters (53%) believe increases in government spending hurt the economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/taxes/june_2009/53_say_more_government_spending_hurts_the_economy

And then there is the Generic Congressional Ballot which is an indication whether voters would vote for their district's candidate. It is tied right now and the Republicans actually took a two-point lead for a single week in the middle of March. Since mid-April, the parties have been roughly even.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_ballot/generic_congressional_ballot

The Obama Apologists should be concerned with the trends.

Look closer. Obama is popular, but his policies are not.

Most voters (58%) say the nation is heading down the wrong track:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track/right_direction_or_wrong_track

Voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats on six out of 10 key issues, including the top issue of the economy.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues/trust_on_issues

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 49% of voters see health care as a very important issue. That is down from 61% in early May and 62% in April. This is the first time since August 2007 that the majority of voters do not see the issue as very important.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/importance_of_issues2/importance_of_issues

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans favor an across-the-board tax cut for all Americans to stimulate the U.S. economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/economic_stimulus_package/june_2009/51_say_cut_everybody_s_taxes_to_stimulate_the_economy

Most voters (53%) believe increases in government spending hurt the economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/taxes/june_2009/53_say_more_government_spending_hurts_the_economy

And then there is the Generic Congressional Ballot which is an indication whether voters would vote for their district's candidate. It is tied right now and the Republicans actually took a two-point lead for a single week in the middle of March. Since mid-April, the parties have been roughly even.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_ballot/generic_congressional_ballot

The Obama Apologists should be concerned with the trends.

Look closer. Obama is popular, but his policies are not.

Most voters (58%) say the nation is heading down the wrong track:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track/right_direction_or_wrong_track

Voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats on six out of 10 key issues, including the top issue of the economy.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues/trust_on_issues

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 49% of voters see health care as a very important issue. That is down from 61% in early May and 62% in April. This is the first time since August 2007 that the majority of voters do not see the issue as very important.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/importance_of_issues2/importance_of_issues

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans favor an across-the-board tax cut for all Americans to stimulate the U.S. economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/economic_stimulus_package/june_2009/51_say_cut_everybody_s_taxes_to_stimulate_the_economy

Most voters (53%) believe increases in government spending hurt the economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/taxes/june_2009/53_say_more_government_spending_hurts_the_economy

And then there is the Generic Congressional Ballot which is an indication whether voters would vote for their district's candidate. It is tied right now and the Republicans actually took a two-point lead for a single week in the middle of March. Since mid-April, the parties have been roughly even.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_ballot/generic_congressional_ballot

The Obama Apologists should be concerned with the trends.

Look closer. Obama is popular, but his policies are not.

Most voters (58%) say the nation is heading down the wrong track:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track/right_direction_or_wrong_track

Voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats on six out of 10 key issues, including the top issue of the economy.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues/trust_on_issues

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 49% of voters see health care as a very important issue. That is down from 61% in early May and 62% in April. This is the first time since August 2007 that the majority of voters do not see the issue as very important.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/importance_of_issues2/importance_of_issues

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans favor an across-the-board tax cut for all Americans to stimulate the U.S. economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/economic_stimulus_package/june_2009/51_say_cut_everybody_s_taxes_to_stimulate_the_economy

Most voters (53%) believe increases in government spending hurt the economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/taxes/june_2009/53_say_more_government_spending_hurts_the_economy

And then there is the Generic Congressional Ballot which is an indication whether voters would vote for their district's candidate. It is tied right now and the Republicans actually took a two-point lead for a single week in the middle of March. Since mid-April, the parties have been roughly even.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_ballot/generic_congressional_ballot

The Obama Apologists should be concerned with the trends.

Look closer. Obama is popular, but his policies are not.

Most voters (58%) say the nation is heading down the wrong track:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track/right_direction_or_wrong_track

Voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats on six out of 10 key issues, including the top issue of the economy.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues/trust_on_issues

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 49% of voters see health care as a very important issue. That is down from 61% in early May and 62% in April. This is the first time since August 2007 that the majority of voters do not see the issue as very important.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/importance_of_issues2/importance_of_issues

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans favor an across-the-board tax cut for all Americans to stimulate the U.S. economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/economic_stimulus_package/june_2009/51_say_cut_everybody_s_taxes_to_stimulate_the_economy

Most voters (53%) believe increases in government spending hurt the economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/taxes/june_2009/53_say_more_government_spending_hurts_the_economy

And then there is the Generic Congressional Ballot which is an indication whether voters would vote for their district's candidate. It is tied right now and the Republicans actually took a two-point lead for a single week in the middle of March. Since mid-April, the parties have been roughly even.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_ballot/generic_congressional_ballot

The Obama Apologists should be concerned with the trends.

Look closer. Obama is popular, but his policies are not.

Most voters (58%) say the nation is heading down the wrong track:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track/right_direction_or_wrong_track

Voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats on six out of 10 key issues, including the top issue of the economy.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues/trust_on_issues

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 49% of voters see health care as a very important issue. That is down from 61% in early May and 62% in April. This is the first time since August 2007 that the majority of voters do not see the issue as very important.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/importance_of_issues2/importance_of_issues

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans favor an across-the-board tax cut for all Americans to stimulate the U.S. economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/economic_stimulus_package/june_2009/51_say_cut_everybody_s_taxes_to_stimulate_the_economy

Most voters (53%) believe increases in government spending hurt the economy, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/taxes/june_2009/53_say_more_government_spending_hurts_the_economy

And then there is the Generic Congressional Ballot which is an indication whether voters would vote for their district's candidate. It is tied right now and the Republicans actually took a two-point lead for a single week in the middle of March. Since mid-April, the parties have been roughly even.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_ballot/generic_congressional_ballot

The Obama Apologists should be concerned with the trends.

Straw man...I never said that.

Not specfically, but that's exactly what you implied. In order for a bailout to have the effect you suggest, the people who actually determine the value (aka Wall Street) would have to understand less than you. Sure you can find people with money invested who don't understand what is going on, but a huge portion of the market is managed by professionals who do actual research.

some are very beholden to what the fickle masses think they should do.

But the public wasn't asking for this, the banks were. Public sentiment has been either mixed or overwhelmingly against.

I'm not defending the gold standard, just saying that now perception of value is much more fickle and salient

Can you prove that? People seem to forget that you can't actually eat gold, nor is it a practial building material. As a result, for gold to have value someone needs to have faith that someone else will believe it has value.

I believe this is the summary you're looking for. You'll have to dig a bit deeper to see the actual questions.

A Rasmussen report on just the NYT favorability ratings. Lots of interesting numbers in that one, none of which looks good for the Times.

A Rasmussen poll specificall about this election: 49/14 Media will actively try to help Obama/McCain

Here's a Zogby poll summary from last year: results 64/28 liberal/conservative bias.

From the Pew report. The Times is rated at 18% for credability.

Another Rasmussen report that shows over 50% believe the media tried to activly hurt Palin.

A write up of a Harvard study with some other studies referenced at the bottom.

These studies are not too hard to find. Just Google media bias and they pop up all over the place. The Media bias Wiki page also references some more studies.

I believe this is the summary you're looking for. You'll have to dig a bit deeper to see the actual questions.

A Rasmussen report on just the NYT favorability ratings. Lots of interesting numbers in that one, none of which looks good for the Times.

A Rasmussen poll specificall about this election: 49/14 Media will actively try to help Obama/McCain

Here's a Zogby poll summary from last year: results 64/28 liberal/conservative bias.

From the Pew report. The Times is rated at 18% for credability.

Another Rasmussen report that shows over 50% believe the media tried to activly hurt Palin.

A write up of a Harvard study with some other studies referenced at the bottom.

These studies are not too hard to find. Just Google media bias and they pop up all over the place. The Media bias Wiki page also references some more studies.

I believe this is the summary you're looking for. You'll have to dig a bit deeper to see the actual questions.

A Rasmussen report on just the NYT favorability ratings. Lots of interesting numbers in that one, none of which looks good for the Times.

A Rasmussen poll specificall about this election: 49/14 Media will actively try to help Obama/McCain

Here's a Zogby poll summary from last year: results 64/28 liberal/conservative bias.

From the Pew report. The Times is rated at 18% for credability.

Another Rasmussen report that shows over 50% believe the media tried to activly hurt Palin.

A write up of a Harvard study with some other studies referenced at the bottom.

These studies are not too hard to find. Just Google media bias and they pop up all over the place. The Media bias Wiki page also references some more studies.

I believe this is the summary you're looking for. You'll have to dig a bit deeper to see the actual questions.

A Rasmussen report on just the NYT favorability ratings. Lots of interesting numbers in that one, none of which looks good for the Times.

A Rasmussen poll specificall about this election: 49/14 Media will actively try to help Obama/McCain

Here's a Zogby poll summary from last year: results 64/28 liberal/conservative bias.

From the Pew report. The Times is rated at 18% for credability.

Another Rasmussen report that shows over 50% believe the media tried to activly hurt Palin.

A write up of a Harvard study with some other studies referenced at the bottom.

These studies are not too hard to find. Just Google media bias and they pop up all over the place. The Media bias Wiki page also references some more studies.

The fact that he analyzed the leanings of the respondents and took that into account was really well done.

It was a good start.

The next step would be to weight the responses based to match the sample to observed party affiliation of (a) all economists or perhaps (b) likely voters.

given the Republican base consists mostly of men

Cite, please? The current polls don't appear to back up your claim.

Obama currently leads by thirteen points among women while McCain leads by six among men. Among white women, the candidates are essentially even while McCain holds a substantial lead among white men (see other recent demographic observations).

Democrats are a bit stronger among women overall, and Republicans among men, but it sounds a lot more complex than your overly simplistic "mostly men" to me.

Texas right now is polling for McCain by only 7 points, which isn't "very Red" (Bush beat Gore and Kerry by 61:38% and 59:38% respectively, about 20 points).

Senator John Cornyn is beating his underfunded Democratic challenger by only 10 points, while Cornyn's approval rating is under 50% (usually a signal that an incumbent is going to be defeated on Election Day).

The Texas delegation to the House of Representatives is only 19/32 (59%) Republican.

The Texas state legislature is only 4 switched seats (2.7%) from a Democratic majority.

All those districts have been carved out (gerrymandered) specifically for Republicans to gain the most seats - more so than in any other state. Those delegations come at the end of a period of Republican domination of the government (despite similarly thin margins nationwide) that prioritized overrepresenting Republicans everywhere, especially in big Southern places like Texas (the Bush HQ).

With all those advantages, the best the Republicans could do in Texas was a little better than the 50%+1 required for majority rule. Which majorities in every chamber have decreased steadily from initial large Republican gains. Trending back down towards the longtime Democratic majorities that controlled Texas until Bush Sr was the first Republican elected in the state, in the 1960s. Now that the Bush Dynasty is quickly waning, and Bush Sr himself near the end of his life at the center of a vastly powerful political network, Texas isn't looking nearly as Red as it once was.

By 2010, if not 2008, Texas will probably be as Blue as the rest of the USA.

where he is currently polling under 30% with a 40% disapproval-approval spread.

And The Dark Knight has a 95% approval rating. The other 5% must be the same people who think Congress is doing a good job.

"The percentage of voters who give Congress good or excellent ratings has fallen to single digits for the first time in Rasmussen Reports tracking history. This month, just 9% say Congress is doing a good or excellent job."

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_performance/congressional_performance

Congress has single-digit approval ratings right now, actually. Rasmussen indicates 9% of Americans think Congress did excellent or good.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_performance/congressional_performance