It's an absurd question formulated with bad intentions to manufacture outrage.
So the polling organization "formulated the questions with bad intentions to manufacture outrage?" LOL
The question is totally open ended, and thus the righteous indignation of Ceeboo is ignited.
LOL - This is about Ceeboo's righteous indignation being ignited" - Right! Look at Ceeboo - Don't look at the elephant in the room (what the poll results illustrate)
Would it have been better if someone had assassinated Hitler?
I understand why you have selected Hitler (talk about formulating a question with bad intentions to manufacture outrage - Good God!) - But to most rational people, to be relative/comparable, you should have asked something like this: Would it be better if someone would assassinate Harris?
Weird. You’re doing it again.
I’m not sure if this last part of your post is verbatim from some other site, or are your own words:
Yes, you read that right: 52% of Democrats (a MAJORITY!) just told you they can’t bring themselves to say that killing an opposing party’s presidential candidate is morally wrong.
… but, either way, those words indicate only one of two things: either extreme dishonesty, or an inability to comprehend the English language.
At least two other people here have noticed the same problem.
Don’t bother pretending to clutch pearls over my comment. You might instead try to explain why that statement doesn’t indicate either extreme dishonesty, or an inability to comprehend the English language, especially given that no one seems to be buying what you’re trying to sell.
TDS is part of the BS story Trump voters tell themselves to justify their incredibly horrible judgment of character. It is projection of the highest order, because they are clearly deranged about Trump.
There's a courtroom scene in the movie Denial (2016) (I highly recommend the book which is phenomenal) where a Holocaust denier is testifying about his character in a trial he's bringing for defamation against historian Deborah Lipstadt. The lawyer brings out evidence of his racism and then asks the witness if he's a racist. The scene:
Ultimately Robert Irving, the witness, denies being a racist and antisemitic. The lawyer then simply asks Irving to refer to the transcript and "look at the words on the page."
I think of that phrase often when I think about politics and life. Clearly no one is perfect but look at the transcript of a person's life. "Grab'em by the pussy" and Bill Cosby levels of sexual assault allegations should really make everyone take pause.
I tried clicking on that link and got a message that the video was no longer available.
No precept or claim is more suspect or more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
In my estimate, the OP is summed up nicely by Honor. - I have the one true information source and you all are sheep.
Pretty much the same box canyon I run into when debating with my boys.
Boy 1: The only reason you hate Trump is because you watch CNN.
Me: Tell me again why you think your news source isn't bias and mine is.
Boy 1: My source is morning talk radio, Markely, Van Camp and Robbins. They will bring on Lefty pundits to debate and they always end up owning them.
Me: Oh, OK. But what about the possibility that they only bring on people they know they can own? I'd like to see them try on someone like, say, Neal Katyal.
Boy 1: Who's that?
Last edited by dantana on Sat Sep 28, 2024 2:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
Nobody gets to be a cowboy forever. - Lee Marvin/Monte Walsh
So the polling organization "formulated the questions with bad intentions to manufacture outrage?" LOL
Obviously. Anyone who understands basic logic can see that the question is ridiculous as a polling question and was contrived to drive controversy. I tried to illustrate that by an equally bad question that could be asked from the left. Sometimes questions similar to the one I suggested are used when these left-leaning media guys go to Trump rallies and ask questions, and make Trump supporters look like idiots. It usually works pretty good. I might get a laugh, but I'd never make a serious topic out of it. These are baiting questions and are asked as traps to make the respondent look bad.
Polls and surveys are supposed to do the exact opposite, and often multiple questions are needed to weed out noise.
We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have. They get rid of some of the people who have been there for 25 years and they work great and then you throw them out and they're replaced by criminals.
Fixed hopefully. I think I just deleted a character at the end by accident.
Bond. James Bond. I've bowed out of political discussions for the time being. Just wanted to say you are a welcome sight on these threads. I always appreciate your commentary!
J to the G
LIGHT HAS A NAME
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
I've bowed out of political discussions for the time being. Just wanted to say you are a welcome sight on these threads. I always appreciate your commentary!