DiscussMormonism.com

You assume they voted for Obama simply because they're black?

No sensible Republican would bring up low-information voters when the majority of likely Republican primary voters either are birthers or open to birtherism.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/rob ... ary-voters

No sensible Republican would bring up low-information voters when 64% of Tea Party supporters thought that Obama raised taxes in his first term.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/1 ... -t-a-Clue#

No sensible Republican would bring up low-information voters when Tea Partiers made signs saying “Keep your filthy government hands off my Medicare.”

Best of all, 49% of Republicans believe that Acorn stole the 2012 election for Obama.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... ion/59632/

beastie wrote:No sensible Republican would bring up low-information voters when the majority of likely Republican primary voters either are birthers or open to birtherism.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/rob ... ary-voters

You'll have to show me the actual poll and the questions it actually asked before I'll buy into this.

No sensible Republican would bring up low-information voters when 64% of Tea Party supporters thought that Obama raised taxes in his first term.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/1 ... -t-a-Clue#

This now rather bland, banal lie, or mutually supporting set of lies, has been put to the sword far too many times to exhume yet again for another dead horse-beating. Its intelligence insulting and patently false (and the infamous source you're using here is about as credible as The Daily Worker was several generations ago).

No sensible Republican would bring up low-information voters when Tea Partiers made signs saying “Keep your filthy government hands off my Medicare.”

Well, it was Obama who raided it for $716 billion of Obamacare loot (a system who's unfunded liability is already $38.6 trillion) and yes, Obama did remove $716 billion from the current Medicare budget. The Wyden-Ryan plan actually retained the same cuts, but uses completely different mechanisms to achieve them.

Best of all, 49% of Republicans believe that Acorn stole the 2012 election for Obama.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... tion/59632

700 people, Beastie, can statistically be extended to the entire Republican voting base? To all Republicans (and the author of the piece Beastie quotes actually expresses dubiousness himself regarding the loaded nature of the question)? In any case, while ACORN no longer exists (due to its own criminal activities relative to electoral politics, one of the core missions at the center of its existence) its not really nonexistent either. ACORN still soldiers on under the auspices of a number of other groups doing the same kinds of activist work.

http://causeofaction.org/2012/08/22/sti ... nizations/

Its kind of like the Russian Federation: its no longer officially the Soviet Union or a socialist nation, but the same people that ran it back in the good old days are still running it now. They moved to new offices and changed the official titles on their doors, but they're fundamentally the same people who hold fundamentally the same views and beliefs.

Its very much like what usually goes on in Washington. Sometimes, on rare occasions, a small bureaucracy will shut down or a program will be abandoned, but when that happens, the bureaucrats themselves are just shuffled to other agencies and offices and their name titles change,and they end by doing many of the same things they were doing in the old bureaucracy within the new one.

This is one reason why leviathan government is such a lethal danger to liberty: it grows even as it appears sometimes to shrink, and it continues to consume the tissues of society even as it undergoes formal reshuffling and reorganization now and then.

Droopy wrote:700 people, Beastie, can statistically be extended to the entire Republican voting base? To all Republicans (and the author of the piece Beastie quotes actually expresses dubiousness himself regarding the loaded nature of the question)? In any case, while ACORN no longer exists (due to its own criminal activities relative to electoral politics, one of the core missions at the center of its existence) its not really nonexistent either. ACORN still soldiers on under the auspices of a number of other groups doing the same kinds of activist work.

http://causeofaction.org/2012/08/22/sti ... nizations/

Its kind of like the Russian Federation: its no longer officially the Soviet Union or a socialist nation, but the same people that ran it back in the good old days are still running it now. They moved to new offices and changed the official titles on their doors, but they're fundamentally the same people who hold fundamentally the same views and beliefs.

Its very much like what usually goes on in Washington. Sometimes, on rare occasions, a small bureaucracy will shut down or a program will be abandoned, but when that happens, the bureaucrats themselves are just shuffled to other agencies and offices and their name titles change,and they end by doing many of the same things they were doing in the old bureaucracy within the new one.

This is one reason why leviathan government is such a lethal danger to liberty: it grows even as it appears sometimes to shrink, and it continues to consume the tissues of society even as it undergoes formal reshuffling and reorganization now and then.

LOL

You seriously question my post while allowing bcspace to make the ridiculous generalization he does in his?

ROFLMAO

beastie wrote:
LOL

You seriously question my post while allowing bcspace to make the ridiculous generalization he does in his?

ROFLMAO

I don't think he did. Its about "Obama voters," collectively speaking, not all of them. But the reality is, nonetheless, that Youtube is top-loaded with videos like this going back to before 2008, and there is very interesting footage of on-the-street interviews with a number of Occupy Wall Street marchers. The typical low-information Obama voter/Eloi appears to hold pretty well as a general rule, as the last election itself is at least prima facie evidence, and much of what they support and believe (and will swallow whole) evidence that goes much deeper.

Droopy wrote:I don't think he did. Its about "Obama voters," collectively speaking, not all of them. But the reality is, nonetheless, that Youtube is top-loaded with videos like this going back to before 2008, and there is very interesting footage of on-the-street interviews with a number of Occupy Wall Street marchers. The typical low-information Obama voter/Eloi appears to hold pretty well as a general rule, as the last election itself is at least prima facie evidence, and much of what they support and believe (and will swallow whole) evidence that goes much deeper.

Not only did he make a ridiculous generalization, but you jumped right in with him - at the same time you find reasons to discount the evidence of low-information conservative voters. If you had any sort of open mind - snicker - that would be a little bit of an alert to you.

700 people, Beastie, can statistically be extended to the entire Republican voting base?

This is the best part of the response. While endorsing using an anecdotal example as worthy of generalization to "Obama voters" as a group, he just goes ahead and questions the entire enterprise of scientific polling. Yes, for a poll of that type, 700 people is a good sample size to give a relatively small error bar.

You might want to keep this post in your back pocket when he tries to cite a poll as evidence of something, which he will invariably do in one of his copy/paste efforts. Of course, the way he parroted nonsense regarding polling in last years presidential election already demonstrates how poorly he understands it, but whether he out and out rejects it or not just depends on whether it flatters his preconceptions.

Kevin Graham wrote:You assume they voted for Obama simply because they're black?

wow, what video were you watching?
racist much?

Behold! Romney voter in all his low-information glory!

bcspace

Have no fear. Even top Senate Democrat Mitch McConnell is pro Second Amendment; on the surface anyway lest Kentuckians see him for what he truly is.

viewtopic.php?p=675062#p675062