• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

ACtually those 47% you talk about do pay taxes. They have to pay fica as well as state and local taxes. They also make under 20,000 so taxing them more would be inherently evil. I think that the rich, excuse my language, "job creators" have been getting a free ride for too long. Time to pay up.
Yeah. But they don't pay federal income taxes. And those are the big killer and maimer on the political battlefield.

And you believe that half of the people working make less than 20,000 dollars? Really?

I am the 53%.
 
I was actually expecting a drop in response to the negativity campaigns.

I expect there to be a bounce back once more people realize how much of it is hype.

I also expect some evidence of paid anti ows instigators and police taking problem homeless to occupations.

The smell of rat is pretty strong, and even conservatives don't care much for rats.

This post belongs in the Conspiracy Theory section.
 
Yeah. But they don't pay federal income taxes. And those are the big killer and maimer on the political battlefield.And you believe that half of the people working make less than 20,000 dollars? Really?I am the 53%.
If you're in the 53rd percent then, according to your argument, you are skating by paying almost nothing in taxes. Pay up!!
 
The poll found that Occupy Wall Street's negatives aren't quite as high as the Tea Party's unfavorables, but aren't far off. Just 31 percent of voters view the Tea Party favorably unfavorably, 45 percent unfavorably, and 24 percent haven't heard enough.

Among independents, the Occupy Wall Street movement and Tea Party movement are now viewed equally unfavorably. Occupy Wall Street has a net -13 favorable rating with independents (29% favorable/42% unfavorable), while the Tea Party holds a net -11 favorable rating (34% favorable/45% unfavorable).

Does this mean the revolution will be called off?

So 31% view the tea party unfavorably, 45% also unfavorably, 24% undecided, and 34% favorably?

Strong set of numbers there :roll:

EDIT: oh, sorry, I re-read what you said, my mistake. Missed the part about independents.

Anyway, is there any suggestion that voters connect the occupy movement and the tea party? Hermain Cain is explicit about his tea party ties, I don't see Democrats embracing this movement. Seems more like angry young voters and less like an extension of partisan politics.
 
Last edited:
Come on J-mac....it's pretty obvious to anybody that those guys are doing some form of counter protests to the occupy crowd which is why the lady comes up and points out that you can't feed a family on the majority of those adds.

First, I don't think it was a counter protest, maybe a little bit of capturing the crazy hypocrisy of the 'no jobs' meme that the protesters have mashed in with their anti capitalist message to distract.

See, it isn't the fact that some of the jobs listed by themselves aren't enough to feed a family of four, but in tough times you do what you have to, and if that means taking two, or three jobs, you do it, at least if you have any self respect. I have.

But, there were just as many jobs on that table that she said 'won't do that' or 'won't work there'..... What about that?

The fact is, beyond partisan stunts like this (I can show you plenty of people going around making Tea Partiers look like idiots and racists) there are many more unemployed people than jobs in this country.

Is it a partisan stunt to allow idiots to bury themselves with their own words, and actions? But you probably are correct in that there are aspects of both sides that serve to discredit the other to the point of masquerading as something they are not. That has long been a tactic, straight out of Rules for Radicals. I've posted it before.

But there are more unemployed than jobs today, I know this all too well with my wife being unemployed currently and having no luck finding a job. But now, this is Obama's economy, he has owned it. It is only his supporters, and sycophants that continue to say that Obama is clear of today's jobs mess.

Maybe if we had low unemployment rates you could make the argument that people just don't want to work. The fact is most people are stuck with part time jobs so the number of unemployed and underemployed is huge in this country.

Again, I have no quarrel with what you say here, but what is Obama's administration doing about this? Creating 88.000 pages of new regulations, and running around yelling 'pass the bill' before anything was ever written, then when his own Leader of the Senate, Reid holds it up, still disingenuously blame republicans? What a crock!

You worked at a job and moved up the ranks. Cases like yours is what made this country great. The fact the new generation isn't experiencing that is a shame and you'd think you support them getting their opportunity.

I sure did, and still at it. But the reason behind it is work ethic. I grew up with wonderful parents where my father owned his own store, and worked up to 16 hrs a day to make that work, and taught me the life lessons that only a father can teach, rest his soul.

Today we have become a culture where the democrat invented, and protected welfare state has pounded the message that the Father is no longer needed, or wanted in the home, and that government will take care of you cradle to grave. And has bought the vote of minority communities with promises and distortion for decades.

The new generation isn't going to experience a chance for the mobility in income status by design I think. But I don't just blame liberals for this. This was a design perpetrated by progressives, Republican, and Democrat for decades, possibly to come to the very ends we are experiencing today.

But it doesn't have to be this way. This is being accelerated by forces in this country that want an end to America as it was founded, and had become.

j-mac
 
But, there were just as many jobs on that table that she said 'won't do that' or 'won't work there'..... What about that?
She's probably acting combative. She probably knew what the guy was trying to "prove". I saw someone walking around a Tea party event in Kentucky trying to lead people to say ridiculous things while he tapes and other people at the event were shouting him down.

Is it a partisan stunt to allow idiots to bury themselves with their own words, and actions? But you probably are correct in that there are aspects of both sides that serve to discredit the other to the point of masquerading as something they are not. That has long been a tactic, straight out of Rules for Radicals. I've posted it before.
Of course it is. It detracts from the message. It personalizes a movement. For example the Tea Party was no longer lower taxes and deficit reduction, it turned into people spitting on black Congressmen and holding up absurd signs like "Keep the government out of my Medicare".

So yes, it's a tactic used on both sides but it is obviously effective, and it obviously is being used to deflect from the message.

Again, I have no quarrel with what you say here, but what is Obama's administration doing about this? Creating 88.000 pages of new regulations, and running around yelling 'pass the bill' before anything was ever written, then when his own Leader of the Senate, Reid holds it up, still disingenuously blame republicans? What a crock!

Beyond the partisan part of it, blaming either side, I think it's obvious to most Americans that jobs for Americans has been low on the priority list for Congress. Americans voted out Dems because they were pushing Healthcare Reform while millions were out of jobs do you think they won't do the same to Republicans that did...in the words of Christie "that stupid debt ceiling thing".

I honestly hope both parties spend the energy trying to "out do" each other in creating jobs. Wouldn't you say it's about time? That it should of been priority number one?

Today we have become a culture where the democrat invented, and protected welfare state has pounded the message that the Father is no longer needed, or wanted in the home, and that government will take care of you cradle to grave. And has bought the vote of minority communities with promises and distortion for decades.

The new generation isn't going to experience a chance for the mobility in income status by design I think. But I don't just blame liberals for this. This was a design perpetrated by progressives, Republican, and Democrat for decades, possibly to come to the very ends we are experiencing today.

But it doesn't have to be this way. This is being accelerated by forces in this country that want an end to America as it was founded, and had become.
I disagree with pretty much all of this. To look at long term unemployment as people just being lazy is incorrect in my opinion. The "welfare state" in the US has existed since the 40's. This idea that it's some radical new thing is not correct. To blame everything on it is to ignore the fact it's been around for over 50 years.
 
For example the Tea Party was no longer lower taxes and deficit reduction, it turned into people spitting on black Congressmen and holding up absurd signs like "Keep the government out of my Medicare".

So yes, it's a tactic used on both sides but it is obviously effective, and it obviously is being used to deflect from the message.



Beyond the partisan part of it, blaming either side, I think it's obvious to most Americans that jobs for Americans has been low on the priority list for Congress. Americans voted out Dems because they were pushing Healthcare Reform while millions were out of jobs do you think they won't do the same to Republicans that did...in the words of Christie "that stupid debt ceiling thing".

I honestly hope both parties spend the energy trying to "out do" each other in creating jobs. Wouldn't you say it's about time? That it should of been priority number one?


I disagree with pretty much all of this. To look at long term unemployment as people just being lazy is incorrect in my opinion. The "welfare state" in the US has existed since the 40's. This idea that it's some radical new thing is not correct. To blame everything on it is to ignore the fact it's been around for over 50 years.

You mean the report of "spitting" that was completely unproven ???

The OWS crowd doesn't need anyone to come in to make them look like fools. They are doing a fine job of that all by themselves.
 
You mean the report of "spitting" that was completely unproven ???
I'm not going to get stuck in that ridiculousness...

The OWS crowd doesn't need anyone to come in to make them look like fools. They are doing a fine job of that all by themselves.
I guess you're a perfect example of how the "Salinsky method" works.
 
She's probably acting combative. She probably knew what the guy was trying to "prove".

So she sought to discredit his attempt by proving it? Not very well thought out if you ask me.

I saw someone walking around a Tea party event in Kentucky trying to lead people to say ridiculous things while he tapes and other people at the event were shouting him down.

That's right, others were shouting him down, and ejecting him from the event, unlike this current so called movement, where even rapists, and rape victims are encouraged to not report it to police, but rather be counseled by OWS higher ups. Now that's great stuff right there.

Of course it is. It detracts from the message. It personalizes a movement. For example the Tea Party was no longer lower taxes and deficit reduction, it turned into people spitting on black Congressmen and holding up absurd signs like "Keep the government out of my Medicare".

You mean the 'spitting incident' that didn't happen except in the minds of liberal progressives that serve to discredit the Tea Party?


So yes, it's a tactic used on both sides but it is obviously effective, and it obviously is being used to deflect from the message.

The message from OWS as far as I can tell is not honestly being put forth. If this group want's a Socialist utopia America, then they should be honest about it.

Beyond the partisan part of it, blaming either side, I think it's obvious to most Americans that jobs for Americans has been low on the priority list for Congress. Americans voted out Dems because they were pushing Healthcare Reform while millions were out of jobs do you think they won't do the same to Republicans that did...in the words of Christie "that stupid debt ceiling thing".

Christie is not the poster boy for anyone but Christie IMHO, but don't you remember when demo's and the administration were saying that this HC reform was going to create jobs? Really?

I honestly hope both parties spend the energy trying to "out do" each other in creating jobs. Wouldn't you say it's about time? That it should of been priority number one?

Not going to happen when the party in power is out to destroy anyone that makes over what they consider 'too much'....Nor is it going to happen when that same party in power refuses to compromise and tries to blame that elsewhere.

I disagree with pretty much all of this. To look at long term unemployment as people just being lazy is incorrect in my opinion.

Who said that? I sure didn't.

The "welfare state" in the US has existed since the 40's. This idea that it's some radical new thing is not correct. To blame everything on it is to ignore the fact it's been around for over 50 years.

Again read what I said again, and you will see that I know that this was in place long before recent times, and that further it was designed to bring this country exactly where it is today.

j-mac
 
I'm not going to get stuck in that ridiculousness...

I agree that it is ridiculous and you should have never brought up this canard.


I guess you're a perfect example of how the "Salinsky method" works.

Rapes, thefts, assaults, indecent exposure............etc., etc., etc. Sounds like a crowd of "good" kids to me.
 
People who judge whole throngs of people based on the hyperfocused actions of a few and meager are slightly disgusting. It's the same thing as racism except without picking colors.
 
Care to explain this a little more - not understanding.

Personalizing a movement based on the actions of a handful of individuals. Deflecting from the message.

It would be like discounting the American revolution because they vandalized private property (Tea Party), some mobs tar and feathered tax men, and some people vandalized property of loyalists. All things the majority of people at the time probably thought was lawlessness but they agreed with the overall message of the revolutionaries.

I'm not saying these people are revolutionaries but anytime you get a lot of angry people together from broad swaths of the population you're going to have some disruptions.
 
All things the majority of people at the time probably thought was lawlessness but they agreed with the overall message of the revolutionaries.
Where can we look? I had heard that the colonies were kind of split in thirds, for/agin/indifferent.
 
So she sought to discredit his attempt by proving it? Not very well thought out if you ask me.
Of course not, she should of just ignored him like most people were.
You mean the 'spitting incident' that didn't happen except in the minds of liberal progressives that serve to discredit the Tea Party?
I'm not going to analyze the video like it's the Kennedy shooting. The Congressman recoiled from the guy and wiped his face.
The message from OWS as far as I can tell is not honestly being put forth. If this group want's a Socialist utopia America, then they should be honest about it.
I'm sure there are hardcore Socialists in the group. Just like hardcore Socialists supported labor when they fought for Child Labor laws. Just like Libertarians supported some of the measures of the Tea Party but the Tea Party is extremely conservative on social issues.

Christie is not the poster boy for anyone but Christie IMHO, but don't you remember when demo's and the administration were saying that this HC reform was going to create jobs? Really?
Sure, if you lower healthcare costs for corporations it might create jobs. The administration didn't say that. Wasn't it Pelosi or Dean?

Not going to happen when the party in power is out to destroy anyone that makes over what they consider 'too much'....Nor is it going to happen when that same party in power refuses to compromise and tries to blame that elsewhere.
My question...what would a Democratic "compromise" look like? For example debt. Please point out where Republicans are willing to give in any shape or form.
Again read what I said again, and you will see that I know that this was in place long before recent times, and that further it was designed to bring this country exactly where it is today.
So...during the time period that you grew up, the time period your family raised you was during the "Welfare state" but apparently some switch flipped as of 2008 to create this large swath of Americans that don't wanna work?
 
Last edited:
Personalizing a movement based on the actions of a handful of individuals. Deflecting from the message.
Alinsky's points are not to personalize a movement but to seize power - the only reason to personalize a movement is not to deflect the message but to minimize it or as Alinsky says, to "polarize" it. The problem here is that OWS is using Alinsky's techniques on themselves and don't even know it.

It would be like discounting the American revolution because they vandalized private property (Tea Party), some mobs tar and feathered tax men, and some people vandalized property of loyalists. All things the majority of people at the time probably thought was lawlessness but they agreed with the overall message of the revolutionaries.

I'm not saying these people are revolutionaries but anytime you get a lot of angry people together from broad swaths of the population you're going to have some disruptions.
That's also not Alinsky - that's just typical media coverage.
 
Now thats sweet of you to say. Except he is the American capitalist personified and admits that his class has been waging war against the rest of us for a long time and they are winning. So you can call him any name in the book and invent some of your own - but, in the end, a billionaire admits to class warfare from the top down and that utterly obliterates your denial of the same concept.

If you're looking for an extreme right wing capitalist then you need look no further than George Soros.
 
Back
Top Bottom