Health Care Law Support for Repeal of Health Care Plan Up To 58%

Redress said:

Guess what Navy, you are moving the goalpost. Show where I cite polls when they are convenient to me. Hint: responding to other peoples polls is not the same thing.

Click to expand...

I already have. Twice.

You ignored it as you always do when you get caught.

Redress said:

Guess what Navy, you are moving the goalpost. Show where I cite polls when they are convenient to me. Hint: responding to other peoples polls is not the same thing.

Click to expand...

Sorry, looks like you were caught here doing what you claim you didn't... so far teh goal post moving is on you.

Redress said:

Too bad we don't make laws based on Rasmussen polls.

Click to expand...

C'mon Redress, you know very well this is a straw man. Are you really going to go around to every thread about a poll and say "hey, who cares, this poll isn't making a law!"?

Dav said:

C'mon Redress, you know very well this is a straw man. Are you really going to go around to every thread about a poll and say "hey, who cares, this poll isn't making a law!"?

Click to expand...

Unless Redress is citing it for one of her arguments. Then its ok

But first, she has to deny she ever cited a poll then run away when confronted with her own words.

Redress said:

Oh...my...god...you got me responding to 3 polls. Results linked by others. Yes, that is such proof that I cite polls....if some one else brings up the poll. You will probably count this thread as the fourth example...

Click to expand...

Your immediate response to this poll was that it didn't matter; unless you reacted the same way with every poll, you're being inconsistent.

texmaster said:

I already have. Twice.

You ignored it as you always do when you get caught.

Click to expand...

No, you caught me responding to polls others cited. It's a rather unsubtle difference.

I find it hilarious that hardly a thread goes by where you don't shout "LIER!" at me, and have yet to prove it. You really need to try a new schtick.

Dav said:

C'mon Redress, you know very well this is a straw man. Are you really going to go around to every thread about a poll and say "hey, who cares, this poll isn't making a law!"?

Click to expand...

When the poll is about the popularity of a law, probably. We don't make laws based on polling data. You know as well as I that if it was a republican president and congress passing an unpopular law(it happens), and a democrat posting the poll numbers, the first thing Tex and that bunch would do is explain how we do not govern by polls. Hell, President Bush the younger specifically used that line.

Redress said:

No, you caught me responding to polls others cited. It's a rather unsubtle difference.

Click to expand...

Wrong again. I gave you two examples of you being the direct instigator of the poll you cited.

Once again for everyone to see:



http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...eats-gay-marriage-bill-96.html#post1058480092

Your quote:

Another indicator:



Source: CNN poll: Generations disagree on same-sex marriage - CNN.com

Younger people are in favor of gay marriage. The older people most opposed are going to be out of the picture soon, while those who support are growing. I think it is an inevitability, the only question being how long it will take. The attitudes in this country towards gays has changed so dramatically just during my lifetime.


http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...end-dont-ask-dont-tell-25.html#post1058302654

Your quote: This poll is a little over a year old, but I doubt the numbers have changed much: Acceptance of Gay People in Military Grows Dramatically - washingtonpost.com

2 more examples of you instigating polls and citing them directly.



If you want to keep digging that hole go right ahead.

I find it hilarious that hardly a thread goes by where you don't shout "LIER!" at me, and have yet to prove it. You really need to try a new schtick.

Click to expand...

And you need to read more carefully.

You've been busted not once, not twice but three times in this thread alone.

You want to keep denying it, I'll keep posting it.

Its sad you lack the capacity to admit you are wrong.

Navy Pride said:

Yeah it only tells how the American People feel on ths issue.....Screw them as long as Obama is happy.........:roll:

Click to expand...

Navy Pride said:

Yeah but when you like the poll you cite it....shame on you.........

Click to expand...

Ah, so you think we should've pulled out of the Iraq War ages ago then? Since you apparently believe we should be governing based on poll numbers is what we should be doing? I mean, you wouldn't be tacitly supporting this post and this assertion by the OP while being upset when people posted polls about the War...right Navy? You weren't citing polls only when you like them, right?

I mean, if we're going to throw accusations out at people, lets be even about them.

This entire notion is idiotic by the way.

Polls have a use. Are they the end all be all? No. Should policy be made SIMPLY on polls? No. Should polls affect policy decisions? A bit. Should you lambast someone for not following polls because it "makes them happy" as someone who hates the American people while a few years earlier making out that pushing for something that is unpopular with the American people makes you "brave" or an inspiredl eader? Absolutely not.

If there's a problem its that both sides at times like to either 100% dismiss polls or 100% make them out to be the end all be all. They're tools, nothing more, nothing less.

For example, its one thing to say "Most people in this country are fine with the notion of gay marriage" and post up a poll that shows more than 50% of the people say "yes" to a question "Are you fine with gay marriage". However, if the question was "Are you fine with Civil Unions or Gay Marriages" suddenly it would bring the poll into question, as one could be fine with the first but not with the second. However, using either of those polls as a way of saying "Its unamerican to ban gay marriage" or if the poll was reversed "This means we must ban gay marriage" it'd be idiotic because it'd be reducing an issue into nothing but a popularity contest.

Take this poll in question. 58% support the reapl of the Health Care Plan. Great. Does that mean it should be definitely repealed? No more than months back when a majority of people thought we should have single payer meant that we should do it. People are fickle and what they want should factor in, but is not the end all deciding factor.

Not to mention that that number is likely made up from a mixed group, some wanting it repealed for reasons similar to conservatives while others wanting it repealed to be able to push an even more liberal interpirtation of the legislation. So acting like 58% are against it means republicans will definitely get voted in or Obama is in trouble is a bit of a fallacy as well as its assuming all 58% is going to vote for Republicans/Against Democrats.

What we can take from it is that, in general, even after passing this legislation by and large is unpopular in this country. That's about it.

Zyphlin said:

Ah, so you think we should've pulled out of the Iraq War ages ago then? Since you apparently believe we should be governing based on poll numbers is what we should be doing? I mean, you wouldn't be tacitly supporting this post and this assertion by the OP while being upset when people posted polls about the War...right Navy? You weren't citing polls only when you like them, right?

I mean, if we're going to throw accusations out at people, lets be even about them.

Click to expand...

I believe that is exactly what he is saying about Redress.

She berated polls she doesn't like but uses them when they suit her.

texmaster said:

I believe that is exactly what he is saying about Redress.

She berated polls she doesn't like but uses them when they suit her.

Click to expand...

Yes, I see that's what he was saying in part.

However, by his statement, it also appears to be that he's implying that he DOESN'T do that as its "shameful" to do such.

So I'm just wanting to be clear if Navy Pride is actually claiming that he DOESN'T support the use of polls only when it suits him, and if not then whether or not he thought we should've exited the Iraq War far earlier in Bush's term since polls were against it then.

Just wanting to figure out the consistency in his argument so as to properly address it.

Not to mention you're right, in the literal interpritation of what redress was saying, they most assuredly are wrong in asserting that they don't post polls unless it benefits their point.

HOWEVER.

If you look at the CONTEXT of the discussion you can see Redress was likely asking where they've ever used polls to justify passing a law. As we can see in the line of discussion:

Redress said:

Too bad we don't make laws based on Rasmussen polls.

Click to expand...

Navy Pride said:

Yeah but when you like the poll you cite it....shame on you.........

Click to expand...

Redress said:

I do? Where?

Click to expand...

Its clear Redress was speaking about using Polls for to make laws. Navy responded with his statement about posting a poll if it helps Redress. To which Redress, likely thinking back to the context of what Navy was responding to, wanted to know where they've ever posted a poll to suggest it should be the basis of creating a law.

Its clear, using context, that redress is not saying they will never or have never used a poll in an argument. That's idiotic. What they're saying is that they don't push for laws based simply on what a poll says.

Unless you think context doesn't matter Tex and you only look at the words on a basic literal level, in which case I do hope you're joining up on the facebook page to send Rush to Costa Rica since it would be obvious then you think he's moving out of the country due to your ridiculously narrow and literalistic view on how to read things.

Right?

texmaster said:

I believe that is exactly what he is saying about Redress.

She berated polls she doesn't like but uses them when they suit her.

Click to expand...

I berate polls in certain situations. We do not legislate based on polls. Polls about how popular a bill is is of limited use. Tracking polls are of more use, especially for societal trends. Polling leading up to elections are certainly interesting, especially as we get close to election time.

By the way, don't think it is not pretty obvious how you attacked me for my statement, instead of actually disagreeing that we do not legislate on polls. Funny how often you do things like that...

Zyphlin said:

Not to mention you're right, in the literal interpritation of what redress was saying, they most assuredly are wrong in asserting that they don't post polls unless it benefits their point.

HOWEVER.

If you look at the CONTEXT of the discussion you can see Redress was likely asking where they've ever used polls to justify passing a law. As we can see in the line of discussion:

Its clear Redress was speaking about using Polls for to make laws. Navy responded with his statement about posting a poll if it helps Redress. To which Redress, likely thinking back to the context of what Navy was responding to, wanted to know where they've ever posted a poll to suggest it should be the basis of creating a law.

Its clear, using context, that redress is not saying they will never or have never used a poll in an argument. That's idiotic. What they're saying is that they don't push for laws based simply on what a poll says.

Unless you think context doesn't matter Tex and you only look at the words on a basic literal level, in which case I do hope you're joining up on the facebook page to send Rush to Costa Rica since it would be obvious then you think he's moving out of the country due to your ridiculously narrow and literalistic view on how to read things.

Right?

Click to expand...

Even if you took your interpretation of which Redress denied as a general rule that she doesn't use polls when she claimed she only used them when responding to other polls thereby widening the argument beyond this thread,
both examples I cited are actually being used for her argument to change law. In this case, gay marriage.

So even with your interpretation, its been proven she does use polls to argue changing the law.

Redress said:

I berate polls in certain situations. We do not legislate based on polls. Polls about how popular a bill is is of limited use. Tracking polls are of more use, especially for societal trends. Polling leading up to elections are certainly interesting, especially as we get close to election time.

By the way, don't think it is not pretty obvious how you attacked me for my statement, instead of actually disagreeing that we do not legislate on polls. Funny how often you do things like that...

Click to expand...

Still can't admit you made a false claim about your use of polls.

Incredible.

Really, because nothing you've quoted shows Reddress suggesting laws should be changed because of a Poll. I see Polls being used to speak about public views, or to counter peoples statements of how people feel, but not that the laws should be changed simply because the public says "X" in some random poll.

Zyphlin said:

Really, because nothing you've quoted shows Reddress suggesting laws should be changed because of a Poll. I see Polls being used to speak about public views, or to counter peoples statements of how people feel, but not that the laws should be changed simply because the public says "X" in some random poll.

Click to expand...

Let it go. This is just something he does. I disagree, he says I am lying to change the subject. You get used to it, and I need to stop rising to the bait.

Zyphlin said:

Really, because nothing you've quoted shows Reddress suggesting laws should be changed because of a Poll. I see Polls being used to speak about public views, or to counter peoples statements of how people feel, but not that the laws should be changed simply because the public says "X" in some random poll.

Click to expand...

Again, look at the last 2 examples. In both cases she is arguing to change the law on gay marriage and both examples she uses polls to boost her argument to that effect.

Redress said:

Let it go. This is just something he does. I disagree, he says I am lying to change the subject. You get used to it, and I need to stop rising to the bait.

Click to expand...

I only say you are lying when you make claims that do not exist or you claim something that is directly opposite to what you previously said.

texmaster said:

Again, look at the last 2 examples. In both cases she is arguing to change the law on gay marriage and both examples she uses polls to boost her argument to that effect.

Click to expand...

Sadly I couldn't look at the last two you posted. One's 50 pages long, one


The one in the thread "Fox News Poll: Most Voters Say Allow Gays to Serve Openly" was not advocating that the law be changed because of the poll numbers. It was expressing shock that the poll numbers were that high. How in the world you get that saying "WOW, those were higher than I thought" equals "Wow, I now believe we must change the law specifically because this poll says so" is beyond me, or anyone actually looking at this honestly.

Your link for the one in "Health Care Bill has passed" so not searching 30 pages on that.

In regards to the quote you posted for th thread "New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill" (BTW, if you quote these things right it helps to make your argument not look like you're hiding something. Having to search through 17 pages because you don't quote it right is frustrating) again, no where is Redress advocating changing the law because of a Poll. Redress was pointing out that according to Polling data the American peoples views on homosexuality has became more and more moderated in regards to the morality of it and that based on that fact they believe the laws will end up changing.

Note, there is a LARGE difference between saying "The law should change because the majority of people in this poll approve of changing it" and "I think eventually the laws are going to end up changing as more and more people begin to think in a certain way, as evidenced by 'X' poll".

In one case you're advocating for a new law based on the poll. In the other case you're saying you think eventually that laws will changed based on the publics views on the issue.

To put it another way....

Saying "The Health Care Bill should be over turned because 58% of the people want it overturned" is saying that the law should be altered BECAUSE of a poll. Saying "The Health Care Bill will likely be over turned in the coming years since those that want its repeal has shown a steady increase, from 54% to 58%, and I believe that will continue" is citing a trend and making an assertion based on it.

Lets continue looking

In the thread you linked "Obama reaffirms will end "Don't ask Don't tell" again, redress's statement was not saying change the law based on a Poll. Redress was using a poll to show that someones assertion on why the law shouldn't change, countering Fiddlytree's statement that "I think it is an exaggeration to say 'The American people' are open to this."

Fiddly tried to made an opinion, his belief it was an exaggeration. Redress provided facts to show that his opinion was likely wrong, and that it may not be an exaggeration to say the "American People" are open to it. This is not to say that is why the law should change, but simply responding to an argument someone else had made.

In not a single, solitary post you quoted was there evidence of Redress suggesting that a Law should be changed or made based simply on the outcome of a Poll.

The ONLY way you can criticize Redress as being hypocritical or wrong in their statement earlier is if you read their statement as a LITERAL statement, suggesting that they NEVER use polls in any way, in which case I'm eagerly awaiting to see you jump into the Rush Limbaugh thread and demand he get his ass down to Costa Rica.

Zyphlin said:

Its clear Redress was speaking about using Polls for to make laws. Navy responded with his statement about posting a poll if it helps Redress. To which Redress, likely thinking back to the context of what Navy was responding to, wanted to know where they've ever posted a poll to suggest it should be the basis of creating a law.

Its clear, using context, that redress is not saying they will never or have never used a poll in an argument. That's idiotic. What they're saying is that they don't push for laws based simply on what a poll says.

Click to expand...

Not to beat up on Redress, but if that were the "context" in which she was arguing, isn't it strange it wasn't mentioned (whatsoever) in the half dozen or so responses?

From what WAS mentioned, it seems rather clear she was simply arguing that she doesn't "cite polls" - period.

Taylor said:

Not to beat up on Redress, but if that were the "context" in which she was arguing, isn't it strange it wasn't mentioned (whatsoever) in the half dozen or so responses?

From what WAS mentioned, it seems rather clear she was simply arguing that she doesn't "cite polls" - period.

Click to expand...

Not really, look at the first response to Tex:

Redress said:

Interesting, one of those times I acted at surprise at a poll result some one else mentioned, the other two I was replying to some one posting poll numbers. Funny how you managed to dishonestly neglect to mention that.

Click to expand...

Note the shock and intrigue. Notice how the counter she used to his statements ONLY works if she's countering it based on her assertion that you don't change laws based on polls.

If Redress had meant "I don't cite polls, ever" then what she said above would not have been a defense. It wouldn't matter that one was acting surprised and the other was replying to someone posting poll numbres...it still would've been Redress citing polls.

HOWEVER

If Redress was arguing in the context that their statement was in regards to using Polls to make Laws then it suddenly makes sense, as Tex tried to present those threads as "proof" that's what Redress does without giving context and Redress provided the context to show that no, they don't prove that Redress was lying or a hypocrite, because when you look at what the polls were used for it was clear it wasn't to make or change a law.

So from the very first post it was clear that the context Tex was using was literal while Redress was contesting it from the notion that they were talking about using it for laws.

Zyphlin said:

Note the shock and intrigue. Notice how the counter she used to his statements ONLY works if she's countering it based on her assertion that you don't change laws based on polls.

If Redress had meant "I don't cite polls, ever" then what she said above would not have been a defense. It wouldn't matter that one was acting surprised and the other was replying to someone posting poll numbres...it still would've been Redress citing polls.

Click to expand...

I believe that when she says "cite polls" she means she doesn't bring them to the thread. See for example all of her responses in this thread:

Redress said:

1) I was surprised at the result someone else mentioned
2) I was replying to someone else’s
3) I responded to polls that were linked by others so I didn’t cite them
4) Caught me responding to polls that OTHERS posted
5) Show me where I CITE polls; responding to other peoples polls not the same thing
6) You caught me responding to polls others cited

Click to expand...

You'll see the common element is that she "responds to other peoples polls" - THAT'S the defense - not some implied "you don't change laws based on polls" reasoning. (Hell, show me anyone that believes we should change laws simply based on polls!)

Of course "citing" a poll simply means you use it to bolster your argument (whether or not someone else mentioned it first). Texmaster has clearly showed instances where she cited polls.

(Are we really talking about her like she's not here? :nails :duel)

Redress said:

When the poll is about the popularity of a law, probably. We don't make laws based on polling data. You know as well as I that if it was a republican president and congress passing an unpopular law(it happens), and a democrat posting the poll numbers, the first thing Tex and that bunch would do is explain how we do not govern by polls. Hell, President Bush the younger specifically used that line.

Click to expand...

Nothing about the importance of the poll was said before you decided to come in and make a straw man.

The poll might mean all sorts of things. To say that it doesn't have ANY implications would certainly be ignorant (for the Bush II example you used, just look at 2006). But to come in solely to say that opinion polls don't make laws, without anyone having said that and without even bothering to discuss the ACTUAL implications of the poll, is borderline trolling.