• 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!

CNN Poll: Unfavorable view of tea party on the rise

Redress said:
No, we call that making **** up. You have supplied zero data, just a bunch of claims. You have in fact done less than Nate Silver, and done nothing to make your claim at all supported. Quality work!
Click to expand...
I made the claim that tea party polling has been all over the map. It has. Even the Nate Silver graph shows that to be true. In some places there’s a 20 point swing depending on who’s doing the polling.

Now, you’re trying to make a claim that there is a "definite trend." Why should I or anyone who understands data believe you (or do anything other than laugh at you) given the "proof" you’ve provided?

I’m always amused when people who can only blindly link to the work of others accuse me of thinking for myself.
 
nonpareil said:
So do you have a chart with a seperate trendline for each polling organisation for usto verify your thinking that "they don't agree"?
Click to expand...
I don't, but I really don't need one. I've pointed out that the methodology is flawed. Knowing that, only a blind partisan would *assume* the data to be accurate. If you think there's merit despite the problems I've outlined, it's up to you to argue why.

nonpareil said:
If the questions are the same, why can't he aggregate the polls? Sometimes, the bigger the sample, the more accurate the result is likely to be.
Click to expand...
First, the questions aren't the same, and this is another glaring error from this idiot who pretends to be a statistician. If they were the same, it would certainly lend more credibility, but even then, different polling organizations use different sampling techniques and even order effects can play a huge a role.
 
Taylor said:
this idiot who pretends to be a statistician.
Click to expand...

Nate Silver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Silver first gained public recognition for developing PECOTA,[2] a system for forecasting the performance and career development of Major League Baseball players, which he sold to and then managed for Baseball Prospectus from 2003 to 2009.[3]

The accuracy of his November 2008 presidential election predictions – he correctly predicted the winner of 49 of the 50 states – won Silver further attention and commendation. The only state he missed was Indiana, which went for Barack Obama by 0.9%. He also correctly predicted the winner of all 35 Senate races that year.

In April 2009, he was named one of The World's 100 Most Influential People by TIME Magazine.[4]
Click to expand...
 
Taylor said:
I made the claim that tea party polling has been all over the map. It has. Even the Nate Silver graph shows that to be true. In some places there’s a 20 point swing depending on who’s doing the polling.

Now, you’re trying to make a claim that there is a "definite trend." Why should I or anyone who understands data believe you (or do anything other than laugh at you) given the "proof" you’ve provided?

I’m always amused when people who can only blindly link to the work of others accuse me of thinking for myself.
Click to expand...

Swings can also be a trend. A variable can go up and down wildly from one point to another, as long as the pattern repeats itself, it's a "trend".

If the problem is the polling stations, then aggregating the polls might mitigate some of those problems, and yet you've come against that too.
 
Taylor said:
I don't, but I really don't need one. I've pointed out that the methodology is flawed. Knowing that, only a blind partisan would *assume* the data to be accurate. If you think there's merit despite the problems I've outlined, it's up to you to argue why.
Click to expand...

You claimed "they don't agree" - why make that claim if you have no evidence?

And you didn't "point out that the methodology is flawed" (except the aggregating of the data, which I'm addressing) you simply accused Nate Silver of being a hack - which is a fallacy, not a logical arguement.

So you make claims you didn't support, and you attacked the messenger - and you then claimed that anyone who doesn't agree with your premise (that the data is inaccurate) are partisan hacks - which is also another fallacy.

And you top all these fallacies by implying that you're right without having to prove your claim ("it's up to [me] to argue why" even though you claimed "they don't agree").

So here's my arguement - your arguements are built on fallacies.



First, the questions aren't the same, and this is another glaring error from this idiot who pretends to be a statistician. If they were the same, it would certainly lend more credibility, but even then, ....
Click to expand...

Are they sufficiently different? I read some of them and they are very similiar:

CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. March 11-13, 2011. N=1,023 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.


"We'd like to get your overall opinion of some people in the news. As I read each name, please say if you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of these people -- or if you have never heard of them. The Tea Party movement."
Click to expand...

ABC News/Washington Post Poll. March 10-13, 2011. N=1,005 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.5.


"Do you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of the political movement known as the Tea Party?"
Click to expand...

CBS News Poll. Feb. 11-14, 2011. N=1,031 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.


"Is your opinion of the Tea Party movement favorable, not favorable, undecided, or haven't you heard enough about the Tea Party movement yet to have an opinion?"
Click to expand...

USA Today/Gallup Poll. Jan. 14-16, 2011. N=1,032 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 4.


"Next, we'd like to get your overall opinion of some people in the news. As I read each name, please say if you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of these people -- or if you have never heard of them. How about the Tea Party Movement?"
Click to expand...

AP-GfK Poll conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media. Sept. 8-13, 2010. N=1,000 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 4.2.

"Do you have a favorable, unfavorable, or neither favorable nor unfavorable opinion of the Tea Party movement?"
Click to expand...

ABC News/Washington Post Poll. June 3-6, 2010. N=1,004 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.5.

"Do you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of the political movement known as the Tea Party?"
Click to expand...

Quinnipiac University Poll. April 14-19, 2010. N=1,930 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 2.2.


"Is your opinion of the Tea Party movement favorable, unfavorable or haven't you heard enough about it?"
Click to expand...

FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. April 6-7, 2010. N=900 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.


"I'm going to read you the names of several individuals. Please tell me whether you have a generally favorable or unfavorable opinion of each one. If you've never heard of someone, please just say so. The Tea Party Movement."
Click to expand...

Washington Post Poll. March 23-26, 2010. N=1,000 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.


"Do you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of the political movement known as the Tea Party?"
Click to expand...


....different polling organizations use different sampling techniques and even order effects can play a huge a role.
Click to expand...

This problem also plagues other forms of empirical reviews. So do you claim that this kind of statistical technique is not credible or that there is a problem just with this particular case - if the latter, you haven't shown us information regarding this particular case to show that the differences in sampling techniques is enough to make the result unreliable. You just made a generalised unsupported claim.
 
So lets pretend this is ALL true and not part of the democrat hit machine obama re-election need an enemy mission...

Are you saying folks no longer want smaller government, more accountable reps, reduced spending, and lower taxes? I don't think so, call it the Tea party or whatever, its the ideals of the tea party folks want, not so much a tea "P"arty.


This is who we are.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So lets pretend this is ALL true and not part of the democrat hit machine obama re-election need an enemy mission...

Are you saying folks no longer want smaller government, more accountable reps, reduced spending, and lower taxes? I don't think so, call it the Tea party or whatever, its the ideals of the tea party folks want, not so much a tea "P"arty.


This is who we are.
Click to expand...

My opinion is and always has been that there are multiple demographic groups in the US who all want different things. Also, the tea party is as of yet untested in a presidential election where the voting population is higher. Generally in the nonpresidential elections only those who are most interested vote which means smaller groups can matter more.
 
megaprogman said:
My opinion is and always has been that there are multiple demographic groups in the US who all want different things. Also, the tea party is as of yet untested in a presidential election where the voting population is higher. Generally in the nonpresidential elections only those who are most interested vote which means smaller groups can matter more.
Click to expand...



But do you think with record deficits, stalled economy, etc, that the tea party, more its stated values, won't be as big an issue come the next election?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
But do you think with record deficits, stalled economy, etc, that the tea party, more its stated values, won't be as big an issue come the next election?
Click to expand...

I think that the people who were ready to shink government all along have already gotten on board and the regular folks still need to be convinced. If you look at polling on an issue by issue level, people tend to trend less conservative than they do if the liberal/conservative question is asked. Because of that, while people in general do support closing the budget gap (and even then, it tends to not be people's highest priority, right now that seems to be employment issues), they don't necessarily always want to do it by reducing spending. For example increasing taxes on the highest brackets tends to have around 70% popularity from the polls I have seen.

On this forum, liberals and conservatives tend to do a lot of posturing and circle jerking, but in the rest of the country, none of what we do here matters. One concern I have about this forum is that we use it to convince ourselves that our various viewpoints are right while leaving the real world behind. This is why polling matters.
 
Last edited:
ReverendHellh0und said:
So lets pretend this is ALL true and not part of the democrat hit machine obama re-election need an enemy mission...
Click to expand...

Why does anyone have to pretend to anything?

Are you saying folks no longer want smaller government, more accountable reps, reduced spending, and lower taxes? I don't think so, call it the Tea party or whatever, its the ideals of the tea party folks want, not so much a tea "P"arty.


This is who we are.
Click to expand...

Is there anyone who is not for better access to education, equal and just society, reducing poverty etc...? What the hell does all that means? How do you make government small - by attacking the Unions? How to get Representatives to be more accountable - by gerrymandering? How do you reduce spending - by cutting Planned Parenthood but ask for tax credit for corporations? How do you cut taxes - at the expense of what and whom? Some people feel reducing the deficit is more important than cutting taxes right now.

Political rhetoric is all fine and dandy but the devil is in the details.
 
Last edited:
nonpareil said:
Why does anyone have to pretend to anything?



Are there anyone who is not for better access to education, equal and just society, reducing poverty etc...? What the hell does all that means? How do you make government small - by attacking the Unions? How to get Representatives to be more accountable - by gerrymandering? How do you reduce spending - by cutting Planned Parenthood but ask for tax credit for corporations? How do you cut taxes - at the expense of what and whom? Some people feel reducing the deficit is more important than cutting taxes right now.

Political rhetoric is all fine and dandy but the devil is in the fine prints.
Click to expand...



lets do this one at a time. show me how the tea party is against an "equal and just society".... :roll:
 
megaprogman said:
from the nate silver link. Again data is fully transparent to anyone who wants to look at the methodology.
Click to expand...

And of course none of this has to do with the lies about the Tea Party over the last couple of years? The Congressional Black Caucus "spitting" hoax last year?

Give me the major media in this country for 6 months and I will convince half the people that Mother Theresa was nothing but a back alley whore from Soho.
 
Ron Mars said:
And of course none of this has to do with the lies about the Tea Party over the last couple of years? The Congressional Black Caucus "spitting" hoax last year?

Give me the major media in this country for 6 months and I will convince half the people that Mother Theresa was nothing but a back alley whore form Soho.
Click to expand...

I have no idea whether it does or not.
 
Ron Mars said:
You don't know if lies and hoaxes affect people’s opinions? Really?
Click to expand...

I guess I tend to think people are more intelligent then you do. I have yet to meet a person who I have spent any significant amount of time with that hasn't surprised me somehow with their insight into an issue.

Generally, I think hoaxes probably do affect general opinions at first, but as people learn about an issue, they have less of an effect.
 
Last edited:
Ron Mars said:
As has been demonstrated in another thread, Palin was right.

See how easy it was to fool people?
Click to expand...

No, she wasn't. You are still mistaken as there is no such thing as a death panel. :roll: :coffeepap
 
megaprogman said:
I guess I tend to think people are more intelligent then you do. I have yet to meet a person who I have spent any significant amount of time with that hasn't surprised me somehow with their insight into an issue.

Generally, I think hoaxes probably do affect general opinions at first, but as people learn about an issue, they have less of an effect.
Click to expand...

I'm not questioning people's intelligence. It's their knowledge base that needs expanding.

A significant number of people in this country believe a man who completed USAF ground school, went on to fly high performance jet aircraft, graduated from Yale and Harvard, and was twice elected as Governor is nothing but a mouth breathing knuckle-dragger.

A great deal of deliberate lies and disinformation is necessary for intelligent people to believe that.
 
Ron Mars said:
I'm not questioning people's intelligence. It's their knowledge base that needs expanding.

A significant number of people in this country believe a man who completed USAF ground school, went on to fly high performance jet aircraft, graduated from Yale and Harvard, and was twice elected as Governor is nothing but a mouth breathing knuckle-dragger.

A great deal of deliberate lies and disinformation is necessary for intelligent people to believe that.
Click to expand...

I will just leave this comment to stand on its own :mrgreen:
 
Boo Radley said:
No, she wasn't. You are still mistaken as there is no such thing as a death panel. :roll: :coffeepap
Click to expand...

She was not referring to any specific language in the bill. You were punked. Get over it.
 
Ron Mars said:
She was not referring to any specific language in the bill. You were punked. Get over it.
Click to expand...

it doesn't matter. There was nothing that reseambled a death panel. Never was. Never existed. She told a lie. Period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom