Barack Obama coming to Birmingham

[bojack34 2]

I will not argue the fact that he is educated, charasmatic etc., but so what. So was Bill Clinton and we see how that went. The man will do nothing to stop the overwhelming inflow of illegal immigrants. Believe me I realize that Dubya has done nothing either so you don't have to go there. I'm ready for a man like Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter to take office and put a stop to this mess. We are slowly becoming a third world country thanks to our lack of border control and to me and most Americans that is the number one issue.

Actually, according to the very reliable Rasmussen Reports polling, immigration issues are a distant third and only 7 points above global warming in fourth.

Situation in Iraq 42%

Economy 26%

Immigration 18%

Global Warming 11%

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...nomy_top_issues

That's not to say it's unimportant. All of these issues (well, minus the global warming scam) are important. But when you rank them, it falls far down the list.

I would like to know who these people are they are polling. If you talk to the majority of people whose neighborhoods have been greatly affected by illegal immigration it is right up there with the war in Iraq. There is a simple solution to both problems. Bring the troops back home and put them on the borders until we can, a) get enough border control men trained, get the fence we were promised by congress finished.

Given that Rasmussen's record of accuracy (they were the most accurate of all the national polling services, coming within half a percentage point of both Bush and Kerry's final vote tallies in the 2004 election), I'd say they are polling a statistically accurate sample of the American people.

I'm sure if you limit your polling to certain areas, the immigration issue might be much higher, just as if you poll an area where a bunch of factories and other businesses have recently closed, the economy would rate much higher. Poll near a major Army base and the Iraq war is probably foremost on their minds.

But if you understand how to poll using truly random samples you get a composite of the American people overall and they rank immigration much lower.

We clearly have seen how well the polls worked during the last elections.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Did you read my post? I did'nt say he was a Muslim. I just noted he had Muslim influences. He even has a Muslim name, it was taken straight from the Koran.

Yeah, you called him a racist, a black panther and said "Obama=Osama." After the first two were losing battles for you and then the "educated in a madrassa" canard was shot down, you've backpeddled into semantics by claiming only that he has "Muslim influences." Whatever, bojack.

I did'nt ask you to provide a link to dissprove what I said about Obama but what you said about me being a white trash, Klansman. Maybe instead of going straight to Logic 101 you should have paid more attention.

I'm sorry. I'm having a hard time translating. My Dumbass to English dictionary is a little outdated.

How many times and ways does a person have to explain to you that I wasn't actually calling you those things? Let's review the original quote from me:

Or maybe bojack's an ignorant, backwoods, white-trash, sheet-wearing, n****r lynching KKK member. You know...as long as we're going to exaggerate viewpoints and/or make stuff up about people for the hell of it.

Catch that? Especially the "make stuff up about people" part? I was making something up about you the same way you were doing about Obama. I even explained that this was what I was doing later in the thread:

Now, time for you to get a clue: I wasn't calling you a racist. I was pointing out that you were making assumptions and making up things about someone by doing the same thing to you. I mean, I had at least as much to go on as you did. Didn't like it? Good. Don't do it to other people and someone won't have to come along give you a demonstration that will hit home

This is what I was talking about when I said you missed the point. And you continue to do so, clueless as ever. You keep arguing about me calling you a racist, completely ignorant (or willfully stupid) to the point I was making and have explicitly explained TWICE now (three times if you count this one). Hell, even someone else caught it, yet it still zoomed right over your head:

lol That was funny bojack you still gave no reason for calling obama racist and then got mad because someone called you racist and was joking about it, did you switch sides after 2002 from the dirt road alumni?

How thick do you have to be not to get this by now?

[bojack34 2]

Did you read my post? I did'nt say he was a Muslim. I just noted he had Muslim influences. He even has a Muslim name, it was taken straight from the Koran.

Yeah, you called him a racist, a black panther and said "Obama=Osama." After the first two were losing battles for you and then the "educated in a madrassa" canard was shot down, you've backpeddled into semantics by claiming only that he has "Muslim influences." Whatever, bojack.

I did'nt ask you to provide a link to dissprove what I said about Obama but what you said about me being a white trash, Klansman. Maybe instead of going straight to Logic 101 you should have paid more attention.

I'm sorry. I'm having a hard time translating. My Dumbass to English dictionary is a little outdated.

How many times and ways does a person have to explain to you that I wasn't actually calling you those things? Let's review the original quote from me:

Or maybe bojack's an ignorant, backwoods, white-trash, sheet-wearing, n****r lynching KKK member. You know...as long as we're going to exaggerate viewpoints and/or make stuff up about people for the hell of it.

Catch that? Especially the "make stuff up about people" part? I was making something up about you the same way you were doing about Obama. I even explained that this was what I was doing later in the thread:

Now, time for you to get a clue: I wasn't calling you a racist. I was pointing out that you were making assumptions and making up things about someone by doing the same thing to you. I mean, I had at least as much to go on as you did. Didn't like it? Good. Don't do it to other people and someone won't have to come along give you a demonstration that will hit home

This is what I was talking about when I said you missed the point. And you continue to do so, clueless as ever. You keep arguing about me calling you a racist, completely ignorant (or willfully stupid) to the point I was making and have explicitly explained TWICE now (three times if you count this one). Hell, even someone else caught it, yet it still zoomed right over your head:

lol That was funny bojack you still gave no reason for calling obama racist and then got mad because someone called you racist and was joking about it, did you switch sides after 2002 from the dirt road alumni?

How thick do you have to be not to get this by now?

I read it all and I got it the first time around. FYI your little demonstration that hit home as you say does'nt bother me one bit, I was just trying make a point as well. What someone says about me setting behind a keyboard is hardly anything to get upset about but I can see some people take it way too seriously.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

We clearly have seen how well the polls worked during the last elections.

Well apparently for Rasmussen, they worked quite well. Here's a chart showing the 2006 election results and the final Rasmussen poll for each:

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content..._senate_results

The only one they missed was Missouri where they had the Dem winning 49-47 with 4% undecided or going for a third party. Once the undecideds came in, the Republican edged the Dem 49-48.

[bojack34 2]

We clearly have seen how well the polls worked during the last elections.

Well apparently for Rasmussen, they worked quite well. Here's a chart showing the 2006 election results and the final Rasmussen poll for each:

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content..._senate_results

The only one they missed was Missouri where they had the Dem winning 49-47 with 4% undecided or going for a third party. Once the undecideds came in, the Republican edged the Dem 49-48.

Yeah you found one poll that got something right once.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

We clearly have seen how well the polls worked during the last elections.

Well apparently for Rasmussen, they worked quite well. Here's a chart showing the 2006 election results and the final Rasmussen poll for each:

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content..._senate_results

The only one they missed was Missouri where they had the Dem winning 49-47 with 4% undecided or going for a third party. Once the undecideds came in, the Republican edged the Dem 49-48.

Yeah you found one poll that got something right once.

Well, you asked who they were polling and I pointed out the accuracy of the polling firm which lends credence to the poll about what issues are most important to the average American. Sorry it doesn't line up with your pet theories based on vapor.

[GalensGhost 0]

Lost in all this foolish rhetoric is the fact that Obama is an empty suit with nothing new or insightful to say. runinred is all up his ass, and that's his preorgative, but it would be a good idea for voters who intend to go to the polls to pay more attention to what the candidates have to say and less to their image. This guy has nothing to say.

As for the racial angle, you can't ignore it.

If he were a white guy, he'd be getting zero publicity and would have less than zero credibility. If he were a white guy he wouldn't be in the race at all. He's trading on his blackness to get votes and then expects race not to be an issue. It's the worst kind of double standard in the world. Don't mention his race, but by all means use whatever political currency it provides.

The democratic party has two novelty acts going now. Vote for Shrillary for the novelty of voting for a "woman" (or shrew, dog, horse if you're into electing animals). Vote for this guy for the novelty of voting for a black person so you can prove that you're not a racist.

I’m not even sure where to start with this one. Calling Obama an “empty suit†and saying all of his support is because he is a black candidate is pretty ill-informed if you ask me. For the record, I am an independent, clear-thinking, objective American who is willing to give all candidates a look. Do I like what I see so far out of Obama? You betcha. So according to you, I’m only into him because he is some novelty item…..haha. I’m not sure what “full suit†you are in favor of but let’s examine Obama’s experience, his ideas and his visions:

Experience: As noted in this thread already, he has “two years in the U.S. Senate, seven years in the Illinois Senate., one loss in a primary election for the U.S. House of Representatives, one stirring keynote address at a Democratic National Convention, and two best-selling books." So he’s not a Washington insider – ever thought perhaps that’s some of his appeal? Further, let me remind you that the only three people alive that have executive experience are George H. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Learning on the job is a fact for any President. Look back through history at candidates who won office without a lengthy Washington resume (Lincoln, Roosevelt, heck – even your boy Bush was only a 2 term Governor) and you’ll see your “no experience†argument is laughable

Ideas/Vision: End the War in Iraq (only candidate running who had the insight to see what a bad idea this was from the get go), End the corruption in Washington (can we all say together – closed door energy policy meetings), National Energy Policy, Universal Healthcare, Reconciling Faith and Politics …. I could go on and on – so don’t tell me he has no ideas, no vision and no plans. If you are truly interested in being objective and learning about him – why don’t you do a little research instead of spouting off the usual radical right talking points.

Educate Yourself

Obama is a guy who has dedicated his life to public service, fighting for issues that matter – and for you to come on this board and try to brand his supporters like the talking heads of Fox News try to do only really means one thing: deep down you know what you say is not true. Barack is a guy that is smart, articulate, well-educated, seasoned and some one who I believe truly has the inspiration, motivation, insight, and what it takes to move this country forward. That my friend, is why he has created this buzz, raised the millions and have people like me interested in his candidacy. But for you just to recklessly call Barack and his supporters names really speaks to the flaws in your character and your inability to view politics and the current state of this country through a realistic prism.

Nope. He's an empty suit. A great big wad of hot air. Any fool can make utopian statements without any idea of how to make them reality. I think it would be great if cars could run on rainwater instead of gas. When I'm president, I'll work toward ensuring that our children will all drive rainwater powered cars. These cars will spit out seeds as exhaust and we'll repopulate the forests and avert the dire threat from global warming!! Vote for me.

Face it. If the guy was white and his name was Mark Waters nobody would ever have heard of him. He's trading off his race. He's a media creation, not a real leader. If you want to buy into the substanceless hype, that's your choice. I'm not trying to change your mind.

[bojack34 2]

We clearly have seen how well the polls worked during the last elections.

Well apparently for Rasmussen, they worked quite well. Here's a chart showing the 2006 election results and the final Rasmussen poll for each:

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content..._senate_results

The only one they missed was Missouri where they had the Dem winning 49-47 with 4% undecided or going for a third party. Once the undecideds came in, the Republican edged the Dem 49-48.

Yeah you found one poll that got something right once.

Well, you asked who they were polling and I pointed out the accuracy of the polling firm which lends credence to the poll about what issues are most important to the average American. Sorry it doesn't line up with your pet theories based on vapor.

Just goes to show you can find a poll or a link to back up just about anything you want it to which is why it is pointless.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

We clearly have seen how well the polls worked during the last elections.

Well apparently for Rasmussen, they worked quite well. Here's a chart showing the 2006 election results and the final Rasmussen poll for each:

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content..._senate_results

The only one they missed was Missouri where they had the Dem winning 49-47 with 4% undecided or going for a third party. Once the undecideds came in, the Republican edged the Dem 49-48.

Yeah you found one poll that got something right once.

Well, you asked who they were polling and I pointed out the accuracy of the polling firm which lends credence to the poll about what issues are most important to the average American. Sorry it doesn't line up with your pet theories based on vapor.

Just goes to show you can find a poll or a link to back up just about anything you want it to which is why it is pointless.

No, it just goes to show that you don't understand polling. There are reliable polling firms and unreliable ones. However, if the math and the methodology are done correctly and you painstakingly analyze the wording of the questions to remove bias as much as humanly possible, you get statistically reliable results.

Tell you what, since you think you can find a poll or link to back up anything, you find me a link to a current, reputable poll that purports to poll Americans in general (not limited to border towns in Texas for instance) and shows that the majority of the American people have immigration as the number one issue. We'll take it from there.

[bojack34 2]

We clearly have seen how well the polls worked during the last elections.

Well apparently for Rasmussen, they worked quite well. Here's a chart showing the 2006 election results and the final Rasmussen poll for each:

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content..._senate_results

The only one they missed was Missouri where they had the Dem winning 49-47 with 4% undecided or going for a third party. Once the undecideds came in, the Republican edged the Dem 49-48.

Yeah you found one poll that got something right once.

Well, you asked who they were polling and I pointed out the accuracy of the polling firm which lends credence to the poll about what issues are most important to the average American. Sorry it doesn't line up with your pet theories based on vapor.

Just goes to show you can find a poll or a link to back up just about anything you want it to which is why it is pointless.

No, it just goes to show that you don't understand polling. There are reliable polling firms and unreliable ones. However, if the math and the methodology are done correctly and you painstakingly analyze the wording of the questions to remove bias as much as humanly possible, you get statistically reliable results.

Tell you what, since you think you can find a poll or link to back up anything, you find me a link to a current, reputable poll that purports to poll Americans in general (not limited to border towns in Texas for instance) and shows that the majority of the American people have immigration as the number one issue. We'll take it from there.

NO problem. But i'm sure you will discount it as not reputable.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

That will depend on whether you find someone that uses sound methodology or whether you think four hicks sitting in front of the drugstore in Fleahop, MS constitutes a good poll.

[bojack34 2]

We clearly have seen how well the polls worked during the last elections.

Well apparently for Rasmussen, they worked quite well. Here's a chart showing the 2006 election results and the final Rasmussen poll for each:

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content..._senate_results

The only one they missed was Missouri where they had the Dem winning 49-47 with 4% undecided or going for a third party. Once the undecideds came in, the Republican edged the Dem 49-48.

Yeah you found one poll that got something right once.

Well, you asked who they were polling and I pointed out the accuracy of the polling firm which lends credence to the poll about what issues are most important to the average American. Sorry it doesn't line up with your pet theories based on vapor.

Just goes to show you can find a poll or a link to back up just about anything you want it to which is why it is pointless.

No, it just goes to show that you don't understand polling. There are reliable polling firms and unreliable ones. However, if the math and the methodology are done correctly and you painstakingly analyze the wording of the questions to remove bias as much as humanly possible, you get statistically reliable results.

Tell you what, since you think you can find a poll or link to back up anything, you find me a link to a current, reputable poll that purports to poll Americans in general (not limited to border towns in Texas for instance) and shows that the majority of the American people have immigration as the number one issue. We'll take it from there.

You asked, I have given. Decatur Daily Poll and Decatur Daily. Now here is a ineteresting poll that gets broke down pretty well and it was pretty interesting for me I will admit. My only explanation is that there are certain parts of the country that have not experienced the overwhelming influx of illegal immigrants as we have in North Alabama especially the Decatur area. But, if the government does'nt do something soon that will change.FOX NEWS POLL

[TitanTiger 20,510]

You asked, I have given. Decatur Daily Poll

First, this poll does not ask what the most important issue (which was your claim...that immigration was the number one issue for the majority of people). Second, it wasn't a real poll. The linked article itself says this:

The poll was unscientific, and people could vote from anywhere.

and Decatur Daily.

This one is also not a statistically sound poll. It was an online poll. The linked article says:

The results are unscientific. People could vote from anywhere.

Now here is a ineteresting poll that gets broke down pretty well and it was pretty interesting for me I will admit. My only explanation is that there are certain parts of the country that have not experienced the overwhelming influx of illegal immigrants as we have in North Alabama especially the Decatur area. But, if the government does'nt do something soon that will change.FOX NEWS POLL

And this one doesn't ask whether they feel immigration is the most important issue, just whether or not it's important. The poll I showed you were all important issues, but when ranked it was a distant third. But Opinion Dynamics is a reputable polling firm, though I don't think they've been as accurate as Gallup or Rasmussen the last couple of election.

[bojack34 2]

You asked, I have given. Decatur Daily Poll

First, this poll does not ask what the most important issue (which was your claim...that immigration was the number one issue for the majority of people). Second, it wasn't a real poll. The linked article itself says this:

The poll was unscientific, and people could vote from anywhere.

and Decatur Daily.

This one is also not a statistically sound poll. It was an online poll. The linked article says:

The results are unscientific. People could vote from anywhere.

Now here is a ineteresting poll that gets broke down pretty well and it was pretty interesting for me I will admit. My only explanation is that there are certain parts of the country that have not experienced the overwhelming influx of illegal immigrants as we have in North Alabama especially the Decatur area. But, if the government does'nt do something soon that will change.FOX NEWS POLL

And this one doesn't ask whether they feel immigration is the most important issue, just whether or not it's important. The poll I showed you were all important issues, but when ranked it was a distant third. But Opinion Dynamics is a reputable polling firm, though I don't think they've been as accurate as Gallup or Rasmussen the last couple of election.

I would think since the poll allowed people to vote from anywhere that it would be a more well rounded poll. Please explain the difference between unscientific and scientific as related to polls. Also, if you read the whole article it does talk about how illegal immigration ranks compared to the economy and the war in Iraq etc. Which suprisingly backs your stance. At one point immigration was the top concern for Americans but since has took a backseat to other issues. If you refer to back to one of my earlier posts I gave a simple solution to three of the top issues. A) bring the troops home put them on the borders C) by doing so you eliminate the illegal immigrants that are contributing the draining of our economy.

[autiger4life 3]

I'm not going to do the quotes simply because it is wasting a lot of space on the pages, and I believe everyone is smart enough to remember what they said.

Bojack, the point on people voting every where is not the point that they possibly could, but the point of only people in the Decatuar area are likely to see the pole and vote on the poll. Where as companies whose job is to find representative samples have a higher likelyhood of getting a better idea of what the country thinks. I am not saying the any poll is always accurate purely based on past outcomes, but there is a much better chance. Although I do remember reading one article in the New York Times that said that whichever presidential candidate sold the most halloween mask in October has won for the past six elections. While looking at whose mask sold the most has shown to be accurate, its not one that I would base too much on.

The next three ideas could be looked at as either completely ignorant, or possibly revolutionary; revolutionary may be to strong, but atleast an alternative viewpoint.

1. Barack does not have enough experience: Well great, maybe this means he won't already be corrupt, owe people favors, be set in only his way etc. Maybe this will allow a new perspective to be brought to the White House, something that desperately needs to be done.

2. He has vague non-specific ideas that almost seem Utopian: This one may be a little more far-fetched and I am willing to admit it, but it might be a good thing that he does not have the set in stone ideas about what has to be done. I think one of the biggest problems with Bush is that he had his idea of what should be done, and he was unwilling to listen to anyone else. Maybe Obama will be able to take ideas from both sides and find what he thinks is best for the American people.

3. He has Muslim ties: While he is not a Muslim, he does have a Muslim name, and at one point attended a Muslim school(not a radical one). There is a possibility that this link will allow us to make peace in the middle east. I am not saying make peace with terroist, I hope they are all killed, but make peace with the Muslim nations and end the bloodshed. Maybe Obama can be the link we need to end the perpetuation of hatred towards America from the area of the world.

These are just ideas of possible outcomes. I know that are more on the half full side, but maybe we can actually see some half full realizations if we stop looking at everything in the bleakest manner we can think of......Except Hillary Clinton, bleak away on that one.

[Tigermike 3,053]

While in Birmingham Obama toed the democrat line concerning pulling out of Iraq. But he also said the US should be doing much more in the The Darfur conflict. So is he saying we should pull out of Iraq immediately and then send troops to Darfur?

[GalensGhost 0]

I'm not going to do the quotes simply because it is wasting a lot of space on the pages, and I believe everyone is smart enough to remember what they said.

Bojack, the point on people voting every where is not the point that they possibly could, but the point of only people in the Decatuar area are likely to see the pole and vote on the poll. Where as companies whose job is to find representative samples have a higher likelyhood of getting a better idea of what the country thinks. I am not saying the any poll is always accurate purely based on past outcomes, but there is a much better chance. Although I do remember reading one article in the New York Times that said that whichever presidential candidate sold the most halloween mask in October has won for the past six elections. While looking at whose mask sold the most has shown to be accurate, its not one that I would base too much on.

The next three ideas could be looked at as either completely ignorant, or possibly revolutionary; revolutionary may be to strong, but atleast an alternative viewpoint.

1. Barack does not have enough experience: Well great, maybe this means he won't already be corrupt, owe people favors, be set in only his way etc. Maybe this will allow a new perspective to be brought to the White House, something that desperately needs to be done.

2. He has vague non-specific ideas that almost seem Utopian: This one may be a little more far-fetched and I am willing to admit it, but it might be a good thing that he does not have the set in stone ideas about what has to be done. I think one of the biggest problems with Bush is that he had his idea of what should be done, and he was unwilling to listen to anyone else. Maybe Obama will be able to take ideas from both sides and find what he thinks is best for the American people.

3. He has Muslim ties: While he is not a Muslim, he does have a Muslim name, and at one point attended a Muslim school(not a radical one). There is a possibility that this link will allow us to make peace in the middle east. I am not saying make peace with terroist, I hope they are all killed, but make peace with the Muslim nations and end the bloodshed. Maybe Obama can be the link we need to end the perpetuation of hatred towards America from the area of the world.

These are just ideas of possible outcomes. I know that are more on the half full side, but maybe we can actually see some half full realizations if we stop looking at everything in the bleakest manner we can think of......Except Hillary Clinton, bleak away on that one.

My fervent hope is that you're not old enough to vote yet.

[autiger4life 3]

I'm not going to do the quotes simply because it is wasting a lot of space on the pages, and I believe everyone is smart enough to remember what they said.

Bojack, the point on people voting every where is not the point that they possibly could, but the point of only people in the Decatuar area are likely to see the pole and vote on the poll. Where as companies whose job is to find representative samples have a higher likelyhood of getting a better idea of what the country thinks. I am not saying the any poll is always accurate purely based on past outcomes, but there is a much better chance. Although I do remember reading one article in the New York Times that said that whichever presidential candidate sold the most halloween mask in October has won for the past six elections. While looking at whose mask sold the most has shown to be accurate, its not one that I would base too much on.

The next three ideas could be looked at as either completely ignorant, or possibly revolutionary; revolutionary may be to strong, but atleast an alternative viewpoint.

1. Barack does not have enough experience: Well great, maybe this means he won't already be corrupt, owe people favors, be set in only his way etc. Maybe this will allow a new perspective to be brought to the White House, something that desperately needs to be done.

2. He has vague non-specific ideas that almost seem Utopian: This one may be a little more far-fetched and I am willing to admit it, but it might be a good thing that he does not have the set in stone ideas about what has to be done. I think one of the biggest problems with Bush is that he had his idea of what should be done, and he was unwilling to listen to anyone else. Maybe Obama will be able to take ideas from both sides and find what he thinks is best for the American people.

3. He has Muslim ties: While he is not a Muslim, he does have a Muslim name, and at one point attended a Muslim school(not a radical one). There is a possibility that this link will allow us to make peace in the middle east. I am not saying make peace with terroist, I hope they are all killed, but make peace with the Muslim nations and end the bloodshed. Maybe Obama can be the link we need to end the perpetuation of hatred towards America from the area of the world.

These are just ideas of possible outcomes. I know that are more on the half full side, but maybe we can actually see some half full realizations if we stop looking at everything in the bleakest manner we can think of......Except Hillary Clinton, bleak away on that one.

My fervent hope is that you're not old enough to vote yet.

Haha, yes naturally as all people with no argument come back with is a non-argument. Well unfortunately I can vote, and fortunately we did not have to listen to another great point about Obama. I'm sorry that new viewpoints were brought, instead of petty responses. New idea I know, but please point out your opinions concerning my errors. Or can you formulate such a thought.

[GalensGhost 0]

Haha, yes naturally as all people with no argument come back with is a non-argument. Well unfortunately I can vote, and fortunately we did not have to listen to another great point about Obama. I'm sorry that new viewpoints were brought, instead of petty responses. New idea I know, but please point out your opinions concerning my errors. Or can you formulate such a thought.

I assure you I'm quite serious. I honestly hoped that someone so easily fooled by a slick politician with nothing to say would be more likely to vote for Johnny Pimpernell for sixth grade class president than be of age to vote for the president of the US.

You brought no "new viewpoints." Nor does your candidate have anything to offer but empty rhetoric and utopian sheen with which to pander to those unwilling to look past the gloss.

He's going to push for cleaner cars. Magnificent. Vote for me and I'll push for Three Musketeers for everyone. I'll push for farts that don't smell and cigarettes that won't kill you.

Your three "talking points" were actually two and they boil down to the following: a - He doesn't know anything so maybe he won't be as jaded as others; and b - He's a muslim, but probably not one of the really bad muslims so maybe other muslims will like him. My friend, your position is the height of naivety and illustrates a fundamental disconnect from reality.

If this guy was white nobody would pay him a bit of attention. He'd be a laughingstock. Leno would make jokes about his candidacy. If you ARE old enough to vote, please stay home. Vote in the democratic primary if you wish, but skip the general election. This country has enough problems as it is.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

I would think since the poll allowed people to vote from anywhere that it would be a more well rounded poll. Please explain the difference between unscientific and scientific as related to polls.

According to my Embry-Riddle ejukashun, it begins with the basic statistical principles of knowing your population, sample size, and standard deviation. Random sampling versus the quota method of sampling are also important factors to consider in placing trust into a opinion poll.

Many newspapers (and most online polls) use the quota method of sampling, in which individual members of the sample are chosen in accordance with a quota so as to roughly match the national population on factors such as geographic area of the country, urban versus rural residence, sex, age, race, and socioeconomic status.

The major problem with the quota method of sampling is that the interviewers are allowed discretion in choosing the individual respondents within the quota categories. This discretion introduces a possible source of bias, because the resulting sample can largely omit some types of people, such as those who are difficult to contact.

A much better approach is the probability method of sampling, in which specific respondents are chosen by random selection methods. The result of this method is that no type of individual is systematically omitted from the sample, and the likely amount of error in the resulting data can be calculated.

No matter how large the population being studied (from a small city to a whole country), the size of the sample is the main factor that determines the expected range of error in a probability sample. Most current polls use samples ranging in size from 1,000 to 2,000 individuals. A sample of 1,500 has an expected margin of error of plus or minus 3%, and larger samples yield only slightly smaller errors. Many polling organizations have adopted probability methods in selecting their samples, but the less-reputable polls (read online rural newspaper polls) still use quota methods or even nonscientific haphazard methods of sample selection, and the results of their findings are questionable because of it.

Several other factors, in addition to sampling methods, can cause errors in poll results. First, the pollster must determine whether respondents have any information about the topic on which to base their opinions. Second, the questions must be carefully worded and pretested in pilot studies to ensure their clarity and impartiality. Questions must avoid biases in wording that may suggest a socially desirable answer or lead respondents to agree with one side of an issue which would obviously influence a respondents answer.

[bojack34 2]

Thanks!

[Tigermike 3,053]

I will ask the question again.

While in Birmingham Obama toed the democrat line concerning pulling out of Iraq. But he also said the US should be doing much more in the The Darfur conflict. So is he saying we should pull out of Iraq immediately and then send troops to Darfur?

And is this on the agenda for the other democrats as well?

[autiger4life 3]

I assure you I'm quite serious. I honestly hoped that someone so easily fooled by a slick politician with nothing to say would be more likely to vote for Johnny Pimpernell for sixth grade class president than be of age to vote for the president of the US.

You brought no "new viewpoints." Nor does your candidate have anything to offer but empty rhetoric and utopian sheen with which to pander to those unwilling to look past the gloss.

He's going to push for cleaner cars. Magnificent. Vote for me and I'll push for Three Musketeers for everyone. I'll push for farts that don't smell and cigarettes that won't kill you.

Your three "talking points" were actually two and they boil down to the following: a - He doesn't know anything so maybe he won't be as jaded as others; and b - He's a muslim, but probably not one of the really bad muslims so maybe other muslims will like him. My friend, your position is the height of naivety and illustrates a fundamental disconnect from reality.

If this guy was white nobody would pay him a bit of attention. He'd be a laughingstock. Leno would make jokes about his candidacy. If you ARE old enough to vote, please stay home. Vote in the democratic primary if you wish, but skip the general election. This country has enough problems as it is.

First of all, Johnny is in no way ready to be president, he doesn't even think we should have sugar drinks in the cafeteria. Although he has promised no homework weekends, so we'll see how that goes.

As for the empty rhetoric and utopian sheen: If you read Obama's book, The Audacity of Hope, he clearly outlines much of what he wants to do differently when President from unions, to education, to welfare to national security. I will completely agree that many of his speeches are filled with nice catch phrases that sound great to an American people who are desperate for something new. However, if you take the time to actually do a little research, he does have specific plans of things that he would do. When he says he wants to say have cleaner cars, he outlines how he plans to do it. I'd love to hear about the farts that don't smell, and well we already have the cigarettes that don't kill, and well I'm a Snickers guy myself, but thanks.

As for the talking points, first I do not think it is fair to say he knows nothing. He has served in the IL. senate and Congress. He has as much experience as several president's we've had, about the same as Lincoln actually. The second talking point you either mis-read or just decided to change on your own. I specifically said he was not Muslim, which if you knew anything about him, you would know this. You continue to show your ignorance on the candidate. The point is, at this time we negotiate without having any links to the culture of the Middle East. It is possible that the small link he has to the Muslim culture will allow us to further negotiations and maybe have some kind of peace in the area. I'm not saying it will happen, maybe it is my naivetyness(see I can make up words too)but as I said in my frist post, these are just thoughts, not hard facts.

Now the point that you have tried to make several times so far about if he was white no one would care. Well guess what, that is politics. If Arnold S. hadn't been in movies, no one would have cared, if Reagan hadn't been in show business, he wouldn't have been elected to Screen Actors Guild which is where he jumped into politics. If W's dad hadn't been president he probably would not have gotten so much publicity. A lot of politicians get airtime for reason's other than politics. That is just the way it works, but it in no way means they shouldn't be heard or they are worthless, it just means they get a chance that many people will not get, it does not mean they are unqualified for the position.

If you ARE old enough to vote, please stay home. Vote in the democratic primary if you wish, but skip the general election. This country has enough problems as it is

I would just like to thank you for giving me permission to vote in the primary, I wasn't sure about it, was I ready for it? Maybe, maybe not, but after your boost of confidence, I know I am now, so thanks for the go ahead; you arrogant, asinine jackass.

While in Birmingham Obama toed the democrat line concerning pulling out of Iraq. But he also said the US should be doing much more in the The Darfur conflict. So is he saying we should pull out of Iraq immediately and then send troops to Darfur?

It seems to me that Darfur is just another region that some politicians are trying to focus on because Americans like to feel concerned every now and then. Genocide has been happening here and many other places and nothing is really done. Every year they have the an anniversary for the holocaust and they vow to never let it happen again, and they continue to let it persist. But I really don't think they care, caring about Darfur is just another fad and the politicians know this.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

It's not a fad among Christians here. We were beating the drumbeat on Darfur and sending money, aid, manpower and other help over there for years before Clooney or any of the other famous people starting talking about it. But Sudan is just a poor country that doesn't offer much bang for the buck in return for getting involved so we don't bother.

[GalensGhost 0]

I assure you I'm quite serious. I honestly hoped that someone so easily fooled by a slick politician with nothing to say would be more likely to vote for Johnny Pimpernell for sixth grade class president than be of age to vote for the president of the US.

You brought no "new viewpoints." Nor does your candidate have anything to offer but empty rhetoric and utopian sheen with which to pander to those unwilling to look past the gloss.

He's going to push for cleaner cars. Magnificent. Vote for me and I'll push for Three Musketeers for everyone. I'll push for farts that don't smell and cigarettes that won't kill you.

Your three "talking points" were actually two and they boil down to the following: a - He doesn't know anything so maybe he won't be as jaded as others; and b - He's a muslim, but probably not one of the really bad muslims so maybe other muslims will like him. My friend, your position is the height of naivety and illustrates a fundamental disconnect from reality.

If this guy was white nobody would pay him a bit of attention. He'd be a laughingstock. Leno would make jokes about his candidacy. If you ARE old enough to vote, please stay home. Vote in the democratic primary if you wish, but skip the general election. This country has enough problems as it is.

First of all, Johnny is in no way ready to be president, he doesn't even think we should have sugar drinks in the cafeteria. Although he has promised no homework weekends, so we'll see how that goes.

As for the empty rhetoric and utopian sheen: If you read Obama's book, The Audacity of Hope, he clearly outlines much of what he wants to do differently when President from unions, to education, to welfare to national security. I will completely agree that many of his speeches are filled with nice catch phrases that sound great to an American people who are desperate for something new. However, if you take the time to actually do a little research, he does have specific plans of things that he would do. When he says he wants to say have cleaner cars, he outlines how he plans to do it. I'd love to hear about the farts that don't smell, and well we already have the cigarettes that don't kill, and well I'm a Snickers guy myself, but thanks.

As for the talking points, first I do not think it is fair to say he knows nothing. He has served in the IL. senate and Congress. He has as much experience as several president's we've had, about the same as Lincoln actually. The second talking point you either mis-read or just decided to change on your own. I specifically said he was not Muslim, which if you knew anything about him, you would know this. You continue to show your ignorance on the candidate. The point is, at this time we negotiate without having any links to the culture of the Middle East. It is possible that the small link he has to the Muslim culture will allow us to further negotiations and maybe have some kind of peace in the area. I'm not saying it will happen, maybe it is my naivetyness(see I can make up words too)but as I said in my frist post, these are just thoughts, not hard facts.

Now the point that you have tried to make several times so far about if he was white no one would care. Well guess what, that is politics. If Arnold S. hadn't been in movies, no one would have cared, if Reagan hadn't been in show business, he wouldn't have been elected to Screen Actors Guild which is where he jumped into politics. If W's dad hadn't been president he probably would not have gotten so much publicity. A lot of politicians get airtime for reason's other than politics. That is just the way it works, but it in no way means they shouldn't be heard or they are worthless, it just means they get a chance that many people will not get, it does not mean they are unqualified for the position.

If you ARE old enough to vote, please stay home. Vote in the democratic primary if you wish, but skip the general election. This country has enough problems as it is

I would just like to thank you for giving me permission to vote in the primary, I wasn't sure about it, was I ready for it? Maybe, maybe not, but after your boost of confidence, I know I am now, so thanks for the go ahead; you arrogant, asinine jackass.

While in Birmingham Obama toed the democrat line concerning pulling out of Iraq. But he also said the US should be doing much more in the The Darfur conflict. So is he saying we should pull out of Iraq immediately and then send troops to Darfur?

It seems to me that Darfur is just another region that some politicians are trying to focus on because Americans like to feel concerned every now and then. Genocide has been happening here and many other places and nothing is really done. Every year they have the an anniversary for the holocaust and they vow to never let it happen again, and they continue to let it persist. But I really don't think they care, caring about Darfur is just another fad and the politicians know this.

Excellent response. Just the right mix of humor and factual information.

I do have the book and have read it. I am reading a book by every viable candidate between now and the election -- with the exception of Hillary Clinton. I would not vote for her if she were the only candidate running and I have no interest in anything she has to say. While I don't disagree that Obama offers some ideas (none appear to be new or innovative) what Obama lacks is the wisdom, knowledge and experience to implement them. It's one thing to have an idea it's another to be able to put it in practice.

Gene Simmons says: Ideas in and of themselves mean nothing. If you have an idea (...assume lots of other people in this 6 Billion populated planet of ours, have also thought of it), you have to be able to MAKE IT HAPPEN That's how I percieve Obama. Utopian ideas -- many of which I disagree with in principle -- but no idea how to bring them about.

That was the point of my sixth-grade president jibe. Every sixth-grade presidential candidate promises no more mystery meat in the lunchroom, longer breaks, better snacks in the vending machines, homework limits and a repeal of the dress code. All great ideas but none likely to happen.