ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 18th November 2012, 04:11 PM   #41
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 18,237
Originally Posted by ConspiRaider View Post

The PBS deal, another matter. When I saw Romney proclaiming in the debate that he intended to axe PBS and even somewhat gloated that Jim Lehrer would soon be out of a job - arrogantly dumb move by Romney. PBS is corporate sponsorship and government-support and private citizen contributions and is generally seen as a positive element in the media mix.

I never understood the logic in this either. Government support of PBS has never been a make or break budget item. In fact it could probably be cut out completely and "big bird" would live on. The Dems focus on it was in no uncertain terms an attempt(successful) to sway voters by pulling on nostalgic heart strings. A strange move on Romneys part to give them this easy target.
__________________
Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join Team 13232!

"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

Last edited by DGM; 18th November 2012 at 04:13 PM.
DGM is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 04:33 PM   #42
Monketey Ghost
Guitar Wizard
 
Monketey Ghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,055
It was a perfect example of "I'm going to slash spending"-"What would you cut?"-"*very stupid, base-pandering floated turd that wouldn't really cut spending in a meaningful way*"
__________________
SSKCAS, member in long standing

"This'll teach those filthy bastards who's lovable."
Monketey Ghost is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 04:37 PM   #43
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 18,237
Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost View Post
It was a perfect example of "I'm going to slash spending"-"What would you cut?"-"*very stupid, base-pandering floated turd that wouldn't really cut spending in a meaningful way*"
I hope you're not looking for an argument from me. The Dems however did make a big deal out of Romney "killing Big Bird".
__________________
Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join Team 13232!

"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley
DGM is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 05:13 PM   #44
shmameron
New Blood
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 5
I'm from a very conservative area of the country. I'm constantly seeing facebook posts just like the OP, including things like "people are so stupid for re-electing him" and "what's wrong with our nation?!"

The thing is that conservative people tend to surround themselves with only conservative people, and the only opinions they hear are the ones they want to hear. They didn't think Obama would win because that's what all their friends (and the right-wing media) were saying.
shmameron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 05:17 PM   #45
ConspiRaider
Writer of Nothingnesses
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,169
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I never understood the logic in this either. Government support of PBS has never been a make or break budget item. In fact it could probably be cut out completely and "big bird" would live on. The Dems focus on it was in no uncertain terms an attempt(successful) to sway voters by pulling on nostalgic heart strings. A strange move on Romneys part to give them this easy target.
Yeahp. Big tactical blunder in front of millions by Romney. You really don't get many mulligans when pitching into the shark-infested political water hazard. The Dems predictably pounced - a nice bit of flair doing the Big Bird proxy for PBS...

There was a way for Romney to say this subtly but he couldn't resist the urge to be clever at that debate with the Lehrer tie-in. For me, after watching all 3 debates? Biggest faux pas of all.
ConspiRaider is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 05:28 PM   #46
Monketey Ghost
Guitar Wizard
 
Monketey Ghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,055
Yes, I was sort of flummoxed by him taking specific aim at PBS like that, it just seemed whacked-priorities doltish, and I'd guess a lot of people felt the same way.
__________________
SSKCAS, member in long standing

"This'll teach those filthy bastards who's lovable."
Monketey Ghost is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 05:42 PM   #47
ConspiRaider
Writer of Nothingnesses
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,169
Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost View Post
Yes, I was sort of flummoxed by him taking specific aim at PBS like that, it just seemed whacked-priorities doltish, and I'd guess a lot of people felt the same way.
As DGM called it, PBS as a symbol of excessive government spending is superfluous and essentially everyone knows it. However, radicals within the Republican Party see it as a favorite blocking dummy; they hold it up as a "Government endorsing The Liberal Agenda" trophy.

Then Romney personalizes the matter with his Jim Lehrer remark at the debate. It made him appear doltish and a little ruthless, as you indicate. More or less he said, "Thank you for moderating the debate for your fellow Americans and the world, soon-to-be-pink-slipped-Jim Lehrer!"

Republicans should have fully expected the Big Bird rejoinder.
ConspiRaider is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 06:08 PM   #48
DDWW
Muse
 
DDWW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 640
Hay, Give me some more stimulas money, like the last 4 years, and I'll cry all the way to the bank!

DDWW
DDWW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 06:33 PM   #49
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 13,605
Originally Posted by WilsonG View Post
Respectively: yes; sometimes; yes.

The Romney faithful fabricated their own polls to convince themselves their dream was real.

http://unskewedpolls.com/unskewed_pr...esident_03.cfm
From that link...

Quote:
The race is Ohio is like the national race, it is a story of many believing skewed polls that show President Obama performing stronger than he really is while Romney is likely to surprise them in winning it. Many of the polls for Ohio are skewed and so too is the RCP average because of that. The most recent poll for Ohio is the Ohio Poll/Univ. of Cincinnati survey that shows Obama leading 50 percent to 49 percent with a 3.3 percent margin of error. The latest Rasmussen poll of Ohio has the race in the state tied at 49 percent.
Final vote total: 50.3% to 48.3%

Skewed polls indeed...

If anything, the Ohio Poll underestimated Obama by a couple tenths or so...
__________________
"Baseball is a philosophy. The primordial ooze that once ruled our world has been captured in perpetual motion. Baseball is the moment. Its ever changing patterns are hypnotizing yet invigorating. Baseball is an art form. Classic and at the same time...progressive. Baseball is pre-historic and post-modern. Baseball is here to stay."

(Stolen from the side of a lava lamp box, and modified slightly)
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 06:38 PM   #50
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 13,605
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I never understood the logic in this either. Government support of PBS has never been a make or break budget item. In fact it could probably be cut out completely and "big bird" would live on. The Dems focus on it was in no uncertain terms an attempt(successful) to sway voters by pulling on nostalgic heart strings. A strange move on Romneys part to give them this easy target.
Then again, it's not at all inconsistent with coming from a position of nothing. I have argued before that the reason he couldn't answer the question of what he was going to cut was because he didn't actually have any plans to cut anything. He was throwing the "cut spending" line around just as a talking point, with no real idea. When stuck on the spot, he had to come up with something, despite it being really stupid.
__________________
"Baseball is a philosophy. The primordial ooze that once ruled our world has been captured in perpetual motion. Baseball is the moment. Its ever changing patterns are hypnotizing yet invigorating. Baseball is an art form. Classic and at the same time...progressive. Baseball is pre-historic and post-modern. Baseball is here to stay."

(Stolen from the side of a lava lamp box, and modified slightly)
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 06:40 PM   #51
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 25,897
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Many of them believed some conspiracy that the polls were wrong. That is, until Romney lead in a couple of those polls, then it was ok. Until Obama took the lead again, then it was a conspiracy again.
Well, if you were watching Fox through the polling cycles, Romney never trailed after the first debate. Each of their three talking heads would cite a different polling source in a different state, regardless of the record of the source. Until Gallup went down after Sandy, they could content themselves with Gallup's national figures, but during Sandy, O'Reilly would open with "Bad news for Obama. The District 7 Eagle Scouts Poll in Harrisburg shows the race in Pennsylvania is a dead heat." That'd be on a day when even Darling Scott (Rasmussen) showed Romney losing ground everywhere. Then, O'Reilly goes off and Hannity comes on.... "And a new poll from Red White And Blue Research shows Mitt Romney is favored in Wisconsin by 1 percentage point." And, again, every other poll had it tighter than the original 9%, but none had Obama at less than +5. Then Hannity would sign off for the night and Greta would come off and lead with a story about the poll taken at Bob's Bait and Tackle on County Road 6 showing that Romney was now ahead in Nevada. And so it went every night for about a week.

Being a Foxaholic (I'm entering a 12-step program shortly), I noticed that every day they cited a different poll in order to give their viewers good news. It was the highlight of their shows for me. O'Reilly was saying all season that "we use Rasmussen because he was the most accurate last time". But he stopped using Rasmussen when Scott's results were a little tighter than Gallup or Pew or ARG and shifted to them. I'm puzzled that regular fans/viewers didn't catch this subterfuge, themselves. They might have been a little less shocked at the results.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 06:48 PM   #52
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 25,897
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
Then again, it's not at all inconsistent with coming from a position of nothing. I have argued before that the reason he couldn't answer the question of what he was going to cut was because he didn't actually have any plans to cut anything. He was throwing the "cut spending" line around just as a talking point, with no real idea. When stuck on the spot, he had to come up with something, despite it being really stupid.
I believe this was just complete miscalculation on the part of their handlers. Watch his delivery. He was waiting for the question and was ready with his answer. This is more cocoon thinking. That line plays well with conservatives and he and his fat cat stuffed shirt buddies thought it would play well with the general public. It was the one case in that debate where he actually reverted to his primaries rhetoric (remember, that was the night he reinvented himself as his father) and it was a big mistake. But having had time to rehearse it and knowing the question was bound to come up, I think it's obviously a tactical error rather than getting caught off guard and answering off the cuff with an intemperate response.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 07:44 PM   #53
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,429
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Obviously, you didn't watch the panic on this site when some of the initial numbers came it.

Hearts were pounding, people were drinking and plans made for leaving the country. Ask Travis about it.
Well, unlike many Romney supporters, I always felt Obama could screw up and lose the thing.

Originally Posted by shmameron View Post
I'm from a very conservative area of the country. I'm constantly seeing facebook posts just like the OP, including things like "people are so stupid for re-electing him" and "what's wrong with our nation?!"

The thing is that conservative people tend to surround themselves with only conservative people, and the only opinions they hear are the ones they want to hear. They didn't think Obama would win because that's what all their friends (and the right-wing media) were saying.
Absolutely. If you just watched Fox News an Obama win would be inexplicable. After all they have spent at least two years of the last four talking about how he is the "worst president in history."

When all you hear about Obama is that he is the absolute worst president ever (meaning worse than both Buchannan and Hoover) it would seem he should have no shot at winning regardless of who he is running against. When you compound it with their ridiculous memes such as blaming high gas prices and unemployment on Obama they ended up living in a fantasy world where no one in their right mind would vote for Obama.

Too bad their fantasy world wasn't allowed to cast real votes.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 07:45 PM   #54
michael44
Critical Thinker
 
michael44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Blasphemy St.
Posts: 259
Originally Posted by Courier View Post
I find it rather peculiar and interesting that many Conservatives simply cannot believe that Obama was re-elected.

Many were convinced that with such high unemployment, such a high debt & deficit, there was simply no way that Obama would win again.

But the fact is, the polls for the battleground states that Obama needed to win, such as Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, & Nevada, all showed Obama ahead, for weeks on end.

Did Conservatives think these polls were wrong? Were the polls lying?

Did Conservatives simply not look at these polls?

It seems like their obsessive-confidence that Obama would lose, was largely based on ignoring the polls..or ignorance.
Although most of my republican friends shared doubts Romney would win, I found their reasonings were often quite varied. Some were good reasons, some bad. The most radical of the bunch falling into a state of total disbief, the more moderate/conservative having a bit more understanding of reality. The most irritating, were those who would go so far as to spin a conspiratory web in hopes of convincing their opponents of anything other than the truth. In my view, these individuals not only did harm to their own little campaign, but cast a shadow upon their main proponent for voting. .. As a bipartisan myself, I always believed the best man should win regardless of their partisanship. Had Romney, for being as intelligent as he is, had prepared himself in a manner that hadn't looked as though everything he stated was an outright lie, I would have gladly supported him.
michael44 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 07:55 PM   #55
Tricky
Briefly immortal
 
Tricky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 43,669
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
I always felt Obama could screw up and lose the thing.
Me too. Indeed, Fox and other poll deniers possibly hurt their own cause by convincing some fringe apathetic Democrats that they really did need to vote.
Tricky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 08:03 PM   #56
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 33,260
My parents are politically conservative, and they have trouble accepting all sorts of things as true. They've always been like that. If they believe something, they cannot imagine that other people really disagree. My mom cannot wrap her head around the idea of atheism. She thinks I must really, deep-down, believe, simply because she cannot imagine herself not believing. My dad didn't believe my tattoo was real because he would never voluntarily undergo something that painful, so he couldn't imagine that I could, so he actually thought it was a fake I carefully applied every time I saw them. For years. My parents have enormous difficulty with the idea that other people don't think like they do, and don't value the same things, and it's everything from political and religious beliefs to what you have in your refrigerator. "You don't buy butter?" is equal astonishment as "you don't believe in Heaven?", and my voting Democrat is as amazing to them as me owning underwear in colors other than white.

I'm not saying all political conservatives are like that, but my parents sure are. They don't see reality, they see the insides of their own heads and project it outward, and get dismayed and confused when it doesn't sync up exactly.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 08:16 PM   #57
Baffled
Critical Thinker
 
Baffled's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 329
Originally Posted by WilsonG View Post
The Romney faithful fabricated their own polls to convince themselves their dream was real.

unskewedpolls.com/unskewed_projection_2012%20president_03.cfm

The ad I see there reads, "Nate Silver for President - Show your support for Nate in 2016!"
Baffled is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 08:43 PM   #58
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,925
Me? I can't believe it's not butter!
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 08:53 PM   #59
Biscuit
Philosopher
 
Biscuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,210
I admit I was nervous on election day but I am planning on leaving America in the next 15 to 20 years anyway.
__________________
“... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.”
― Neil deGrasse Tyson
Biscuit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 09:12 PM   #60
Courier
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,237
Originally Posted by Biscuit View Post
I admit I was nervous on election day but I am planning on leaving America in the next 15 to 20 years anyway.
Funny, as I plan on leaving the USA in 60 years or so.
Courier is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 09:18 PM   #61
Craig4
Philosopher
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Reston, Virginia
Posts: 7,745
Why on Earth would anyone be surprised? The GOP had a slightly less bloody version of the Hunger Games for a primary race, leaving a candidate who was damaged goods. AND!!! they ran a Mormon. Why would they expect to win? That plan was really going to sway those swing state voters.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 09:25 PM   #62
MNBrant
Master Poster
 
MNBrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,744
I demand a recount!
MNBrant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 09:31 PM   #63
ConspiRaider
Writer of Nothingnesses
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,169
Originally Posted by Courier View Post
Funny, as I plan on leaving the USA in 60 years or so.
Oh no you should stay, if only for the Dodger dogs which are not yet made in China.
ConspiRaider is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 09:32 PM   #64
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,873
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Another thing that's sad is, I've talked to many people that voted for Obama that claim they did because he kept their taxes low.
Well, there was the FICA tax holiday, which benefitted mostly the working class.

Quote:
I was told if Romney got elected he'd raise our taxes, cancel our insurance and take away all womans rights.
Willard did plan to cut some tax exemptions, and there was no guarantee that the exemptions cut would be just on what the upper 10% use. They were more worried that it would be on mortgage interest, tuition, state sales taxes and that sort of thing.

Had Willard had a chance to end Obama care, insurance companies could go back to convening death panels to cull out the less profitable policy holders and writing their executives nice bonuses out of the money they did not spend on actual services.

Willard flat-out said that he would utterly defund PP, which ios where a lot of women get ALL of their gynecological care, and that he would gladly sign a bill outlawing all abortions, even for rape victims. Then those idiots Akin and that other dork, whose name I have already forgotten because he was such a worthless excuse for a man, had to open their mouths and confirm that they knew little and cared less what women really needed in the way of health care.

Funny how some people are.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 10:18 PM   #65
davefoc
Philosopher
 
davefoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 8,213
Originally Posted by ConspiRaider View Post
The "magic underpants" deal I thought was idiotic, a cheap shot. Religion is religion is religion, the Western ones especially steeped in screwball ceremony, "rules", traditions. That was a glass houses overstep by those Dems promoting the peculiarities of Romney's Mormonism.
I didn't realize the magic underpants thing made it much out of this forum (maybe I'm too sheltered) and I did think it was a little unfair also, but then I saw this interview and I was a little less sure that it wasn't borderline reasonable: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2077433.html

One of the fears that was expressed by several moderates in this forum was that some of Romney crazy talk was more than routine political posturing. Interviews like this made it seem a lot more likely to me that Romney could easily become a true believer in stuff that conservative handlers would impart in to him and we might have a repeat of the Bush presidency where a strangely disassociated president put much of the decision making of his presidency in the hands of the vice president and a political adviser.

Quote:

The PBS deal, another matter. When I saw Romney proclaiming in the debate that he intended to axe PBS and even somewhat gloated that Jim Lehrer would soon be out of a job - arrogantly dumb move by Romney. PBS is corporate sponsorship and government-support and private citizen contributions and is generally seen as a positive element in the media mix.
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I never understood the logic in this either. Government support of PBS has never been a make or break budget item. In fact it could probably be cut out completely and "big bird" would live on. The Dems focus on it was in no uncertain terms an attempt(successful) to sway voters by pulling on nostalgic heart strings. A strange move on Romneys part to give them this easy target.
Speaking as a moderate libertarian, I can easily see arguments, beyond saving a few bucks, for stopping government support of PBS. On the other hand, speaking as an individual that gets more enjoyment out of PBS programming than all the rest of the mainstream broadcast network programming put together I wouldn't be too keen to see it ended. Of course, one thing about Romney is that one never knew exactly where he really stood, but I doubt his libertarian streak would have gotten in the way of his practical political self and Big Bird would have probably been spared but I think the number of polar bears are dying as the Arctic ice cover melts away documentaries might have taken a hit.

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
My parents are politically conservative, and they have trouble accepting all sorts of things as true. They've always been like that. If they believe something, they cannot imagine that other people really disagree. My mom cannot wrap her head around the idea of atheism. She thinks I must really, deep-down, believe, simply because she cannot imagine herself not believing. My dad didn't believe my tattoo was real because he would never voluntarily undergo something that painful, so he couldn't imagine that I could, so he actually thought it was a fake I carefully applied every time I saw them. For years. My parents have enormous difficulty with the idea that other people don't think like they do, and don't value the same things, and it's everything from political and religious beliefs to what you have in your refrigerator. "You don't buy butter?" is equal astonishment as "you don't believe in Heaven?", and my voting Democrat is as amazing to them as me owning underwear in colors other than white.

I'm not saying all political conservatives are like that, but my parents sure are. They don't see reality, they see the insides of their own heads and project it outward, and get dismayed and confused when it doesn't sync up exactly.
I was a little taken aback here by the serious nature of a Tragic Monkey post. But an attempt to respond in kind: My father with his partisan Republican political views is somewhat similar to your parents (my mother is dead). Late in his life he married a fairly religious woman with fairly conservative sons, and he forwards me a lot of what I see as bizarre partisan stuff. I'm never too sure how to respond. Tonight I got stuff about how Patraeus was forced to resign to keep him from testifying clap trap that has now morphed strangely since Patraeus has testified into an even more implausible CT. Mostly I don't answer. Occasionally I'll provide a link to snopes or as in this case I'll mention that there's no evidence and no apparent motive for the new version of this CT.

My father and I have never talked much about religion. About forty years ago he asked me if I was an atheist and I told him yes. I always assumed he was also, but now that he has married this fairly religious woman I'm not so sure and anyway we have enough disputes about political stuff that I think it makes sense that neither of us brings up the religion issue.

As an aside, my father and step mother are regular Fox News watchers and maybe that's why I have been one that thinks that Fox News has a major impact on a major section of the population. A lot of people think that Fox News is driven by a political agenda. There may be some truth to that but a lot of what drives Fox News is making money and they do that by pandering to people that want their views continuously reinforced even if the reinforcement is accomplished with only a limited connection to objectivity and truth.
__________________
The way of truth is along the path of intellectual sincerity. -- Henry S. Pritchett

Perfection is the enemy of good enough -- Russian proverb
davefoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 10:21 PM   #66
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 23,600
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I'd also like to point out that the opposition felt the need to fixate on killing "big bird" and some other non-sense about "magic under-pants" (I never got that one and really don't want to know).
No they did not fixate on those things.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 10:24 PM   #67
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,957
There were plenty of reasons to believe Obama would lose, and only the pollsters and a blogger for the New York Times to believe he would win. The pollsters could be dismissed with other pollsters and with the memories of the 2004 exit polls, and the New York Times blogger with the simple observation that he worked for the NY Times.

And Romney very easily could have won. If the jobs report for September had been negative instead of positive, if Romney had not made the 47% comment, if Sandy had hit a week earlier or a week later....

In short, don't make the mistake that conspiracy theorists do, of assuming that everything that happened was bound to happen.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 10:27 PM   #68
Richard Masters
Illuminator
 
Richard Masters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,032
Originally Posted by funk de fino View Post
Anyone who seriously thought Romney had any chance at all was deluded.
Nate Silver gave Romney a 30%. Was he deluded?
Richard Masters is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2012, 10:57 PM   #69
davefoc
Philosopher
 
davefoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 8,213
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
There were plenty of reasons to believe Obama would lose, and only the pollsters and a blogger for the New York Times to believe he would win. The pollsters could be dismissed with other pollsters and with the memories of the 2004 exit polls, and the New York Times blogger with the simple observation that he worked for the NY Times.

And Romney very easily could have won. If the jobs report for September had been negative instead of positive, if Romney had not made the 47% comment, if Sandy had hit a week earlier or a week later....

In short, don't make the mistake that conspiracy theorists do, of assuming that everything that happened was bound to happen.
I agree with some of this. The point that a lot of people have made though, is that the polls had leaned weakly for Obama for quite awhile and the nature of the fights in the battle ground states favored Obama pretty heavily and that a Romney win looked to be an uphill fight. Reasonably, Romney, seems not to have believed the polling data and went forward with a very optimistic view. But anybody, other than a candidate that might need to be optimistic to help drive him on, looking at the polling data would have concluded either that there was a major flaw in the polls or a Romney victory was a long shot. My own pre-election guess was that the chances of an Obama victory was about 90%. I based that on taking a close look at the races in the five closest battleground states and the guess that the rest of the state results would fall as predicted. I notice that Silver went through a bunch of fancy math to predict about a 92% chance of an Obama victory. Perhaps next time he'll just ask me.

As to the effect of the 47% comment: Romney said quite a few silly things that cumulatively hurt him. You might be right that the cumulative effect of all of them might have been enough to swing the election against him, but part of many of his apparent gaffs were attacks on Obama or people that were associated with Obama that might have garnered him support in some quarters. I think the total effect of Romney's various gaffs and stumbles is difficult to assess.

As to Sandy: This one is interesting (and of course unknowable). There was at least some data before the storm that the candidate in office usually lost about a point when a major natural disaster occurred. It's sort of like people blaming the guy in power when they can't get a job. The guy in charge might not be responsible for the problem but there is a problem, they're not happy and maybe the next guy will do better. But in this case, Obama got a lot of press while he was handling the federal side of the storm response and he looked like he might have been doing OK, so maybe that more than countered the votes he lost because people weren't happy.

And of course, if you happened to be watching Fox News where the Benghazi murders story was playing almost nonstop, you might not have realized that there was a massive hurricane making its way to NY and NJ.

ETA: One of the things that seems to have helped Obama with regard to Sandy was that his administration had not let contracts to companies owned by cronies without buses to supply buses in emergencies. I think some people saw it as a good thing that FEMA had real resources secured from real companies that had real resources to sell.
__________________
The way of truth is along the path of intellectual sincerity. -- Henry S. Pritchett

Perfection is the enemy of good enough -- Russian proverb

Last edited by davefoc; 18th November 2012 at 11:17 PM.
davefoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 06:10 AM   #70
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,280
Originally Posted by Richard Masters View Post
Nate Silver gave Romney a 30%. Was he deluded?
I don't think you understood one bit about how a statistical statement of probability works.

I mean a total lack of any comprehension whatsoever.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 06:36 AM   #71
Monketey Ghost
Guitar Wizard
 
Monketey Ghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,055
The fact that people are giving a statistician props for predicting something that was statistically likely has made me laugh... I'll bet he's laughed a bit about that too
__________________
SSKCAS, member in long standing

"This'll teach those filthy bastards who's lovable."
Monketey Ghost is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 07:27 AM   #72
Tricky
Briefly immortal
 
Tricky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 43,669
Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost View Post
The fact that people are giving a statistician props for predicting something that was statistically likely has made me laugh... I'll bet he's laughed a bit about that too
Mostly the props are for being so extremely accurate. Calling all 50 states and DC correctly is damn good prediction for any statistician.
Tricky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 07:45 AM   #73
Monketey Ghost
Guitar Wizard
 
Monketey Ghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,055
But after so many times, so many years, seems some math whizard was bound to hit the jackpot, so to speak
__________________
SSKCAS, member in long standing

"This'll teach those filthy bastards who's lovable."
Monketey Ghost is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 07:47 AM   #74
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 13,605
Originally Posted by Tricky View Post
Mostly the props are for being so extremely accurate. Calling all 50 states and DC correctly is damn good prediction for any statistician.
According to HIS statistics, the chances of getting them all correct were something like 12%, and about 25% if you don't count Florida. Notice of the two famous statisticians, one got Florida right, one got Florida wrong, consistent with both of their estimates that Florida was basically a toss-up.

Getting them all correct was not a stretch at all IF you got Florida.

Recall Silver got one wrong back in 08 (and Sam Wang got them all right)
__________________
"Baseball is a philosophy. The primordial ooze that once ruled our world has been captured in perpetual motion. Baseball is the moment. Its ever changing patterns are hypnotizing yet invigorating. Baseball is an art form. Classic and at the same time...progressive. Baseball is pre-historic and post-modern. Baseball is here to stay."

(Stolen from the side of a lava lamp box, and modified slightly)
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 08:14 AM   #75
remirol
Senior Wrangler
 
remirol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,133
Originally Posted by davefoc View Post
I agree with some of this. The point that a lot of people have made though, is that the polls had leaned weakly for Obama for quite awhile and the nature of the fights in the battle ground states favored Obama pretty heavily and that a Romney win looked to be an uphill fight. Reasonably, Romney, seems not to have believed the polling data and went forward with a very optimistic view. But anybody, other than a candidate that might need to be optimistic to help drive him on, looking at the polling data would have concluded either that there was a major flaw in the polls or a Romney victory was a long shot. My own pre-election guess was that the chances of an Obama victory was about 90%.
This. There were a lot of ephemeral reasons to believe Romney would win; none of them were borne out by any evidence, just a lot of people's opinions and feelings and hunches. There was one very, very good reason to believe Obama would win -- and that was the hard facts of the polling, along with the historical accuracy of that polling when subjected to rigorous analysis.

Silver said several times that the likelihood he gave Romney of winning was almost entirely ascribed to the polls (ALL of them) being consistently, across-the-board significantly wrong in favor of Obama. He debunked the turnout argument at one point right before the election as well (ie. if the polls are right but using the wrong turnout model, and the turnout matches '04 or '00, what happens? Turns out, Obama still wins).

Simply put, hard facts were on Obama's side this time, and wishful thinking was on Romney's side. The reverse was true in '04 -- there was absolutely no concrete reason to believe Kerry would win, and sure enough, he didn't. I said as much in at least two different threads here, and perhaps having made the mistake of falling into the trap of wishful thinking in '04 was an advantage for me this year as far as confidence was concerned. I had a brief moment of concert WRT "did he really just step on his own dick?" after the first debate, but once it became obvious from the trends that the debate was only reversing the post-convention bounce, it went away.
__________________
Roguelike player? Info: http://sporkhack.com -- Public server: telnet://sporkhack.com
--
The church is near but the road is icy; the bar is far away but I will walk carefully. -- old Russian proverb
remirol is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 09:50 AM   #76
coalesce
Illuminator
 
coalesce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,113
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
My parents are politically conservative, and they have trouble accepting all sorts of things as true. They've always been like that. If they believe something, they cannot imagine that other people really disagree. My mom cannot wrap her head around the idea of atheism. She thinks I must really, deep-down, believe, simply because she cannot imagine herself not believing. My dad didn't believe my tattoo was real because he would never voluntarily undergo something that painful, so he couldn't imagine that I could, so he actually thought it was a fake I carefully applied every time I saw them. For years. My parents have enormous difficulty with the idea that other people don't think like they do, and don't value the same things, and it's everything from political and religious beliefs to what you have in your refrigerator. "You don't buy butter?" is equal astonishment as "you don't believe in Heaven?", and my voting Democrat is as amazing to them as me owning underwear in colors other than white.

I'm not saying all political conservatives are like that, but my parents sure are. They don't see reality, they see the insides of their own heads and project it outward, and get dismayed and confused when it doesn't sync up exactly.
Your parents may be suffering from the thing my mother has often mentioned (she's 70+): they grew up in a world of certainties. In their day, Dad went to work, Mom stayed home with the kids and the non-whites knew their place. Nowadays, both parents (if they're both around) almost always have to work, kids attend daycare and after-school programs until the parents come home or the kids come home to empty house, and a BLACK MAN is the President. They will then look back wistfully on the world they grew up in and wish it still existed. Some will get even more worked up about it and wear "I Want My Country Back!" buttons or dress up like deranged Uncle Sams and wonder why no one else outside of their little bubbles GETS IT.

Wonder if people my age (46) will do the same. We probably will, but until then, I'll just spend my day working my two jobs and chasing those kids off mah lawn.

Michael
__________________
"I want the kids in bed by nine, the dog fed, the yard watered and the gate locked. And get a note to the milkman NO MORE CHEESE!"
coalesce is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 10:16 AM   #77
varwoche
Philosopher
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,654
Originally Posted by ConspiRaider View Post
The "magic underpants" deal I thought was idiotic, a cheap shot. Religion is religion is religion, the Western ones especially steeped in screwball ceremony, "rules", traditions. That was a glass houses overstep by those Dems promoting the peculiarities of Romney's Mormonism.
I disagree with this part. LDS is more virulent than most. For instance, they were the money behind CA prop 8.

Also, I don't understand why it's customary in US politics to compartmentalize religious beliefs -- as if the topic is somehow special and shouldn't matter to voters.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot (and/or Fat Jack)
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 10:41 AM   #78
JoeTheJuggler
Penultimate Amazing
 
JoeTheJuggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,770
Originally Posted by Courier View Post

Did Conservatives think these polls were wrong? Were the polls lying?

Did Conservatives simply not look at these polls?

I think many of them relied on reporting in the mainstream media that continued to portray the election as a dead-heat right up to election day.

They based that reporting on over-reliance on the national polls and ignoring the state polls in the battleground states, but I think they (the media, that is) were motivated to make the "story" one of a close race rather than accurate reporting for their own non-political interests.
__________________
"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons
JoeTheJuggler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 10:47 AM   #79
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 25,488
Originally Posted by WilsonG View Post
The Romney faithful fabricated their own polls to convince themselves their dream was real.

http://unskewedpolls.com/unskewed_pr...esident_03.cfm
Originally Posted by Baffled View Post
The ad I see there reads, "Nate Silver for President - Show your support for Nate in 2016!"
All I see is ".cfm" and think "there is someone who has no business producing websites."

Dean Chambers of UnSkewedPolls.com has manned up and admitted he was wrong. Good on him.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2012, 10:53 AM   #80
JoeTheJuggler
Penultimate Amazing
 
JoeTheJuggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,770
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I disagree with this part. LDS is more virulent than most. For instance, they were the money behind CA prop 8.
Their efforts to support the passage of Prop 8 were in collaboration with the Roman Catholic Church, which also spent money lobbying for Prop 8. So yeah, I think religion is religion.

There is no more reason to believe that Romney would have set public policy based on his Mormon beliefs than that JFK would have taken orders from the Vatican.

Just because it's newer and less mainstream doesn't mean the Mormon church is any more (or less) wacky or "virulent" than any other.

ETA:
Quote:
Also, I don't understand why it's customary in US politics to compartmentalize religious beliefs -- as if the topic is somehow special and shouldn't matter to voters.
Are you kidding? You think most candidates at that level behave as if religion doesn't matter?

Candidates at the national level always have to address concerns of religion. There are people who opposed Obama (still) under the mistaken notion that he is a Muslim or at least a non-Christian. There is also the guilt-by-association crowd who feel that Obama's connection to Jeremy Wright makes him un-American.


And opposition to gay marriage and a woman's right to choose an abortion are definitely positions motivated only by religion. Candidates at this level who support those positions do so only to pander to religious votes (especially on the Roe v. Wade thing) since there is basically nothing they can or would do to follow up on their campaign promises to that segment of the electorate.

Romney for his part did some major etch-a-sketching of his positions on some of the issues of interest to religious people to try to get their votes. He also did some serious evasion when it came to questions of exactly what sort of things he believes.
__________________
"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

Last edited by JoeTheJuggler; 19th November 2012 at 11:01 AM.
JoeTheJuggler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:09 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.