I generally don't pay much attention to polls. There are too many other idiotic things going on for me to worry about the thought process (or lack thereof) of 500-1000 responders to a poll like this.
I'm sorry, but it's not. Not sure is more expansive than maybe. Not sure includes the idea of maybe, but also includes the concept of I literally don't know. It's cool though.
What's the problem here? It seems like a reputable poll that illustrates some alarming statistics about a very prominent and influential group of people. Was saying "the plurality of Republicans are idiots" a bit inflammatory? Yeah, it was but how PC do we have to get when referring to people who believing ridiculous notions that have been proven false? These people should be labeled as what they are so people can stop taking them seriously. If you're a Republican and you answered "no" to most of those questions it's probably time for you to disassociate yourself with the party because it has obviously dissociated itself from your principals.
Maybe and not sure are essentially one in the same. If something "may or may not be", then you are obviously "not sure". If you're "not sure" of something, then it obviously "may or may not be". Both of which also automatically include "not knowing".
More importantly, it is only opinion. Where is quantitative rejoinder? Show me how the poll is flawed or why it is not reputable.
Research2000 is fairly highly respected and was one of the more accurate pollsters throughout last year's primaries.
In general context, that is not entirely true. "not sure" is conveying the questioner you're not sure on your answer or its unknown. "Maybe" is often used to mask the answer.
To be even more fair I would suggest: "To be fair, he said that it proves that a plurality of the Republicans polled are idiots, not all. Of course, considering the source of the poll, I wonder if I should have added ... selectively polled .... This is why Clutch describes this forum as "monkeys flinging poo at each other." Lunacy abounds on both ends of the political spectrum.
If you want to read further into it than the plain definition of the words, then be my guest, but I'll stick with the letters on the paper. And what point are you trying to make by stating "not sure" means "not sure"? Do you disagree with the fact that someone who is "not sure" of something allows for the fact that something "may or may not be"?
The "not sure" vs "maybe" argument is quite possible the most ridiculously stupid weaseling I have ever seen. And this from the same crowd that loves to bring up "what the definition of 'is' is"...
Where exactly is the history of Research2000 doing anything unethical for any of their clients (in this case, DailyKos)? A polling firm's entire livelihood is based on their credibility. What reason would they have for trashing that credibility to create a biased poll for a particular client?
I find it particularly troubling since twhy77 is in law school. Gotta know the intrinsic value of these things there, or you can get in serious dookie.
For those of you who don't like the results so you decide the poll must be biased (great logic, by the way), here are other independent polls that have similar results: Public Policy polling found 35% of Republicans think Obama should be impeached: http://washingtonindependent.com/70241/poll-35-percent-of-republicans-want-to-impeach-obama Angus Reid found 51% of Republicans thought Obama was not born in the US: http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/obama_was_not_born_in_us_republicans_say/ I guess they all must be biased since they don't fit your beliefs too?
why are people so adamament in disputing these numbers, have they not been paying attention to the political landscape of the past fifteen years? how many people believed in whitewater? this is the environment republicans have created since clinton
Yeah. One side says Obama is a racist that wants the terrorists to win. The other side says that's idiotic. Yeah, that's the same on both ends.
:grin: I don't think it's weaseling though. Listen, I was just trying to be cute with Batman on his plurality argument, because the technical plurality agrees with what he says (accept about Obama being a Socialist). Here's the real problem with Batman's tone and slant, it's just down right arrogant and rude, paints an entire party as complete knuckleheads for being nothing more than ignorant. It's an attitude that's not respectful of human dignity. The same goes for those who make the same arguments on the right. Am I happy there are Conservative think tanks that write-up this trash (the emails I somehow get from someone who thinks they just saw Obama and Osama smoking dope together because there is a photoshopped picture on the webs that shows this) and send it out? Hell naw. They are doing way more harm then whatever iota of good they think they might be doing. Does that mean that the party holds these views? Nope. Does it mean you are an idiot if you tend to associate yourself with the Republican party. This brings up my problem with the way the poll was actually carried out as well, self-identified Republicans? Really? That would exclude me because I don't self-identify as a Republican, just a Conservative? DailyKos could do a poll with the same type of questions, do you believe the Earth has a Soul and humans are killing it? Do you believe whatever crazy left idea the fringe might have is the truth? If you were only asking people who self-identify as Democrats, I bet you could get 400 out of 2000 people to agree with some off the wall statements if they were self-identified Democrats.
I'm glad your concerned about my concern for equivocating. If I say to an agnostic do you believe in God, and they say "maybe", is that the same thing as saying "not sure"? I don't think it is.
