Rebecca Knowlton, 45, of Smithville, said she took the day off of home-schooling her three children and brought them to the rally to teach them about civic duty. Knowlton, a critic of the Social Security system and the United Nations, said she felt camaraderie at the demonstration. "The movement is growing stronger," she said. "You're not alone."
This credit could screw over a large number of people. Many people are going to find out that they actually not be withholding enough because of the credit. In particular of families in which both parents work. We've been recommending people adjust their withholdings to avoid a surprise when it comes time to file 2009 tax returns.
Major, I say this without meaning any disrespect, but you need to get out and actually talk to people outside your subset. I've said many times I do not trust polls because they tend to deliver the results favorable to whomever pays them. That's just me, and you know I tend to be a cynic. If I searched some right wing sites, the chances are strong that I could find polls that challenge your polls. My personal random selection of people to "interview" was admittedly unscientific, but, at the same time, 180 degrees from your polls. The reactions were perhaps as skewed as they would have been had I done the same sampling in a San Antonio barrio/ghetto. The difference between us is that I am not trying to win any arguments or converts to my way of thinking. I am merely passing on what I experienced and observed. Take it for what it is worth, and, if worthless, don't worry about it. I won't.
That's what I was/am afraid of. Because of the tax break I am getting now, does that mean I will get less of a refund now or perhaps have to pay in when tax time rolls around next year?
omfg homeschooling oh noes. God forbid a parent teaches their child and not the government. what is the point of these idiotic posts?
Just saying that only monthly makes sense, or be prepared for a lower refund or owing more when you file next year.
No disrespect to you, but I'm not sure you understand how these polls work. Yes, you can create results you want depending on the wording of the questions and the like - which is why you should look at methodology and the source. These gallup polls have been using the same wording of questions over years or decades in order to specifically remove the bias and gauge trends. These aren't polls commishioned to find particular results or sponsored by partisan organizations. You can get a lot of data out them and there is solid science behind them. If you can find contrary, well-respected polls, I would love to see them. But your selection of people wasn't random - it was people at or near the protests. The ghetto sampling wasn't random either. That's the value of polls over indidividual pieces of data. If I remember right (it may have been someone else), you were just as suspicious of the pre-election pollling which turned out to be virtually perfectly accurate.
There is no way to know for sure. When I go back to work tomorrow, I'll try to remember to post who is the RIA information on it. They have gone through calculations to test what the negatives of changing the tax tables will do.
Except they wouldn't unless Fox News conducted the study. When Fox sponsors a poll, they generally don't actually conduct the analysis. They simply pay a professional, independent polling company to do it. The polling companies have a reputation to maintain to stay viable in the industry, and they generally work with group aligned with both sides of the political aisle. Same with CBS, NYTimes, etc. None of these groups have their own internal polling businesses and historically, none have shown any kind of political bias. There can be sampling biases, but those can generally be identified and adjusted for. The raw numbers would be off, but the trend data is still just as valid.
Despite your best efforts to cloak your political persuasions in amiable, but phony give-and-take, do you not see the hypocrisy dripping from your post? What sample population do you believe is more representative of our population? Yours at the anti-Obama rally?
I see that you are as big a cynic as me -- you're just the fool on the other hill (forgot, you may not be old enough to know that was a Beatles music word play). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDJ-015ojec I cloak nothing intentionally or unintentionally. My opinions are what they are. As I said earlier, take them for what they are worth, and, if worthless, don't worry about them. I won't worry about yours, especially since you tend to wear blinders regarding anything other than what you already believe, right or wrong.
I'm a bit confused on where these "patriots" were 4 years ago. They did not find it convenient to protest irresponsible spending when it was spent on Republican agendas. They instead, only protest spending on a Democrat's agenda. How conveeeeeeenient. (A Democrat agenda whose hand is forced by its predecessor to raise government spending in order to stimulate the economy due to lower consumer spending, or else the economy is screwed which, in turn harms our military and security. (You don't have to take a Global Macro class to know this.)) While you lie to yourself about your "patriotism," is it really necessary to drape yourself with the blood, sweat and tears spilled by the true patriots of the Boston Tea Party? They never had such identity-crisis issues.
