anyone see obama's new attack ad

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

10-09-2012, 08:22 AM
David88vert

Quote:

Originally Posted by bu villain

Sure, a 9 of 17 is a majority. Can't argue with that math. What I am arguing about is that it is a meaningless sampling and will probably mislead people into thinking that a majority OF ALL ECONOMISTS feel that way. Hey I just asked three people on the street who they were voting for and they said Obama. Would it be responsible for me to write an article and title it "100% of Georgians plan to vote for Obama"?

It's as meaningful as the way the job numbers are polled.
If you looked at the percentage that those 17 make up of all professional US economists, and looked at the percentaged of those polled on the job rate against all individuals over 18 in the US, I suspect that the percentage would be greater on the polled economists. There aren't that many well-known and well-respected economists, and there are a lot of people eligilbe for work in the US. Yet, some people have no problem with the small sampling for the job numbers - when they support their political position.
10-09-2012, 08:23 AM
David88vert

Quote:

Originally Posted by .blank cd

9 out of 17 Georgians I've asked said Obamas a Muslim Kenyan socialist.

Seems legit.

Sounds like you hang out with some uneducated people. I'm starting to think that you get your news updates from their uneducated neighbors, who believe that Obama is the saviour.
10-09-2012, 08:25 AM
David88vert

Quote:

Originally Posted by BanginJimmy

According to the chairman of the congressional black caucus Emanuel Cleaver, blacks that dont vote "should give us their color back".

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Skin color shouldn't have anything to do with who you vote for. Vote for the candidate that will do the most to improve the lives of your kids, and their kids. That's what people really need.
10-09-2012, 10:16 AM
Jaimecbr900

Quote:

Originally Posted by .blank cd

If I'm referencing a direct quote from Rush Limbaughs own two lips, does it matter where I got the quote from? I wasn't referring to what the editors thought about it, I'm referring to what Limbaugh actually said. I could have plucked the same thing from Limbaughs own archived broadcast and delivered the same message.

And Rush is running for WHAT office exactly????? This is simply a strategy to muddy the water away from the real issue. Real issue is below and no one can answer that question to a level of satisfaction to sway my vote to Obama. My own check book answers that question loud and clear.

Quote:

Biases based on reporting document-able evidence shouldn't be categorized as liberal leaning (which is what I feel like is happening here), unless you define a liberal lean as fact based. I define liberal leaning as biased towards liberal viewpoints in a overt or covert manner. I think "liberal" has been subconsciously defined here as the opposite of conservative. While I agree there is absolutely a such thing as "liberal bias", it is itself blatantly obvious, and distinguishable from fact based reporting. However, I feel as if it's increasing in occurrence now that if you report discernible facts and truths without the conservative spin you are placed subconsciously into a de-facto state of liberal preference. Which in itself I do not define as "liberal".

Fact is that during Obama's sitting presidency he has NOT accomplished anything of value nor meaning. If he has, list it. If you can't, then why would you or anyone else vote for him? Answer that simple question.

Saw a quote this morning that applies here clearly:

Directly from OBAMA'S nomination acceptance speech at the NDC in 2008 and referring to his opponent.......

"If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things."

So let's see......back when Obama was the challenger he stood on a platform of "Change" from the oppressive regime that alienated "poor" people and "rewarded the rich white people". Now, fast forward 4 yrs, and HE who has not accomplished a single meaningful thing nor promise he stood up so high for and so many fools bought into blindly just because of the color of his skin is the one that has paid millions of dollars (none of which is his own money) to try and steer the public's eye away from his OWN lack of accomplishments to his opponent's ONE ANALOGY/EXAMPLE of "BIG BIRD" on Sesame Street?????? Really? Sesame Street? When the Middle East is about to blow up.....when we are Gazillions in debt......when unemployment is off the charts......when the economy is the worst is ever been in decades.....when we have immigration issues.....when we have unnecessary dependency on foreign oil which fuels that same Middle East blow up.......REALLY???? Freaking BIG BIRD is all you got after you looked like a fool on National TV to 60+ million of your constituents?????? Where's that "CHANGE" now? WHAT exactly has "CHANGED" for the better in 4yrs???? Someone please tell me.

Maybe we'll see a smear ad where the Democrats claim that "you are what you eat" or "I'm rubber and you're glue". Considering they are so focused on Big Bird and following the rhyme of what's good for the goose is NOT good for the gander, maybe they should stick to that course because running on the platform of "CHANGE" and accomplishments will likely not be so easily sold this time. Maybe they'll have high ranking Senators and Congressmen threaten to take people's "color" away if they don't vote for Obama. That may scare a few million in the herd. That may help his margin of victory.

Still challenge anyone to quit dancing around the excuses and LIST his accomplishments during his Presidency.......Hell, during his lifetime since he was already the LEAST qualified candidate in history to have ever been elected to begin with. LIST it. 1,2,3,4......if you can find them. LIST THEM. Obama campaign can't or they'd used it to death by now. Someone else try.
10-09-2012, 02:22 PM
bu villain

Quote:

Originally Posted by David88vert

It's as meaningful as the way the job numbers are polled.

So then you agree, it's meaningless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David88vert

If you looked at the percentage that those 17 make up of all professional US economists, and looked at the percentaged of those polled on the job rate against all individuals over 18 in the US, I suspect that the percentage would be greater on the polled economists. There aren't that many well-known and well-respected economists, and there are a lot of people eligilbe for work in the US. Yet, some people have no problem with the small sampling for the job numbers - when they support their political position.

Actually you are mistaken on the math behind statistical significance. It is not as simple as what percentage of the total.

To determine unemployment for the US Population of 300 million, you only need to ask 1067 people to get a result that has a margin of error of 3% with a 95% confidence level.

To determine the opinion of the top 100 economists with the same 3% margin of error and 95% confidence level, you need to ask 92 of them.

Now the article only asked 17 (out of the top 100 economists lets say). Their result was 9 of 17 or 53%. With a 95% confidence level, guess what the margin of error is. ..... almost 22%. So the conclusion of the article should be "Somewhere between 31% and 74% of top economists think Romney is better for the economy."
10-09-2012, 02:39 PM
bu villain

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaimecbr900

Fact is that during Obama's sitting presidency he has NOT accomplished anything of value nor meaning. If he has, list it. If you can't, then why would you or anyone else vote for him? Answer that simple question.

First, it is important to note that everyone has different values so just because he hasn't done anything that you value or find meaningful, doesn't mean everyone agrees. It doesn't make you or them wrong, it's just a difference in values. I don't plan to vote for Obama but he has done some things that I value. I could similarly list things he has done that I do not support but since you asked for the ones I do value, here is a short list in no particular order.

1. Subsidized new sustainable energy technologies
2. Lowered my taxes (lower payroll tax, homebuyer credit, etc)
3. Made it illegal to deny health coverage for those with preexisting conditions, no lifetime benefit caps, healthcare exchanges, etc.
4. Repealed don't ask don't tell
5. Drawing down troops in the middle east
10-10-2012, 02:17 AM
Sinfix_15

Quote:

Originally Posted by David88vert

Skin color shouldn't have anything to do with who you vote for. Vote for the candidate that will do the most to improve the lives of your kids, and their kids. That's what people really need.

tell that to black people.
10-10-2012, 02:19 AM
Sinfix_15

Worst president in the history of the united states but thanx to the liberal media and unconditional support from minorities, we're actually going to have a close race to get rid of Obama. In a perfect world, when a president is this terrible, you shouldnt have to worry about him being re-elected.
10-10-2012, 06:58 AM
David88vert

Quote:

Originally Posted by bu villain

So then you agree, it's meaningless.

Actually you are mistaken on the math behind statistical significance. It is not as simple as what percentage of the total.

To determine unemployment for the US Population of 300 million, you only need to ask 1067 people to get a result that has a margin of error of 3% with a 95% confidence level.

To determine the opinion of the top 100 economists with the same 3% margin of error and 95% confidence level, you need to ask 92 of them.

Now the article only asked 17 (out of the top 100 economists lets say). Their result was 9 of 17 or 53%. With a 95% confidence level, guess what the margin of error is. ..... almost 22%. So the conclusion of the article should be "Somewhere between 31% and 74% of top economists think Romney is better for the economy."

All the polls are meaningless. Only the electoral collee poll matters in the long run. The media just loves to stir up controversy to generate more profits.

Asking 1067 does not get you a cross-section of 300 million, in and of itself. You have to look at different region, economic levels, industrues, age, races, genders, etc. 1067 is not enough to achieve this, period. Do you think that you are going to get the same answer from a well-to-do 70 year old white pig farmer in OK, as from a single mother-of-3 black woman in NYC, who just got laid off from her job? It's not possible to get enough sampling from 1067 for conclusions or relible calculations on ANY subject. f it could, we wouldn't need to have an election at all. We could just make a few phone calls (all to Chicago, of course).
10-10-2012, 06:59 AM
David88vert

Quote:

Originally Posted by bu villain

First, it is important to note that everyone has different values so just because he hasn't done anything that you value or find meaningful, doesn't mean everyone agrees. It doesn't make you or them wrong, it's just a difference in values. I don't plan to vote for Obama but he has done some things that I value. I could similarly list things he has done that I do not support but since you asked for the ones I do value, here is a short list in no particular order.

1. Subsidized new sustainable energy technologies
2. Lowered my taxes (lower payroll tax, homebuyer credit, etc)
3. Made it illegal to deny health coverage for those with preexisting conditions, no lifetime benefit caps, healthcare exchanges, etc.
4. Repealed don't ask don't tell
5. Drawing down troops in the middle east

Excellent post. Must like this one.
10-10-2012, 07:00 AM
David88vert

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sinfix_15

tell that to black people.

I do. And not all of the black people I know act like the stereotypes that you mention on here. We have different circles. I only know one who is voting for Obama because he is black, and he was already a very liberal Democrat.
10-10-2012, 12:52 PM
Sinfix_15

Quote:

Originally Posted by David88vert

I do. And not all of the black people I know act like the stereotypes that you mention on here. We have different circles. I only know one who is voting for Obama because he is black, and he was already a very liberal Democrat.

How many black people do you know that are voting for Romney?

"my circle" isnt the only factor in my opinion on this matter, i'm also judging from what i see on the news and net. Any black person that publicly supports Romney will be persecuted.
10-10-2012, 01:34 PM
David88vert

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sinfix_15

How many black people do you know that are voting for Romney?

"my circle" isnt the only factor in my opinion on this matter, i'm also judging from what i see on the news and net. Any black person that publicly supports Romney will be persecuted.

I don't ask people who they are voting for. Based upon stated opinions, I suspect 2 that I know will vote Romney. There are a coue more that might vote either way.

I know a few whites that will vote for Obama even though they are quite wealthy just because they believe he will be a better President. They are entitled to their votes.
10-10-2012, 01:55 PM
bu villain

Quote:

Originally Posted by David88vert

All the polls are meaningless. Only the electoral collee poll matters in the long run. The media just loves to stir up controversy to generate more profits.

Asking 1067 does not get you a cross-section of 300 million, in and of itself. You have to look at different region, economic levels, industrues, age, races, genders, etc. 1067 is not enough to achieve this, period. Do you think that you are going to get the same answer from a well-to-do 70 year old white pig farmer in OK, as from a single mother-of-3 black woman in NYC, who just got laid off from her job? It's not possible to get enough sampling from 1067 for conclusions or relible calculations on ANY subject. f it could, we wouldn't need to have an election at all. We could just make a few phone calls (all to Chicago, of course).

My point was and still is that the 17 economist poll is useless and will only mislead people. That's it. I'm trying not to get pulled off on a tangent to analyze any other kind of polling. Funny side note though, there are a significant number of economists and mathemeticians who think should decide elections via relatively small samples of polling.
10-10-2012, 01:58 PM
bu villain

Hey Sinflix, is that you in the picture in your sig? Just curious because that's kind of how I imagine you look when you talk about blacks voting for Obama.
10-11-2012, 02:19 AM
Sinfix_15

Quote:

Originally Posted by bu villain

Hey Sinflix, is that you in the picture in your sig? Just curious because that's kind of how I imagine you look when you talk about blacks voting for Obama.

Why is it that i get insulted for saying black people vote for Obama when black people do in fact vote for Obama? I'm making a factual statement and you're insulting me because of it.
10-11-2012, 02:21 AM
Sinfix_15

Quote:

Originally Posted by David88vert

I don't ask people who they are voting for. Based upon stated opinions, I suspect 2 that I know will vote Romney. There are a coue more that might vote either way.

I know a few whites that will vote for Obama even though they are quite wealthy just because they believe he will be a better President. They are entitled to their votes.

I dont ask them either, but i figure out who theyre voting for when every time i walk thru the break room at work they cheer like theyre watching a football game anytime something negative is said about Romney. The day after the debate they were all fiery and pissed off saying that Romney bullied Obama and wouldnt let him talk.
10-11-2012, 02:39 PM
bu villain

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sinfix_15

Why is it that i get insulted for saying black people vote for Obama when black people do in fact vote for Obama? I'm making a factual statement and you're insulting me because of it.

I didn't mean to insult you, it was a light hearted joke. You just seem to have a lot of passion when discussing black people voting for Obama and I thought your sig matched that passion. I have no problem with you stating a vast majority of blacks vote for Obama. It is indeed a fact. But everyone already knows it so I'm not sure what is the point of injecting it into just about every discussion on here.
10-11-2012, 02:40 PM
bu villain

Aww you changed your sig. That's no fun.
10-12-2012, 02:16 AM
Sinfix_15

Quote:

Originally Posted by bu villain

Aww you changed your sig. That's no fun.

The fact that you didnt know who it was means that i wasnt getting my point across. That is Will Muschamp, Gators football coach.
10-12-2012, 03:07 AM
Sinfix_15

side note, am i the only one who would like to punch Joe biden in the face? what an arrogant classless douchebag. He's a perfect fit to be at Obama's side.
10-12-2012, 07:35 AM
.blank cd

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sinfix_15

side note, am i the only one who would like to punch Joe biden in the face? what an arrogant classless douchebag. He's a perfect fit to be at Obama's side.

Don't be mad because Biden made quick work of Ryan
10-12-2012, 07:46 AM
David88vert

The VP debate is never taken seriously but it should be. Ask yourself who appears to have the answers and appears more Presidential? Who has the experience to step up the next day if something happened? The selection of a VP is a very important decision and tells you a lot about the President-elect.
10-12-2012, 01:48 PM
.blank cd

Sinfix. Step in here.

You're one to ridicule the inadequacy and idiocracies of the left. How does this make you feel?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E87gciwebw&sns=em
10-12-2012, 02:05 PM
Juggernaut

All I want to know is, if Obama/Biden knew nothing about what really happened in Libya even weeks after the attack. Why should we believe him about how much they know about Iran and their nuclear capabilities/deadline?

Edit: Serious question. After re-reading I realized it came off partisan.
10-12-2012, 02:18 PM
ISAtlanta300

Quote:

Originally Posted by .blank cd

Don't be mad because Biden made quick work of Ryan

What debate were you watching??? lol.
10-12-2012, 03:05 PM
.blank cd

Quote:

Originally Posted by ISAtlanta300

What debate were you watching??? lol.

The one where Ryan kept skating around simple mathematical issues that he couldn't answer and where Biden kept destroying his lies with facts.

That was the VP debate last night. Did you see it too?
10-12-2012, 03:25 PM
Sinfix_15

Quote:

Originally Posted by .blank cd

Don't be mad because Biden made quick work of Ryan

He didnt work Ryan over, what he did was make a mockery of himself the same way this president has made a mockery of the white house. Both of these bums need to go. I hope unemployment rises.... because i hope the next 2 unemployed people are Obama and Biden.
10-12-2012, 03:28 PM
Sinfix_15

Quote:

Originally Posted by .blank cd

Sinfix. Step in here.

You're one to ridicule the inadequacy and idiocracies of the left. How does this make you feel?

Woman At VP Debate Calls Obama A Communist - YouTube

As i've said before.... there's idiots on both sides of the isle, nobody is denying that. The scale leans heavy to the left though and its not even close. People are angry because theyre suffering under Obama's presidency. While theyre suffering, they have to watch a liberal media glorify this awful president.
10-12-2012, 06:10 PM
Elbow

I'm not going to lie, I thought Biden kicked Ryan in the nuts. I thought Ryan would do better, he came across to me as a young kid without the knowledge he needs to do the job all while kissing Mitt's butt. I thought Biden's quick comebacks and laughs were hilarious.
10-12-2012, 11:48 PM
Sinfix_15

Quote:

Originally Posted by simontibbett

I'm not going to lie, I thought Biden kicked Ryan in the nuts. I thought Ryan would do better, he came across to me as a young kid without the knowledge he needs to do the job all while kissing Mitt's butt. I thought Biden's quick comebacks and laughs were hilarious.

How did Ryan come off as "without knowledge" he produced as much stats and substance as Biden if not more. Biden came well prepared, he tried to turn it into a fight and not a stat match. He knows Ryan is well studied and that's why he tried to make it as much of a "bar brawl" as he could. Ryan is very much a political book worm, he knows his stats and figures.

Biden's arrogance annoys me. Neither Biden or Obama feel the need to apologize for anything and it makes me want to punch both of those douchebags.
10-13-2012, 01:54 AM
Sinfix_15

http://www.politicalmathblog.com/wp-...ure-Medium.jpg

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page