Friday, December 18, 2015

Voter IQ Test

In a poll just released a majority of Republicans surveyed favor bombing the country of Agrabah while a majority of Democrats oppose it. The problem is, Agrabah is the mythical country from the animated film "Aladin".

http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/263713-poll-30-percent-of-republicans-want-to-bomb-country-from

23 comments:

  1. Mick this one is even below the standards of reprehensible.

    A poll via #nottheonion from Twitter.

    You forgot to mention, they also polled Democratic primary voters: 19% of them said they would support bombing Agrabah

    The Hill??? Not to far left is it, ROTFLMAO.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A plurality of Democrats, 36 percent, also opposed the measure, compared to 19 percent who said they support it.

      Actually the plurality was the 45% who couldn't make up their minds....

      Delete
    2. 90% would know who won last week's made for TV dance competition.

      Delete
    3. louman, I posted this because I found it to be very amusing. It is no great revelation that the Republicans tend to favor military action more than Democrats, it was reported on The Hill web site so that's the citation I used. While you are rolling on the floor you might try and comprehend the difference between a serious news story and a joke.

      Delete
    4. Of the same republican surveyed, 36 percent believe Donald Trump's claim that thousands of Arabs in New Jersey cheered when the World Trade Center collapsed on 9/11. Almost 54 percent support Trump's idea to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. and 46 percent think a national database of Muslims in the United States should be created.

      Additionally, one in four of those polled by the PPP said that Islam should be illegal in the US and that they support the US policy of Japanese internment during the second world war.

      Jim Williams, a PPP spokesperson, told Mashable that the company got the idea to include the question on the political survey after watching the GOP debate on Dec. 15. An overwhelming focus on the Middle East and the threat posed by radical Islamists encouraged them to include the trick question.

      "We got the idea to see how far that might extend — if people would reflexively support bombing something that sounded vaguely Middle Eastern," Williams said.

      Delete
    5. Again louman you can only shoot the messenger because you don't like the message. The conservative message is tailored to dumb you down to make you a sheeple. As Mick said most conservatives are for carpet bombing any place they think that Islam may live. Conservatives are conditioned to see all Muslims as terrorists when it is about 1% of the religion that is truly radical. The 19 % of dems who would bomb it, well they are probably just dumb and scared and think it is really a country.

      Delete
    6. Dumbing down of America is a product of our fine liberal education system. Why is it you tend to believe everything negative about half the population. Half of Americans do not believe as you do so they are sheeple, dumbed down, etc. When in reality there is little difference between the left and right.

      Don't consider the source of the laughable poll Rick as it is obviously a put up but agrees with your programmed thinking which makes it instantly the truth.

      Why is it you can be so accepting of illegals breaking our laws, terrorists in our country with more on the way as it's just part of the way things are? Yet you cannot accept of half the population of the US as they are not like you?

      You are the the perfect example of those that spread divisiveness like your leader.



      Delete
    7. No one can deny that Republicans support and desire to fund a formidable military. It is after all a primary responsibility of the national government under the dreaded constitution. However its use is not as clear cut as the left would like to portray it. Remember that it was progressive democrats running the show during WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam and Bosnia…. And if you believe the attempt to rewrite history by the university of Chicago claiming Lincoln as theirs then you can throw in the ½ a million lives lost their as well. They were in support of Afghanistan and were for Iraq before they were against it. They, or at least their party leader has had no problem throwing cruise missiles around Libra and now Syria and once again in Iraq. The left don’t want to fund a military but are none to hesitant in using it to spread their version of democracy at the point of a gun if all of that diabetes causing , obesity spreading enriched aid doesn’t do the trick…
      Let us also not forget the roots of ‘neo conservatives’…. Trotsky was no republican… Nor is Ryan but that is another subject.

      Delete
    8. "It is after all a primary responsibility of the national government under the dreaded constitution"

      And what this means is as muddy as the reason for using it. I believe the Founding Fathers were very wary of creating a large standing militia. That said, I have to agree with much of the rest of your post. I was pretty outspoken against the 300 odd million dollars worth of missiles we fired into Libya and even now, the only real debate we have regarding Syria is occurring on the campaign stump rather than in Washington where it should be. Say what people will about Rachel Maddow, but her book "Drift" was an excellent read regarding how we, as a nation, circumvent having genuine debate in congress before committing acts of war. I'll concede your points about Obama's war mongering TS, but let's also be honest about something else here, there is now an ingrained attitude within this country that military use without declaring war is perfectly acceptable if it's done to "protect us".

      To me, I see political ideology as somewhat circular. IE, the further left or further right one goes, the closer that individual gets to becoming what they believe they are firmly against. The more ideologically fervent one becomes, the easier it seems to agree that it is simply easier to use force, or to deny freedom to those who oppose you.

      Delete
    9. Hillary Rodham Clinton, proposed banning politically unpopular academic research, demanded that funding politically unpopular organizations and causes be made a crime and that the RICO organized-crime statute be used as a weapon against targeted political groups.

      At the beginning of December, Rolling Stone writer Jeff Goodell asked Secretary of State John Kerry whether Charles and David Koch, two libertarian political activists, should be considered — his remarkable words “an enemy of the state.” He posed the same question about Exxon, and John Kerry, who could have been president of these United States, said that he looked forward to the seizure of Exxon’s assets for the crime of “proselytizing” and the impermissible about the question of global warming.

      The left-wing activists having smashed, looted, and burned portions of Ferguson, Mo., and Baltimore, where Koreans and other Asian minorities were specifically targeted. As on college campuses, they have made a point of assaulting journalists documenting their violence. They have rioted in Philadelphia and in other cities.

      The left has sought to use the FCC to revoke the broadcast licenses of Rupert Murdoch and other political hate totems, and have long dreamt of using federal regulation to shut down conservative talk radio. They have gone to the Supreme Court to argue that they should be empowered to ban books, films, magazines, and newspapers when they desire to do so for political reasons.

      The fabricated story about Mitt Romney’s not paying taxes, Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid made a straight-up might-makes-right argument: “Romney didn’t win, did he?” When proven wrong which he knew was totally incorrect. Nothing, no apology, no admission of the lie. Instead an excuse.

      And people wonder why some would flock to a right candidate they say is fringe. Perhaps some see the agenda of the left. The divisiveness they seem to be sowing into the country for political gain. The left laughs at the rights number of candidates yet they now seem to adhere to the it's my turn to run for president as the right did with Mc Cain then Romney.

      "It is simply easier to use force, or to deny freedom to those who oppose you."

      So it seems.






      Delete
    10. It would not be hard, of course, to respond with a five paragraph list of things those right of center have done. This is beside the point. I think the analogy holds, those who hold inflexible views are ripe to be pulled into supporting hard liners, no matter if they lean left or right.

      If you really believe this is a left issue only, good luck.

      Delete
    11. And you know that I do not hold that viewpoint as meither party is putting forth a candidate that represents the people. It's become popular in politics to round up the hard core then shift to pick up the middle. After elected, do what you want to do regardless of what the people want as so aptly done by the Bushwacker and Obaminator.

      Delete
    12. I do think Sanders better represents what Democrats say they should be for, but he won't be allowed to get the Democratic nod. On the right, I'm not really sure who their candidate of the people is. I think Kasich is a little more realistic, though a bit of an abrasive sort.

      Delete
    13. It would not be hard, of course, to respond with a five paragraph list of things those right of center have done.

      Go on then...

      Delete
    14. “And what this means is as muddy as the reason for using it. I believe the Founding Fathers were very wary of creating a large standing militia.”

      Mike, the fear was not of the standing army or police within the society... it was just how they would be utilized by the state. Power begets power and at the heart of any power centric state is a strong military (With its implicit use against it own citizens or overt actions against others as a conquering nation) and an unaccountable police force which is why the elected county sheriff is... or was... at the heart of policing in America. The constitution while making direct reference to raising armies made no mention of the unaccountable alphabet soup of federal agents we have today. So you have a state that seeks omnipotent power, it follows that it will create military and police apparatus that will defend its decisions.

      As far as the comment about the constitution, I think you know exactly what I meant. Far too many people see it as an obstacle to overcome by nether wells of a different century... obstacles that were put in place for a reason; People who understood that actions have consequences. The results of taking the admonishments lightly and ignoring the agreed upon rules are all around us.

      Delete
  2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpHOaW99ST4

    ReplyDelete
  3. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/07/obama-supporters-support-repealing-the-bill-of-rights.php

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That you would even post this is reprehensible. That is so much a lie. I know lots of Obama supporters I know none of them that want to repeal the bill of rights. Another message designed to dumb you down as the rich take more of your money. And for the average person there is the dilemma.... Redistribute your money to the rich and get nothing, or give it to the government who will waste a bunch of it but eventually will come up with something of some benefit. I choose the latter.

      Delete
    2. The Scott, this is as credible as the poll from twitter above which we all know only allows posting of the truth.

      Delete
    3. What makes it reprehensible? Someone stands in a public space with a petition and states clearly that it is to repeal the 1st amendment so people would be forced to quite bad mouthing Obama? What is reprehensible is that people signed it. Now it is no doubt true that he had to film 100 people to get a dozen to sign but even still... what is acceptable... 10%... 5%... 1%?

      Lou... their is no lie to what he is doing. He is asking a question and qualifying it pretty clearly. The only thing that no doubt is misleading is the number of people he had to ask to get those response. I still contend that you wouldn't get any right leaning individuals to partake in the first two and only certified idiots for the last one....

      My comment at the bottom still stands.

      Delete
    4. Within the last two weeks on this very paste board we have had members support the watering down of our 2nd and the right of free association.

      Delete
  4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNr5czZKEdk

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ask republicans the above questions and you might get stupid support for the 3rd one but they would laugh at the other 2.

    ReplyDelete