deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Aug 19, 2011 23:04:49 GMT -5
Gee, thanks for proving my point! I cannot recall (at least in my lifetime) any politician from the same political party as the sitting president seriously challenging the president for his seat. Randall Terry is not a serious contender to become the democratic nominee in the 2012 national elections. He wouldn't be a serious contender to become the republican nominee either. You forgot..Kennedy did, Bobby, against Carter..in fact Carter is still pissed at him today and belives it had a lot to do with his losing.. Guess he forgot that interest rates on CD's were as high as 17%..you figure out what a bank loan would be.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 19, 2011 23:10:36 GMT -5
I cannot recall (at least in my lifetime) any politician from the same political party as the sitting president seriously challenging the president for his seat. Randall Terry is not a serious contender to become the democratic nominee in the 2012 national elections. He wouldn't be a serious contender to become the republican nominee either. You forgot..Kennedy did, Bobby, against Carter..in fact Carter is still pissed at him today and belives it had a lot to do with his losing.. Guess he forgot that interest rates on CD's were as high as 17%..you figure out what a bank loan would be. Actually, it was Teddy Kennedy against Carter, Bobby entered the race in 68 after McCarthy showed that Johnson was vulnerable (not sure if Johnson had done his "If nominated ...." speech when Bobby announced). Reagan challenged Ford in 76.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,835
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 19, 2011 23:18:30 GMT -5
You forgot..Kennedy did, Bobby, against Carter..in fact Carter is still pissed at him today and belives it had a lot to do with his losing.. Guess he forgot that interest rates on CD's were as high as 17%..you figure out what a bank loan would be. Actually, it was Teddy Kennedy against Carter, Bobby entered the race in 68 after McCarthy showed that Johnson was vulnerable (not sure if Johnson had done his "If nominated ...." speech when Bobby announced). Reagan challenged Ford in 76. I don't know/don't remember the answer. Did Ford and Reagan compete in primaries? Did T. Kennedy and Carter compete in primaries?
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,835
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 19, 2011 23:22:45 GMT -5
Regardless of the answers for the above, there are not a lot of folks from the same party as a sitting president (who has announced he is running for a second term) running for his seat as there are those wishing to run against him for his seat.
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Aug 19, 2011 23:23:21 GMT -5
Actually, it was Teddy Kennedy against Carter, Bobby entered the race in 68 after McCarthy showed that Johnson was vulnerable (not sure if Johnson had done his "If nominated ...." speech when Bobby announced). Reagan challenged Ford in 76. I don't know/don't remember the answer. Did Ford and Reagan compete in primaries? Did T. Kennedy and Carter compete in primaries? Im pretty sure T Kennedy ran against Carter in the primary.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 19, 2011 23:24:25 GMT -5
Curious that Rep. Paul has more votes on our board than every other Republican candidate combined. I wonder how disconnected this is from the reality of the "average voter". I read in the National Post that Rep. Paul rarely polls in the double digits, even among Republicans.
Perhaps the difference is owed to some of the undeclared heavyweights (e.g. Palin) not being up there. (Although I don't ever recall seeing much support for Ms. Palin on P&M, from any quarter.)
We're at about 50 votes. Assuming an unbiased sampling (which is a stretch), it takes 120 samples to get a sampling error of +/-5% 19 times out of 20.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,835
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 19, 2011 23:29:52 GMT -5
I don't know/don't remember the answer. Did Ford and Reagan compete in primaries? Did T. Kennedy and Carter compete in primaries? Im pretty sure T Kennedy ran against Carter in the primary. Kennedy v. Carter in a primary was more than 30 years ago. Easy to forget. Tks SV
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Aug 19, 2011 23:32:54 GMT -5
Curious that Rep. Paul has more votes on our board than every other Republican candidate combined. I wonder how disconnected this is from the reality of the "average voter". I read in the National Post that Rep. Paul rarely polls in the double digits, even among Republicans. Perhaps the difference is owed to some of the undeclared heavyweights (e.g. Palin) not being up there. (Although I don't ever recall seeing much support for Ms. Palin on P&M, from any quarter.) We're at about 50 votes. Assuming an unbiased sampling (which is a stretch), it takes 120 samples to get a sampling error of +/-5% 19 times out of 20. In CA Paul only gets 5% Romney and Perry are #1 and #2 in the Repub Polls But in all the Polls in CA we still have @26% undecided for both parties which says volumes about the candidates...voters don't like Obama or any of the Repubs or waiting for more choices..??
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 19, 2011 23:43:18 GMT -5
Curious that Rep. Paul has more votes on our board than every other Republican candidate combined. I wonder how disconnected this is from the reality of the "average voter". I read in the National Post that Rep. Paul rarely polls in the double digits, even among Republicans. Perhaps the difference is owed to some of the undeclared heavyweights (e.g. Palin) not being up there. (Although I don't ever recall seeing much support for Ms. Palin on P&M, from any quarter.) We're at about 50 votes. Assuming an unbiased sampling (which is a stretch), it takes 120 samples to get a sampling error of +/-5% 19 times out of 20. I think that the proper term would be "random" sampling, not unbiased. What that means is that each member of the whole "universe" you are attempting to measure is equally as likely to be polled as any other member of that "universe". It is essential that you clearly define that "universe". You did that here: Just to get an idea of the political make-up of the board. ... The poll you created is an attempt to measure all of the universe you have defined, not a random sample of that universe. Therefore your discussion of sampling size. error, and level of confidence is irrelevant. Not to mention that any attempt to take the results from the "universe" of posters on this board to predict what the "universe" of all American voters might do is absurd.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 20, 2011 0:00:22 GMT -5
You're misinterpreting what I meant by "biased".
In the OP I talk about the make up of this board. In #66, I'm ruminating over why our sample—drawn from seemingly random Americans—is such a poor representation of the national population. Even with a sample size of 50, the results are telling us that either i) the political opinions of this board are in no way reflective of the political options of America at large, or ii) our perceptions about America at large are grossly mistaken.
As the sample size n grows, the explanation for the disparity shifts from i to ii, probabilistically speaking. If we get 120 votes and Ron Paul is still the clear Republican frontrunner, it behooves us to figure out which factor is responsible for the schism between sample and (what we assume is) the population at large. It's not simply that this board is "ultra-right". We have a comparable number of votes for Pres. Obama up there.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 20, 2011 0:22:19 GMT -5
You're misinterpreting what I meant by "biased". In the OP I talk about the make up of this board. In #66, I'm ruminating over why our sample—drawn from seemingly random Americans—is such a poor representation of the national population. Even with a sample size of 50, the results are telling us that either i) the political opinions of this board are in no way reflective of the political options of America at large, or ii) our perceptions about America at large are grossly mistaken. As the sample size n grows, the explanation for the disparity shifts from i to ii, probabilistically speaking. If we get 120 votes and Ron Paul is still the clear Republican frontrunner, it behooves us to figure out which factor is responsible for the schism between sample and (what we assume is) the population at large. It's not simply that this board is "ultra-right". We have a comparable number of votes for Pres. Obama up there. Thanks for the clarification of your thinking. Drawing exclusively from individuals who self select to frequent a message board titled Politics and the Markets fully explains the discrepancy between the results of your poll and those taken by pollsters using a random sampling of either likely voters or all Americans adults.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 20, 2011 0:32:02 GMT -5
You say that with such confidence.
Why, in your opinion, are Republicans who frequent a political message board significantly more likely to favor Rep. Paul than "average" Republicans? I'm not saying it isn't possible, but given your confidence I'm assuming you have a sound theory to explain it.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 20, 2011 0:47:21 GMT -5
You say that with such confidence. Why, in your opinion, are Republicans who frequent a political message board significantly more likely to favor Rep. Paul than "average" Republicans? I'm not saying it isn't possible, but given your confidence I'm assuming you have a sound theory to explain it. I am not sure that the votes cast here for Rep. Paul are cast by "Republicans", average or otherwise. While he is currently seeking the Republican nomination for President, he has previously been the Libertarian Party nominee for that office. I believe that most of his votes are cast by those who would be more accurately identified as Libertarian. (In your poll why vote for "Libertarian Party frontrunner" when you can vote for that person by name.)
|
|
|
Post by bassillion on Aug 20, 2011 1:03:04 GMT -5
Hello all my name is James Dee Shinn, I'm on this post because my name is on the list in your poll, it comes up when I google my name, I'm a candidate for President of the United States running as an Independent because I'm a Scientist not a politician, I designed the Interceptor Missile Shield for the US and the Arrow Missile Shield for the Israelis, for 22 years in a row lawyers have been in charge of our country, and we are now on the verge of world wide economic collaspe, I feel it is time for the Intelligent ones to lead the nation, and not the greedy ones, I'm currently in the process of hiring a campaign manager as I write this note, stay tuned folks this could get very interesting.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 20, 2011 1:12:00 GMT -5
Then the more pertinent question would be: why do you believe our board has attracted an unusually large number of libertarians? Good to hear from you, Mr. Shinn. We're apparently an enclave of Democrats and small-L libertarians here. The board quiets down to a trickle over the weekend, but you'll find that your views vis a vis economic collapse are in the majority. If your goal is to speak truth to power, you've come to the right place.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 20, 2011 1:13:26 GMT -5
Hello all my name is James Dee Shinn, I'm on this post because my name is on the list in your poll, it comes up when I google my name, I'm a candidate for President of the United States running as an Independent because I'm a Scientist not a politician, I designed the Interceptor Missile Shield for the US and the Arrow Missile Shield for the Israelis, for 22 years in a row lawyers have been in charge of our country, and we are now on the verge of world wide economic collaspe, I feel it is time for the Intelligent ones to lead the nation, and not the greedy ones, I'm currently in the process of hiring a campaign manager as I write this note, stay tuned folks this could get very interesting. Welcome to the board. "W" wasn't a lawyer
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 20, 2011 1:23:11 GMT -5
Bassillion
Libertarian conservatism describes certain political ideologies within the United States and Canada which combines libertarian economic issues with aspects of conservatism. Its five main branches are Constitutionalism, paleolibertarianism, neolibertarianism, small government conservatism and Christian libertarianism. They generally differ from paleoconservatives, in that they are in favor of more personal and economic freedom
Agorists such as Samuel Edward Konkin III labeled libertarian conservatism right-libertarianism
In contrast to paleoconservatives, libertarian conservatives support strict laissez-faire policies such as free trade, opposition to the Federal Reserve and opposition to business regulations. They are vehemently opposed to environmental regulations, corporate welfare, subsidies, and other areas of economic intervention. Many of them have views in accord to Ludwig von Mises. However, many of them oppose abortion, as they see it as a positive liberty and violates the non-aggression principle because abortion is aggression towards the fetus. www.ustream.tv/channel/bassillion?lang=en_US
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 20, 2011 1:27:42 GMT -5
... Then the more pertinent question would be: why do you believe our board has attracted an unusually large number of libertarians? Libertarians are weird, thus this is a great place for them to hang out along with all us other weirdos.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Aug 20, 2011 2:08:24 GMT -5
"Libertarian conservatism describes certain political ideologies within the United States and Canada"
Canada? Not so much. They're always dead last, right behind the Communist Party. And the Marxist Leninist Party. Even the Marijuana Party eats the Libertarians' lunch.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Aug 20, 2011 2:51:05 GMT -5
Hello there, Mr. Shinn, and welcome to Bedlam. We'll all be interested to hear your views on the various issues that confront us. It's a trying time for all, to be sure. I don't know if I could consider myself (or very many people, for that matter) amongst the capital "I" Intelligent ones; however, I think we probably have a few here who could, at least, keep up.
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Aug 20, 2011 6:45:06 GMT -5
Ron Paul - voted for him in 2008 and will do it again, regardless of whether he is viewed as main stream. He is the best option that has been presented to the American people in both 2008 and 2012, in my opinion with 30+ years of voting records to back up his support of our liberties.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Aug 20, 2011 7:12:28 GMT -5
Ron Paul - voted for him in 2008 and will do it again, regardless of whether he is viewed as main stream. He is the best option that has been presented to the American people in both 2008 and 2012, in my opinion with 30+ years of voting records to back up his support of our liberties. Ron Paul is polling at @ 9% in most Republican Polls and as I stated earlier @5% out here in the Golden State of California.. You also have to consider that congress has @13% Approval Rating so that could be factored or considered when voters are asked about a congressman who is running for president..since most members of congress are persona non grata in many of our larger cities for obvious reasons The rub on Ron Paul has always been that he has a lot of ideas but has not accomplished much legislation in congress during his long career as a representative from Texas although he has brought home a lot of Earmarks for his area of Texas over the years.
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Aug 20, 2011 7:26:27 GMT -5
When assessing the best option, I don't look at polls. I look at the body of work of that individual based on information I can gather myself [with the internet, it's great] and come to a conclusion on my own, based on my own opinion and beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Aug 20, 2011 7:33:41 GMT -5
When assessing the best option, I don't look at polls. I look at the body of work of that individual based on information I can gather myself [with the INTERNET, it's great] and come to a conclusion on my own, based on my own opinion and beliefs. Very good point and I do agree but consider this the polls are often a pretty good indicator for predicting how a candidate will perform in an election....Are they 100% accurate?? Not but close enough for government work and used by campaigns along with their own polling... but yes there are exceptions......I worked for a congressional candidate who was way ahead in the polls by@ 20% in MA but an 11th hour smear campaign by his opponent cost him the election.. I also think the recent Republcan Iowa Straw Poll was a complete farce and an insult to the intelligence of the voters in this country..IMHO
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Aug 20, 2011 7:39:07 GMT -5
I can't attribute the comment to Rendell but, yes he was the mayor of Philadelphia and saw that exact situation unfold in Philadelphia as the city sucked the financial resources dry, attempted to over tax the rich, only to see them move to the suburbs and leave a largely all black populous to clean up. There is a city tax [3.5% for non-residents] which caused a lot businesses to move out of Philadelphia and into the suburbs...which are very nice, in my opinion. Now the employees can completely avoid the income tax and the city loses out on all the other revenues it would have gained had it not pushed the "rich" out. Yes, the same thing is happening at the national level now. The "rich", however it is ultimately defined, will reach a point where they don't want to be taxed more and will begin to make moves to avoid those taxes.
In a global economy, there will be countries willing to take our best and brightest. I hope our country does not resort to this failed tactic.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 40,011
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 20, 2011 7:40:17 GMT -5
Ron Paul has some decent ideas and he plus Romney are the only two Republicans who wouldn't cause me to vote for the lesser weevil immediately, Obama. I still wish Hillary or someone better would run as the Democrat choice instead of Obama. He's made more and different kinds of mistakes than I predicted; still its no reason to vote for say Bachmann or Newt. <Did not participate in the poll as my answer totally depends on the Republican challenger and wishing Obama was someone else.>
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 20, 2011 8:16:02 GMT -5
Sounds like you're an 'abstain from voting'. The purpose of the poll is to determine who our board would elect if the field was wide open. Obviously the GOP field is going to narrow as time goes on and that will change some voters back over to Pres. Obama. For now, it's a curious exercise to treat each candidate as a standalone party. If you like Paul's and Romney's policies better than Obama's, it's fair to vote for one of them in this pre-election. If you're holding out for Ms. Clinton, this poll envisions a situation where she doesn't go up against a sitting Democrat. I know P.I. and some other people here believe it's possible that will happen. I certainly don't. Also, it's curious that you're a fan of Ms. Clinton's policies and Rep. Paul's policies. There's not a whole lot of overlap between the two.
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Aug 20, 2011 8:26:34 GMT -5
Right, doesn't the inconsistencies of some posters boggle the hell out of you? I sometimes wonder whether they really know what they want from their government.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Aug 20, 2011 8:31:29 GMT -5
I can't attribute the comment to Rendell but, yes he was the mayor of Philadelphia and saw that exact situation unfold in Philadelphia as the city sucked the financial resources dry, attempted to over tax the rich, only to see them move to the suburbs and leave a largely all black populous to clean up. There is a city tax [3.5% for non-residents] which caused a lot businesses to move out of Philadelphia and into the suburbs...which are very nice, in my opinion. Now the employees can completely avoid the income tax and the city loses out on all the other revenues it would have gained had it not pushed the "rich" out. Yes, the same thing is happening at the national level now. The "rich", however it is ultimately defined, will reach a point where they don't want to be taxed more and will begin to make moves to avoid those taxes.
In a global economy, there will be countries willing to take our best and brightest. I hope our country does not resort to this failed tactic.I know a lot of Ron Paul supporters who were in college or the military when he ran for president the first two times...but they seem to me at least to be having second thoughts because of his age (75), and his ideas about eliminating so many government agencies, and one of them just happens to be my oldest son.. He is undecided these days. So if you are comfortable having a president who is @77 in 2013 and who wants to dismantle your government in Washinngton DC, and layoff thousands of government workers then that is your call and Ok but sometimes you may not get what you asked for.. I personnally think that Ron Paul is too scary..
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Aug 20, 2011 9:44:21 GMT -5
I voted for RP, but I would vote Gary Johnson also since they are pretty much one in the same on the ideal front.
|
|