PDA

View Full Version : Birther jokes -- a new genre



Pages : [1] 2

Figmental
08-04-2009, 08:38 AM
I found these among the comments section under a story on huffingtonpost.com about the Kenyan birth certificate that Ms Orly has now. Who's got more? I love em!


Q: How do you drive a Birther mad?
A: Put him in the oval office and tell him the President's Kenyan Birth Certificate is hidden in the corner.

Q: How do you tell which is the Groom at a Birther wedding?
A: He's the guy wearing the CLEAN wifebeater.

Q:What does it say on the bottom of Coke bottles sold in the South?
A:"Open other end."

Q. What's the solution to the Birther problem?
A. Live ammo for Civil War reenactments.

Q. Why did the Birther stare at the Orange Juice carton?
A. Because it said "CONCENTRATE".

Q. What do you call 100 Birthers at the bottom of the ocean?
A. A good start.

I just had to take my Birther neighbor to the Hospital.
He broke his leg when he tripped over his cordless phone.

Q: What's wrong with Birther jokes?
A: Birthers don't think they're funny and other people don't think they're jokes.

Ian McColgin
08-04-2009, 09:21 AM
Brilliant.

Phillip Allen
08-04-2009, 09:23 AM
help me out please...birther? (I guessing it must be the right to life/anti abortion bunch)

Andrew Craig-Bennett
08-04-2009, 09:26 AM
"Birthers" are people who don't want to believe that their President is an American.

They tend to be found in larger numbers in the states that lost the Civil War.

Ian McColgin
08-04-2009, 10:11 AM
My fully qualified I am tolorant of bad jokes anyway thoughts are, numbering the jokes:

1. is a great joke.
2. sucks
3 & 4 are common jokes about southerners just transported to birthers
5 is mostly told on southernes, but also Newfies (as those who tell it would tell it) and I'm sure Archie Bunker used it on Polaks.
6. is usually told on lawyers
7. is dumb
8. is trite

So, qualified brilliant because I laughed at #1.

Keith Wilson
08-04-2009, 10:43 AM
What does it say on the bottom of Coke bottles sold in . . . Man, that's an old one. I've heard that one about Poles, Norwegians, Italians, Newfies, folks from Wisconsin, blondes . . . They probably tell it in China about Uighurs, or Mongolians, and In Botswana about Zambians, or whoever is the local equivalent of Poles.

Milo Christensen
08-04-2009, 12:00 PM
You guys still don't get the real joke, do you?

I'll see your chimp and raise you a Joker.

http://bedlammagazine.com/files/images/news/Obama-socialism_0.jpg

bobbys
08-04-2009, 12:07 PM
You guys still don't get the real joke, do you?

I'll see your chimp and raise you a Joker.

http://bedlammagazine.com/files/images/news/Obama-socialism_0.jpg.

WOW the stress of hiding his Birth Certificate is really getting to him, He looked much better last year!!!!{Birther joke}

Figmental
08-04-2009, 12:35 PM
The point is that here is a social grouping that can be joked about and dearly deserves it. No stigma attached to the teller since these folks are sub thought.

Yeadon
08-04-2009, 12:43 PM
First the teabaggers, now the birthers. This is fun.

I like the "Obama as the joker" poster. It makes me want to vote for him again.

Canoez
08-04-2009, 01:27 PM
This one by Sean Kelly at the Huffington Post

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/96833/original.jpg

(Just me breaking my rule about not posting on political threads. :()

Captain Blight
08-04-2009, 02:43 PM
First the teabaggers, now the birthers. This is fun.

I like the "Obama as the joker" poster. It makes me want to vote for him again.
Some people just wanna see the world burn.

pefjr
08-04-2009, 03:09 PM
"Birthers" are people who don't want to believe that their President is an American.

They tend to be found in larger numbers in the states that lost the Civil War. Really, which states?

pefjr
08-04-2009, 03:19 PM
It's the "born again" presidents I worry about.

TomF
08-04-2009, 03:22 PM
You guys still don't get the real joke, do you?

I'll see your chimp and raise you a Joker.

Milo, you're better than this. WTF?

All of your allies - the ones you fought Communism with - deliver health care in a way you lot would call "socialistic" - more socialistic than Obama's proposing. WTF - are we next? Going to nuke Ottawa, London and the rest of the NATO capitals, or just look at us with mounting suspicion? Equating universal health care with socialism is bull****. To be blunt, your health care system is a major drag on your economy, stifling small entrepreneurship and smothering your major industries. Spending the same money - or less - differently will be an enormous economic boost. Suddenly losing that crushing burden is a business owner's wet dream, for any awake enough to see it.

Similarly, all of your allies - the ones you fought Communism with - invested heavily with borrowed money to staunch the blood pouring from international financial markets. With the wound inflicted by under-regulated US financial institutions. Bush himself started the spending ... Obama's at least trying to put some accountability provisions around his followup. Equating stimulus spending with socialism is more bull****.

So let's talk about something dear to your Michigan heart - the auto sector. Spending trillions of borrowed money to try to protect what's left of a domestic industry is pointless? You can look around blasted Michigan and say that - and describe how much better the Free Market lads at GM and Chrysler managed for the betterment of us all? Canada's own R-wing bastard Prime Minister answer to GWB has also made us a major shareholder in the New GM - so Stephen bloody Harper's a Socialist? Bull****!

Milo, this Obama as Joker thing is obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism. It's not Obama who's wanting to just see the place burn. It's not Obama who's barking, running after cars ... but wouldn't know what to do if he caught one ...

Show me how the Reps are responding in a principled way, embodying the hallowed "Country First" slogan. What I see is partisan bull****, obstructionism, slander, and spiteful comments about "hoping Obama fails."

Keith Wilson
08-04-2009, 03:33 PM
Here's the official website of the Socialist Party USA (http://socialistparty-usa.org/). Their presidential candidate in '08 was Brian Moore; he got 6555 votes.

Glen Longino
08-04-2009, 03:43 PM
You guys still don't get the real joke, do you?

I'll see your chimp and raise you a Joker.

http://bedlammagazine.com/files/images/news/Obama-socialism_0.jpg


We see the real joke, Milo, and you're it!
W-H-I-I-I-I-I-I-N-E !!!!:rolleyes:

johnw
08-04-2009, 04:24 PM
O, Milo, you were born in Kenya, weren't you?

I like the birthday card, that's real humor. The jokes were not so funny.

Ah, socialism. Isn't that what they said about Medicare? And we know how unpopular that is.

ucb4ume
08-04-2009, 04:53 PM
They tend to be found in larger numbers in the states that lost the Civil War.


What an ignorant moron!

It's people like you who perpetuate stereo types.

What a f’ing bigoted moron!

Glen Longino
08-04-2009, 04:59 PM
What an ignorant moron!

It's people like you who perpetuate stereo types.

What f’ing bigoted moron!

Nope, it's not people like Andrew who perpetuate "stereo types".
Andrew said nothing that is not true.:rolleyes:

Nicholas Scheuer
08-04-2009, 05:05 PM
Birthers are people who need SERIOUS help.

They'er apparently speaking out at anti National Healthcare Town Meetings, which correlates, I guess. However, it's like standing up with a sign procaliming, "I'M A BLOOMIN' IDIOT".

Moby Nick

ucb4ume
08-04-2009, 05:05 PM
Nope, it's not people like Andrew who perpetuate "stereo types".
Andrew said nothing that is not true.:rolleyes:

Do you have statistics to support Andrew's premise that birthers are only form the south?

Show me the evidence.

johnw
08-04-2009, 05:22 PM
Do you have statistics to support Andrew's premise that birthers are only form the south?

Show me the evidence.

Not what Andrew said. What he did say was accurate.


"Birthers" are people who don't want to believe that their President is an American.

They tend to be found in larger numbers in the states that lost the Civil War.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/birthers.png
Research 2000 poll

pefjr
08-04-2009, 05:35 PM
I deleted several of these birther emails, none coming from any southern state, does that prove anything? Where does the poll come from? This would be hard to prove. That ignorance is widespread. Are you connecting this with the civil war? That's far out. Send me some of that you are smoking.

bobbys
08-04-2009, 05:43 PM
Here's the official website of the Socialist Party USA (http://socialistparty-usa.org/). Their presidential candidate in '08 was Brian Moore; he got 6555 votes..

Good catch however i ran some numbers of my own just to compare.

There were 35 million people that did not think Obama was born in the US.

There were 30 Million dems that thought John MaCain was born outside the US.

Thats a difference of 5 million.

But 3 million dems think Cheny is the Devil so scratch them but add One million Reps that think Clinton was a Commie but subtract one million Dems that think Halliburton is tied in with big oil and Bush but subtract 200000 dems that believe Barbra Striestand is still a good singer but add 100000 people that think Jake and Elwood are really on a mission from God but add 4500 people that think Bush ordered God to destroy Black people in New Orleans, Subtract 400000 that think George Cloony impregnated Bristol Palin for spite butadd 2000 people that think the girls on the view are "hot" but subtract 1500 people in Idaho that we dont know what they believe but add one person that thinks Rosy O"donald is funny, Subtract 6500 people that believe Obama is going to buy gas for there cars but add 4000 people that dont like sean penn but add 567 that fry twinkies, subtract 2675 people that want Rush Dead but add 2400 that would steal his drugs if they could, Subtract The cast of "cats" but add the Cast of "growing pains" and you wind up with 34 people that are "birthers".

Ok i made up some of these numbers.

Glen Longino
08-04-2009, 05:48 PM
:D:D
Pretty danged funny, bobbys !!!

johnw
08-04-2009, 05:53 PM
I deleted several of these birther emails, none coming from any southern state, does that prove anything? Where does the poll come from? This would be hard to prove. That ignorance is widespread. Are you connecting this with the civil war? That's far out. Send me some of that you are smoking.
As stated in my post, Research 2000. I ran into it on Washington Monthly. Why this is something of a regional phenomenon is an interesting question. Does anyone from the South have a theory?

I don't smoke.

pefjr
08-04-2009, 05:54 PM
Bobbys, I will vote for you for Prez.

Wait a minute, you are not born 2 times are you?

Glen Longino
08-04-2009, 06:06 PM
As stated in my post, Research 2000. I ran into it on Washington Monthly. Why this is something of a regional phenomenon is an interesting question. Does anyone from the South have a theory?

I don't smoke.

I think there is a simple explanation, John.
The people, in general, who thought Sarah Palin would be good for the country, are the same people who whine about Obama's place of birth.
Many, but not all birthers live in Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Arkansas, Florida, and Tennessee. How many of those states voted for Obama last fall?
None? I figgered!:)

johnw
08-04-2009, 06:19 PM
Thanks, Glen. I find it amazing that there is a region in this country where less than half the voters are sure of their president's place of birth and citizenship. And it would appear that those who harbor those doubts voted for a man who was unquestionably born outside the United States (though McCain was certainly also a 'natural born' American citizen.)

I'm not sure what it means, but the thing seems more visceral than rational.

Glen Longino
08-04-2009, 06:30 PM
"more visceral than rational"

Absolutely! No brains involved, only Black Bile!:)

ucb4ume
08-04-2009, 06:34 PM
Not what Andrew said. What he did say was accurate.



http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/birthers.png
Research 2000 poll

Hmmm. I could be wrong. I apologize for the insults.

I just get tired of all the south bashing that goes on in this forum.

I've done a little research on the poll and found that it seems to be legitimate. However, it was commissioned by the DailyKos which could be considered by some to be a little left of center.

Again, I apologize for the insults.

johnw
08-04-2009, 06:46 PM
"more visceral than rational"

Absolutely! No brains involved, only Black Bile!:)
Wouldn't that lead to melancholia?

johnw
08-04-2009, 06:52 PM
Hmmm. I could be wrong. I apologize for the insults.

I just get tired of all the south bashing that goes on in this forum.

I've done a little research on the poll and found that it seems to be legitimate. However, it was commissioned by the DailyKos which could be considered by some to be a little left of center.

Again, I apologize for the insults.
Thanks. I was born in Louisiana, by the way.

I don't think Research 2000 would slant their poll based on who the client is. That would ruin their reputation.

Glen Longino
08-04-2009, 07:00 PM
Wouldn't that lead to melancholia?

I think it has! And worse.
The disenchanted members of this forum are far less rabid and angry than some.
I belong to a forum of collectors of Native American artifacts, members mostly from Texas and Oklahoma, and mostly fundamentalist Christian racist bigots who are simply blind with disappointment and disdain for Obama and very vocal about it.
Compared to those crazy bastards we have a pretty mild bunch of Conservative hombres here.

BETTY-B
08-04-2009, 07:02 PM
It just goes to show how powerful propaganda still is. And certainly there's a horrible brain problem with a vast majority of people who still remain in the Republican party. Honesty is just not important to them. Lies, deceit, cheating, even though it's against most of their own lives. Time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine and to whack religions head off.:)

DAN

Vince Brennan
08-04-2009, 07:05 PM
Bobbys, I will vote for you for Prez.

Wait a minute, you are not born 2 times are you?

You got sumpin' against bein' born again?

Milo Christensen
08-04-2009, 07:31 PM
Milo, you're better than this. WTF? . . .

You're absolutely correct. I am much, much better than this. You object to my posting a caricature. Fine. Sometimes I just get, you know, upset with the liberal twaddle that's perfectly acceptable around here. This chest beating Tarzan thing all about I'm so freakin' superior because I'm a liberal crap, and you're a conservative so you must be stupid and ignorant and God knows what else.

But, the coin has two sides, doesn't it? I'd think better of you if once, just once, when someone caricaturized a sitting President as a chimpanzee, you had objected.

At this point, following accepted liberal practices, I have earned the right to caricaturize any sitting President I want, almost as blatantly as I want. Except that I'm not allowed to be perceived to be a racist in my caricatures, like the thing that got me banned for three freakin' months. Which wasn't intended to be racist, but was a poor attempt at a caricature.

At least this Obama is the Joker caricature gives Obama status as a human being. I got taken to task by a bunch of your fellow travelers early in 2008 for asking why there weren't any conservatives using the chimpanzee thing on Obama.

I'm sorry that our political viewpoints aren't even remotely in alignment. I'm sorry that I believe down to my core that individuals make better decisions for themselves then governments can possibly make for them. I'm sorry that I'm successfully retired, content with my government pension and health care - and slightly fearful of changes to same, reluctant to bail out anybody, distrustful of progressive intentions, etc., etc.

Glen Longino
08-04-2009, 09:14 PM
You're absolutely correct. I am much, much better than this. You object to my posting a caricature. Fine. Sometimes I just get, you know, upset with the liberal twaddle that's perfectly acceptable around here. This chest beating Tarzan thing all about I'm so freakin' superior because I'm a liberal crap, and you're a conservative so you must be stupid and ignorant and God knows what else.

But, the coin has two sides, doesn't it? I'd think better of you if once, just once, when someone caricaturized a sitting President as a chimpanzee, you had objected.

At this point, following accepted liberal practices, I have earned the right to caricaturize any sitting President I want, almost as blatantly as I want. Except that I'm not allowed to be perceived to be a racist in my caricatures, like the thing that got me banned for three freakin' months. Which wasn't intended to be racist, but was a poor attempt at a caricature.

At least this Obama is the Joker caricature gives Obama status as a human being. I got taken to task by a bunch of your fellow travelers early in 2008 for asking why there weren't any conservatives using the chimpanzee thing on Obama.

I'm sorry that our political viewpoints aren't even remotely in alignment. I'm sorry that I believe down to my core that individuals make better decisions for themselves then governments can possibly make for them. I'm sorry that I'm successfully retired, content with my government pension and health care - and slightly fearful of changes to same, reluctant to bail out anybody, distrustful of progressive intentions, etc., etc.

What's it going to cost you, Milo? Nothing?
Cheer up! Don't be so danged paranoid!
The sky won't fall if poor undeserving people have medical care along with the deserving wealthy people.
The sky won't fall if two young girls are set free rather than spending 12 years in prison.
What happened to you "compassionate conservatives" anyhow?

Milo Christensen
08-04-2009, 09:34 PM
. . . What happened to you "compassionate conservatives" anyhow?

Look, lets talk to the thread starter about compassion for the poor, ignorant "birthers" first, then get back to me, ummmmkayyyyy? Isn't that the hallmark of a liberal - compassion for the less fortunate?

pefjr
08-04-2009, 09:37 PM
It just goes to show how powerful propaganda still is. And certainly there's a horrible brain problem with a vast majority of people who still remain in the Republican party. Honesty is just not important to them. Lies, deceit, cheating, even though it's against most of their own lives. Time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine and to whack religions head off.:)

DANOK, I am a dishonest, and a brain damaged Repub.. But I would hate to be in your shoes. You as bad as a birther, well not quite that bad, but..... did you read your post before pushing submit?

pefjr
08-04-2009, 09:39 PM
You got sumpin' against bein' born again?once is enough for me.

Shang
08-04-2009, 09:59 PM
You guys still don't get the real joke, do you?

I'll see your chimp and raise you a Joker.

http://bedlammagazine.com/files/images/news/Obama-socialism_0.jpg

Mind your manners, Milo.
Play hard, but play fair.

Glen Longino
08-04-2009, 10:00 PM
Look, lets talk to the thread starter about compassion for the poor, ignorant "birthers" first, then get back to me, ummmmkayyyyy? Isn't that the hallmark of a liberal - compassion for the less fortunate?

Birthers have the same fortune as liberals.
Birthers are not naturally ignorant...they cultivate ignorance , work at it, and are proud of it.
See the difference?;)

The Bigfella
08-04-2009, 10:16 PM
The real joke is that a country founded and built by immigrants (with a few exceptions) won't allow an immigrant to be the president. Duhh!

pefjr
08-04-2009, 10:16 PM
You know these guys are always bitching and bashing conservatives, and some of them are pretty flawed thinkers. But there is one thing worse than a conservative and that's a liberal.

pefjr
08-04-2009, 10:17 PM
The real joke is that a country founded and built by immigrants (with a few exceptions) won't allow an immigrant to be the president. Duhh!Will the Aussies?

The Bigfella
08-04-2009, 10:20 PM
Will the Aussies?

Hell yeah... aside from the fact we don't have a President, that is.... but if you are a permanent resident, no political position is out of reach. We've had foreign-born Prime Ministers before.

What's the big problem?

pefjr
08-04-2009, 10:32 PM
I don't have a problem with it, how about Schwarzenegger 2016

The Bigfella
08-04-2009, 10:40 PM
I don't have a problem with it, how about Swartsnegger 2016

Sorry, he isn't free enough.

BETTY-B
08-04-2009, 10:49 PM
OK, I am a dishonest, and a brain damaged Repub.. But I would hate to be in your shoes. You as bad as a birther, well not quite that bad, but..... did you read your post before pushing submit?

Yes, I did. And I take honesty very seriously.

LeeG
08-04-2009, 10:51 PM
You guys still don't get the real joke, do you?

I'll see your chimp and raise you a Joker.

http://bedlammagazine.com/files/images/news/Obama-socialism_0.jpg

right,,and Rush Limbaugh will come flying in wearing a Batman costume.

LeeG
08-04-2009, 11:05 PM
Hmmm. I could be wrong. I apologize for the insults.

I just get tired of all the south bashing that goes on in this forum.

I've done a little research on the poll and found that it seems to be legitimate. However, it was commissioned by the DailyKos which could be considered by some to be a little left of center.

Again, I apologize for the insults.

It was commissioned by Kos but the research company that did it is not Kos. There's a difference. Actually your ire about south bashing was brought up on Kos with a good argument that it undermines the work of those in the south who worked for Obama. If birther types do happen to concentrate in that region it's that much more important for progressives and liberals to reach out to those who want to seperate themselves from batsh*t crazies.

LeeG
08-04-2009, 11:08 PM
You're absolutely correct. I am much, much better than this. You object to my posting a caricature. Fine. Sometimes I just get, you know, upset with the liberal twaddle that's perfectly acceptable around here. This chest beating Tarzan thing all about I'm so freakin' superior because I'm a liberal crap, and you're a conservative so you must be stupid and ignorant and God knows what else.

.


Jesus Milo, you mean you feel protective towards birthers?

LeeG
08-04-2009, 11:20 PM
Look, lets talk to the thread starter about compassion for the poor, ignorant "birthers" first, then get back to me, ummmmkayyyyy? Isn't that the hallmark of a liberal - compassion for the less fortunate?

It's hard to show compassion for people who hold beliefs that can cultivate extremist actions. But it is worth understanding them or empathizing with them in order to monitor them better. You know, like James Von Brun, the old guy who shot the guard at the Holocaust museum. You get enough people believing crazy stuff and it's like religion.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2009/06/james-w-von-brunn-obama-is-missing.php?page=1

LeeG
08-04-2009, 11:25 PM
Hell yeah... aside from the fact we don't have a President, that is.... but if you are a permanent resident, no political position is out of reach. We've had foreign-born Prime Ministers before.

What's the big problem?

God Blessed This Soil,,,so any furren born person isn't as special. I have no frigging idea.

pefjr
08-04-2009, 11:26 PM
Yes, I did. And I take honesty very seriously.Well I was hoping you accidentally submitted that garbage, but in that case, good luck to you, you're gonna need all you can get.

BETTY-B
08-04-2009, 11:32 PM
Well I was hoping you accidentally submitted that garbage, but in that case, good luck to you, you're gonna need all you can get.


Garbage? It's truth. And you know it.

John Smith
08-05-2009, 07:07 AM
Man, that's an old one. I've heard that one about Poles, Norwegians, Italians, Newfies, folks from Wisconsin, blondes . . . They probably tell it in China about Uighurs, or Mongolians, and In Botswana about Zambians, or whoever is the local equivalent of Poles.
When I was a kid, we had Moron jokes. Same jokes are now ethnic humor.

I never paid any attention to them, but I did have to think when I went to our local deli on a coffee run. Deli run by a Polish gentleman

I ordered 15 coffees. 14 regular, one black; no sugar. He marked the regulars.

John Smith
08-05-2009, 07:10 AM
The point is that here is a social grouping that can be joked about and dearly deserves it. No stigma attached to the teller since these folks are sub thought.
I thought # 10 was great.

I'm fat, but I can laugh at a good fat joke.

We have the birthers. Now we have the organized disrupting of meetings.

What are the long term affects, I wonder.

Truth does not always win out.

John Smith
08-05-2009, 07:12 AM
Really, which states?
That was posted last night. States to the south east are where the birther thing has the most support.

Florida not included, but they were yellow on the map, and it was a clump in that section of the country.

John Smith
08-05-2009, 07:14 AM
Milo, you're better than this. WTF?

All of your allies - the ones you fought Communism with - deliver health care in a way you lot would call "socialistic" - more socialistic than Obama's proposing. WTF - are we next? Going to nuke Ottawa, London and the rest of the NATO capitals, or just look at us with mounting suspicion? Equating universal health care with socialism is bull****. To be blunt, your health care system is a major drag on your economy, stifling small entrepreneurship and smothering your major industries. Spending the same money - or less - differently will be an enormous economic boost. Suddenly losing that crushing burden is a business owner's wet dream, for any awake enough to see it.

Similarly, all of your allies - the ones you fought Communism with - invested heavily with borrowed money to staunch the blood pouring from international financial markets. With the wound inflicted by under-regulated US financial institutions. Bush himself started the spending ... Obama's at least trying to put some accountability provisions around his followup. Equating stimulus spending with socialism is more bull****.

So let's talk about something dear to your Michigan heart - the auto sector. Spending trillions of borrowed money to try to protect what's left of a domestic industry is pointless? You can look around blasted Michigan and say that - and describe how much better the Free Market lads at GM and Chrysler managed for the betterment of us all? Canada's own R-wing bastard Prime Minister answer to GWB has also made us a major shareholder in the New GM - so Stephen bloody Harper's a Socialist? Bull****!

Milo, this Obama as Joker thing is obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism. It's not Obama who's wanting to just see the place burn. It's not Obama who's barking, running after cars ... but wouldn't know what to do if he caught one ...

Show me how the Reps are responding in a principled way, embodying the hallowed "Country First" slogan. What I see is partisan bull****, obstructionism, slander, and spiteful comments about "hoping Obama fails."

Nice post. thanks.

John Smith
08-05-2009, 07:17 AM
I deleted several of these birther emails, none coming from any southern state, does that prove anything? Where does the poll come from? This would be hard to prove. That ignorance is widespread. Are you connecting this with the civil war? That's far out. Send me some of that you are smoking.
There have been several polls. All show the same thing. South eastern part of the country is where MOST, not all, birthers reside.

John Smith
08-05-2009, 07:19 AM
.

Good catch however i ran some numbers of my own just to compare.

There were 35 million people that did not think Obama was born in the US.

There were 30 Million dems that thought John MaCain was born outside the US.

Thats a difference of 5 million.

But 3 million dems think Cheny is the Devil so scratch them but add One million Reps that think Clinton was a Commie but subtract one million Dems that think Halliburton is tied in with big oil and Bush but subtract 200000 dems that believe Barbra Striestand is still a good singer but add 100000 people that think Jake and Elwood are really on a mission from God but add 4500 people that think Bush ordered God to destroy Black people in New Orleans, Subtract 400000 that think George Cloony impregnated Bristol Palin for spite butadd 2000 people that think the girls on the view are "hot" but subtract 1500 people in Idaho that we dont know what they believe but add one person that thinks Rosy O"donald is funny, Subtract 6500 people that believe Obama is going to buy gas for there cars but add 4000 people that dont like sean penn but add 567 that fry twinkies, subtract 2675 people that want Rush Dead but add 2400 that would steal his drugs if they could, Subtract The cast of "cats" but add the Cast of "growing pains" and you wind up with 34 people that are "birthers".

Ok i made up some of these numbers.
I believe it was the dems who stood up and chose NOT to make an issue of McCain's birth place.

John Smith
08-05-2009, 07:28 AM
Thanks, Glen. I find it amazing that there is a region in this country where less than half the voters are sure of their president's place of birth and citizenship. And it would appear that those who harbor those doubts voted for a man who was unquestionably born outside the United States (though McCain was certainly also a 'natural born' American citizen.)

I'm not sure what it means, but the thing seems more visceral than rational.
There seem to be a couple on contexts this might fit in. The first is racial. It would not be unreasonable to think that this section of the country has a problem with a black man as president and will grasp any straw that helps them think he's not eligible.

On the other hand, let's remember Clinton. As soon as Clinton was viewed as a serious candidate, Whitewater came into the news. Look at how much time and money the republicans spent on investigating him. Fostergate. Travelgate.

The FBI files that the Clinton's supposedly requested, but no instance of them looking through them was ever reported. The vandalism they supposedly did to the White House that no invoices for any repairs ever turned up.

John Smith
08-05-2009, 07:39 AM
It's hard to show compassion for people who hold beliefs that can cultivate extremist actions. But it is worth understanding them or empathizing with them in order to monitor them better. You know, like James Von Brun, the old guy who shot the guard at the Holocaust museum. You get enough people believing crazy stuff and it's like religion.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2009/06/james-w-von-brunn-obama-is-missing.php?page=1
Actually, it's almost like a religion.

They're minds are made up, and they don't want to be confused by facts.

It's the intensity of the believe that I find worrisome. This is exactly the type of crowd that might plot an assasination, in the belief they're doing something for the bigger "good."

I have on my wall one of the old flying horses from my local Mobile station. I have a friend who believes it came from Flying A. It's my horse, I brought it home from the local Mobile Station. Mobile stations always had it as a symble, if only on a flag, yet I cannot convince him that he is mistaken.

The birthers are not going to accept any proof of Obama's birth in Hawaii, or any proof that the Kenya certificate is not real.

The question is, IMO, is this movement going to slowly die, or is it going to grow.

TomF
08-05-2009, 07:53 AM
...all about I'm so freakin' superior because I'm a liberal crap, and you're a conservative so you must be stupid and ignorant and God knows what else.

But, the coin has two sides, doesn't it? I'd think better of you if once, just once, when someone caricaturized a sitting President as a chimpanzee, you had objected.I feel no respect for GWB. For conservatives like Colin Powell, George Will, or even George Bush 1, absolutely. These are men who sought to "conserve" what's good about America - personal and fiscal accountability, the rule of law, etc.

No, I didn't once speak out defending GWB from caricature. The man caricatured himself. Sworn to uphold the Constitution ... he actively subverted it in the name of National Security. Sworn to uphold the rule of law, he created Guantanamo to side-step existing domestic and international law, and legitimized torture. Sworn to protect US citizens, he diverted an initial response to an actual attack on US citizens into a "personal" vendetta against Iraq, with no credible cause. And doing so, he is directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of US service men and women who trusted the POTUS to have the best interests of their nation in mind, and were betrayed. To say nothing of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. That he was weak enough to be possibly led to do this by Cheney does nothing to rehabilitate the man himself.

No, I didn't raise my voice against those caricaturing GWB, because NOT defending Bush was in itself an expression of respect for the Office of the Presidency. And of outrage that the office - and with it the United States itself - was being degraded.

...At this point, following accepted liberal practices, I have earned the right to caricaturize any sitting President I want, almost as blatantly as I want. Except that I'm not allowed to be perceived to be a racist in my caricatures, like the thing that got me banned for three freakin' months. Which wasn't intended to be racist, but was a poor attempt at a caricature. If you think a sitting President is defaming his office, running the country for his own gain or to satisfy his own psychological demons, feel free. If you think the guy's trying to do what he thinks is best for the country, disagree or not, more respect's in order.

I profoundly disagreed with Reagan and Bush 1; in neither case did I think they were wilfully ignoring or damaging the rule of law. And while I did think (e.g. with Grenada, Nicaragua) they were spending lives recklessly pursueing imaginary threats, they were at least threats based in some semblance of reality. In contrast to Iraq, where far more money and far more lives were wasted in pursuit of precisely nothing but bragging rights.

What's Obama's motivation, you think? Is he really trying to build Cuba on the US mainland? Is he pursuing Health Care reform because he's got a buddy whose company will make a bundle on untendered contracts? Because his family's got business interests that will surge if the private insurance companies fail? Is he buying into GM to have an Obamamobile launched - or in a (perhaps misguided) attempt to rescue a critical piece of the American economy?

Criticize his policies, for sure - they're up for grabs. But respect is due if you think he's trying to bring the Office of the Presidency back into some good odour.
...I'm sorry that our political viewpoints aren't even remotely in alignment. I'm sorry that I believe down to my core that individuals make better decisions for themselves then governments can possibly make for them. I'm sorry that I'm successfully retired, content with my government pension and health care - and slightly fearful of changes to same, reluctant to bail out anybody, distrustful of progressive intentions, etc., etc.Feel free to disagree. I'm glad you're successfully retired, glad you're content with your pension/health care. I also think most individuals make better choices for themselves than most governments ... but fundamentally believe that health care is both a basic citizen entitlement, and a significant investment in GDP and broad-based economic competitiveness and productivity.

As a citizen of one of America's competitor nations, I don't mind if you continue to put a drag on your economy - except when it means you won't purchase our exports. But as a human being, it maddens me no end to see your great nation choose harm for its citizens, because enough of you are duped into thinking a universal option is ideologically repulsive.

TomF
08-05-2009, 07:59 AM
Will the Aussies?In Canada, our most recent two Heads of State (Governors General) have both been immigrants. Michaelle Jean (current GG) was born in Haiti, and her predecessor Adrienne Clarkson came to Canada as a refugee from Hong Kong in 1941.

pefjr
08-05-2009, 08:40 AM
Interesting, we are too much like the British, "steeped in tradition"

Figmental
08-05-2009, 09:09 AM
The question has been asked whether I have compassion for the Birthers. In my heart of hearts I feel such loss for all of us as our species reduces this planet to a wasteland. I feel compassion for anyone who is stuck in a hating mindset and is supported in that by nieghbors, friends or relatives. How can they manifest an inner change in the midst of such peer pressure?

But compassion for hating? I resent individuals who forfeit their opportunity to have an enjoyable life of their own making. The very act of being a Birther is a demonstration of willfull blindness.
The lynch mob gene carriers are revved up. Media tabloid barkers are holding the throttle down.
Seeing these fools gives us all a chance to locate where we are on the slippery slope to hating.

We're all in this together.

Joe (SoCal)
08-05-2009, 09:19 AM
Not what Andrew said. What he did say was accurate.



http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/birthers.png
Research 2000 poll


UCB just got Bitch Slapped :D

http://tom.digitalelite.com/img/bitchslap.jpg

Nice job johnw :D

Andrew Craig-Bennett
08-05-2009, 09:42 AM
Interesting, we are too much like the British, "steeped in tradition"

Oh, we have no restriction on who can be Head of State - we've imported a Dutchman and a German before now!

Actually, whilst I recogise the "steeped in tradition" stereotype (jolly good for the tourist trade!:)) it can be a little deceptive (this also applies to Japan, by the way) .

We retain the forms, but change the substance at the drop of a hat.

In some ways, its easier to bring in a new idea in Britain than it is in the States, because you are more "legalistic" than we are, being bound to a written Constitution as interpreted by your Supreme Court. We just smuggle it in under the radar, so to speak.

pefjr
08-05-2009, 09:47 AM
How about the Queen?

I, Rowboat
08-05-2009, 09:54 AM
Hey, I just thought up a Birther joke on the spot! Look-y me!:

Knock-knock!

Who's there?

Illegitimate President!

Illegitimate President who?

Illegitimate President who traveled back in time to plant false birth announcements in local papers around his supposed place of birth.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
08-05-2009, 09:55 AM
That's my point - she is the Head of State.

King George the First was the Elector of Hannover - he was offered the Throne by Parliament in 1715, in preference to the Old Pretender, the English-born son of King James the Second.

King William the Third was the Stadtholder of the United Provinces (Holland) - he was offered the throne by Parliament in 1688 in preference to the English-born King James the Second.

Queen Elizabeth the Second is directly descended from George the First. Her husband, Prince Philip, was Greek but became a naturalised Englishman so you could say that Prince Charles is the son of a foreigner, if you liked.

pefjr
08-05-2009, 10:02 AM
I was referring to the "tradition" of having a Queen or King

Andrew Craig-Bennett
08-05-2009, 10:06 AM
As I said, we retain the forms but change the substance. Its rather handy to have a non-political Head of State, and that is what the Queen is.

Spain decided to have a King quite recently - is King Juan Carlos a "tradition" or not? ;)

I, Rowboat
08-05-2009, 10:10 AM
C'mon. Someone acknowledge my funny, dammit!

pefjr
08-05-2009, 10:16 AM
[quote=Andrew Craig-Bennett;2278944]As I said, we retain the forms but change the substance. Its rather handy to have a non-political Head of State, and that is what the Queen is.

Kinda beeish I say.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
08-05-2009, 10:18 AM
[quote=Andrew Craig-Bennett;2278944]As I said, we retain the forms but change the substance. Its rather handy to have a non-political Head of State, and that is what the Queen is.

Kinda beeish I say.


Could you translate?

Thanks

Joe (SoCal)
08-05-2009, 10:19 AM
C'mon. Someone acknowledge my funny, dammit!

T'wasn't that funny :p

bobbys
08-05-2009, 10:30 AM
C'mon. Someone acknowledge my funny, dammit!.

Ok im a neocon but a sucker for a joke!!!:D

pefjr
08-05-2009, 10:36 AM
[quote=pefjr;2278961]


Could you translate?

Thanksa failed attempt at British humor. Queen bee

Andrew Craig-Bennett
08-05-2009, 10:38 AM
OK, got it. :D

I, Rowboat
08-05-2009, 11:30 AM
T'wasn't that funny :p

Say it ain't so Joe.

Did you resent your name this last election cycle as much as I resented mine (Chad) back in the 2000 election?

johnw
08-05-2009, 12:30 PM
I don't have a problem with it, how about Schwarzenegger 2016

Great. The whole country could be governed as well as California.

pefjr
08-05-2009, 12:31 PM
C'mon. Someone acknowledge my funny, dammit!Very funny, and original.

pefjr
08-05-2009, 12:37 PM
Great. The whole country could be governed as well as California.Well, he is as qualified as Reagan was. Lets have a "living" Constitution, amend it.

Captain Blight
08-05-2009, 04:34 PM
Let's start with a new Constitutional Convention. Let's quit slapping patches on the old system and instead, let's overhaul it to more accurately reflect where the American Experiment is at this point in time. We'd only need--what, 34 States? -- to ratify it.

Or how about a bloodless Civil war? Republicans move to the former Slaveholder States and the Dems get everything else.

Or just amend the Constitution to allow for election of the foreign-born to the Oval Office. I'd be okay with that.

Big Woody
08-05-2009, 07:58 PM
Any time Obama wants to release his original long form birth certificate and clear this all up he is welcome to do so. :)

So much for transparency. I'm not certain where Obama was born, but I'm certain he's withholding his original long form birth certificate from the public if it exists, thereby creating a conflict that he could simply dispel if he chose to be a transparent leader and publicly release the document. But he is either instigating the conflict or hiding something, otherwise withholding the details of ones birth would serve no purpose to a public figure who is by choice constantly in the public eye.

Glen Longino
08-05-2009, 08:20 PM
Any time Obama wants to release his original long form birth certificate and clear this all up he is welcome to do so. :)

So much for transparency. I'm not certain where Obama was born, but I'm certain he's withholding his original long form birth certificate from the public if it exists, thereby creating a conflict that he could simply dispel if he chose to be a transparent leader and publicly release the document. But he is either instigating the conflict or hiding something, otherwise withholding the details of ones birth would serve no purpose to a public figure who is by choice constantly in the public eye.

Poor reasoning there, Woodrow!
There could be many other reasons for not showing his birth certificate.
My favorite? "Kiss my arse, Birthers!" :eek::)

LeeG
08-05-2009, 08:24 PM
Hey Big Woody,,you like Alan Keyes?

Big Woody
08-05-2009, 08:39 PM
I'm not that familiar with Mr. Keyes.

Big Woody
08-05-2009, 08:49 PM
There could be many other reasons for not showing his birth certificate.
My favorite? "Kiss my arse, Birthers!" :eek::)

Feel free to give us those many reasons befitting our post-partisan transparent president, who is not hiding anything and is a uniter of the people. :D

LeeG
08-05-2009, 08:57 PM
I'm not that familiar with Mr. Keyes.

you might, google is your friend

pefjr
08-05-2009, 09:16 PM
Feel free to give us those many reasons befitting our post-partisan transparent president, who is not hiding anything and is a uniter of the people. :DI think I, Rowboat is working on that birth certificate Woody. He said the Prez will be back shortly from his time travel with the proof.

B_B
08-05-2009, 10:38 PM
Any time Obama wants to release his original long form birth certificate and clear this all up he is welcome to do so....
been done, over and over...

Hell, even a grade school teacher recalls discussing BHO's birth with his friggin obstetrician ... !

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp

birthers are dumnuts.

Soundbounder
08-06-2009, 06:35 AM
As stated in my post, Research 2000. I ran into it on Washington Monthly. Why this is something of a regional phenomenon is an interesting question. Does anyone from the South have a theory?

I don't smoke.It is important to recognize that the results do not say that there are more Birthers in the South, or that most Birthers come from the South. It is saying that Birthers make up a larger portion of the population in the South.

I am sure there are many Birthers in western PA, upstate NY, etc; but the numbers from the large urban areas cancel them out.
Same goes for Indiana, southern Illinois, rural Missouri etc.
Ditto for Utah, Wyoming, the Dakotas etc. Areas like Los Angeles, Denver and San Francisco cancel the numbers out, and diminish the percentages of the Birthers.

The South is already a GOP stronghold. Plus the rural and exurban numbers may not be as overwhelmed by large urban areas. Metropolitan areas like Atlanta and Houston do not constitute as large a percentage of the overall population of the South.

I am speculating on this. I need to look at the demographics, but I think this plays a role in the results.

Keith Wilson
08-06-2009, 08:49 AM
It is important to recognize that the results do not say that there are more Birthers in the South, or that most Birthers come from the South. It is saying that Birthers make up a larger portion of the population in the South.Nonsense; that's exactly what the results do say. The survey data in the graph show that about 25% of the people in the South think Obama was born outside the US, but only 5% in the West and Midwest and about 2% in the Northeast.

The populations of the various regions are roughly as follows:
South 34%, 102 million
West 23%, 69 million
Midwest 22%, 66 million
Northeast 21%, 63 million

So the number of people who think Obama was born outside the US ("birthers") by region can be calculated as:
South: 25.5 million
West: 3.5 million
Midwest: 3.3 million
Northeast 1.2 million

So there are 33.5 million "birthers", 25.5 million of which live in the South, or 76% of the total. There are only 8 million in the rest of the country combined. So, assuming the survey results are more or less accurate (a big assumption), 3/4 of all "birthers" are in the South . They are a significant portion of the population there, a small fringe group elsewhere. That's a lot of ignorant people, but you can get 5% of the population to answer "yes" to almost any damn fool thing. The data shows it's mostly a Southern phenomenon.

Here's the original source of the graph. (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_07/019306.php) It's interesting to note that overwhelming majorities (high 80 or over 90%) in the rest of the country get Obama's birthplace right. In the South, it's less than half. I think it's another example of the increasing marginalization (and regionalization) of the right, a drift into weirdness, but others may disagree.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/birthers.png

Soundbounder
08-06-2009, 09:08 AM
Nonsense; that's exactly what the results do say. The survey data in the graph show that about 25% of the people in the South think Obama was born outside the US, but only 5% in the West and Midwest and about 2% in the Northeast.

The populations of the various regions are roughly as follows:
South 34%, 102 million
West 23%, 69 million
Midwest 22%, 66 million
Northeast 21%, 63 million

So the number of people who think Obama was born outside the US ("birthers") by region can be calculated as:
South: 25.5 million
West: 3.5 million
Midwest: 3.3 million
Northeast 1.2 million

So there are 33.5 million "birthers", 25.5 million of which live in the South, or 76% of the total. There are only 8 million in the rest of the country combined. So, assuming the survey results are more or less accurate (a big assumption), 3/4 of all "birthers" are in the South . They are a significant portion of the population there, a small fringe group elsewhere. That's a lot of ignorant people, but OTOH, you can get 5% of the population to answer "yes to almost any damn fool thing. The data shows it's mostly a Southern phenomenon.

Here's the original source of the graph. (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_07/019306.php) It's interesting to note that overwhelming majorities (high 80 or over 90%) in the rest of the country get Obama's birthplace right. In the South, it's less than half.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/birthers.png
The statistics you use for the regional populations include places like Delaware, Maryland, and DC as part of the South.
Did this survey count every state south of Philadelphia as part of the South also?

My point is simply that areas such as Michele Bachmans district probably contain a similar percentage of Birthers as do many areas of the South. But there are not as many places in the South like Chicago, Twin Cities, Detroit etc to dilute the percentages.

Soundbounder
08-06-2009, 09:17 AM
Keith,
The geographic breakdown that was used for the survey is not consistent with the geographic population numbers that you provided.

http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320

You provided US Census population numbers that breakdown the regions differently.
The Birther survey did not include places like Delaware, DC and Maryland as part of the South.
They also labeled some other states as part of the Midwest, that the US Census counts as part of the South.

Keith Wilson
08-06-2009, 09:19 AM
I don't know how the survey divided up the regions. OTOH, the numbers are pretty overhwhelming. "Birhters" are a fring in most of the country; in the SOuth they're almost mainstream.

I know a bit about Ms Bachman's district; I'm sitting in it right now, in fact, although I don't live there. She's something of an anomaly, and is far, far, to the right of most of her constituents. She won becuse she was running against a both an uninspring Democrat and a stong centrist third party candidate.

Ah, good - the real numbers I'll redo my percentages. Thanks.

Mrleft8
08-06-2009, 09:37 AM
Knock, knock.
Who's there?
Birther.
Birther who?
Birther.
Birther who?
Just Birther....They didn't tell me who....
:D

Keith Wilson
08-06-2009, 09:53 AM
OK, revised numbers. the regions used in the survey are almost the same as the census regions, except that Delaware, Maryland and West Virginia (?) are included as part of the Northeast. So using the figures directly from the survey data, those who think Obama was not born in the US are distributed thus:
Northeast - 4% of population, 2.7 million
South - 23% of population, 22.6 million
Midwest - 6% of population, 4.1 million
West - 7% of population 4.7 million

This gives 35 million "birthers", 66% of which are in the South.

Again, even with the revised numbers, the survey indicates it's mostly a Southern thing; fringe in most of the country, almost mainstream in the South.

I, Rowboat
08-06-2009, 10:14 AM
And they wonder why we disparage the South. Christ, they've got a 480 percent stupidity handicap above their nearest competitor.

Winning the Civil War really was a loss for the country, considering the scorched-earth anti-intellectual tactics the South has managed to foist on all of us ever since.

John of Phoenix
08-06-2009, 11:57 AM
Hmmm, 23%... 23%... Why does that sound so familiar? :D

George Roberts
08-06-2009, 12:16 PM
Any time Obama wants to release his original long form birth certificate and clear this all up he is welcome to do so. :)

So much for transparency. I'm not certain where Obama was born, but I'm certain he's withholding his original long form birth certificate from the public if it exists, thereby creating a conflict that he could simply dispel if he chose to be a transparent leader and publicly release the document. But he is either instigating the conflict or hiding something, otherwise withholding the details of ones birth would serve no purpose to a public figure who is by choice constantly in the public eye.

My daughter was born at home. When she needed an original birth certificate, neither the one the state gave me at the time or the one I wrote up was satisfactory.

Possession of a birth certificate is more or less meaningless.

Ian McColgin
08-06-2009, 12:59 PM
Mr. Roberts must have some unique circumstance. Certainly none of my cousins and (now given my age) some of their kids have managed home births in New Hampshire, Vermont, Oregon, and even Oklahoma with no problem obtaining a valid birth certificate.

It's a fact that an unattended and unreported birth can create problems. I had a client who's eldest was not on her welfare grant because she gave birth (age 15) alone and in secret. Even that, kid was five and we really needed to regularize the situation so he could start school, it was a problem that required only my modicum of bureacratic smarts to fix.

Birth certificates can be falsified, but they are hardly meaningless.

pefjr
08-06-2009, 01:16 PM
Surveys, who did it and how, and how does 23% of those surveyed turn into 22.6 million, and that into "mainstream",that into 480% ???

I did my own survey and went to the Second Baptist Church of the Holy Roller Kingdom in Ochlocknee, Ga., 15 miles north of the Fl. border. 93% believe Obama is an illegal Prez. They also believe that the moon landing in 1969 is Hollywood. Then I went to the University of Penn. campus did my questioning. Only 2% were birthers and they happened to be from Ochlocknee, Ga. on a Religious scholarship. So that survey speaks for itself.

If I am ignorant about the South,and want to prove it with a survey. What am I proving? My ignorance?

Keith Wilson
08-06-2009, 02:43 PM
There was a link to the raw survey results in post #104. Basic math, if the survey results accurately reflect the views of the entire population. The population of the states they identify as the south is about 98 million. 23% of that is 22.6 million. AFAIK, I said nothing about 480%.

In the southern states, and only there, more than half of the people surveyed said either that Obama wasn't born in the US or that they weren't sure. "Almost mainstream in the south" was my interpretation, based on the survey.

pefjr
08-06-2009, 03:07 PM
I noticed your little if. I think it was I, Rowboat that took your figures and went to 480%. Half of those surveyed means what? you don't know because you gave no figures for how many were surveyed. How does that translate to mainstream? The surveyors are trying to make a point and not so concerned about accuracy or being questioned. These surveys are weak and distorted to reflect what the public will buy or to back up their articles to sell to the public. I don't buy it.

johnw
08-06-2009, 04:13 PM
Polls are always meaningless if they don't say what we want them to.

Even if there's a substantial margin of error here, I'd say the survey shows an interesting result. This does seem to be to a great extent a regional phenomenon.

Keith Wilson
08-06-2009, 04:19 PM
Here is the link to the original poll data. (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320) Sample size was 2400, consistent with other national polls. The margin of error was 2%. Again, in this case, the difference between the results from the south and other regions was so enormous that even if the poll was fairly sloppily conducted, the conclusion that "birthers" are mostly southerners is compeltely justified.

pefjr
08-06-2009, 04:53 PM
Keith

If you visit Atlanta today you would find a high percentage of people there born in the north. Same in Florida. These are just 2 examples, there's many. Your prejudiced thinking leaves you wide open for shock. The south is no longer ignorant dirt farmers of the past, nor prejudiced like the stereotype you and others try to push. This is OK, Southerners know you and take advantage of that prejudice. I know the new Southerners and I know the old, and I can just see some of my old Buddy's being surveyed on that question of Obama and his birth certificate and playing it to their delight.

"the conclusion that "birthers" are mostly southerners is compeltely justified." There you go again. mostly means over 50% doesn't it? Where does it say over 1200 were Southerners? I don't see even that distorted survey saying any such thing. What is your point in this really? What do you want to say or imply by distorting even further an already weak and bigoted survey.

Have you ever been South?
Do you know where the surveyors got the phone numbers?
Do you know what kind of people sit home all day and answer phone surveys?

Keith Wilson
08-06-2009, 05:15 PM
Oh, for the love of God! :rolleyes: My mother was from Georgia. I went to high school in North Carolina. Most of my extended family lives in the south, and I've spent quite a lot of time there. I know as well as anyone that the south, or at least the cities, are not at all like they were thirty years ago, much less sixty. And I'm so goddamn sick of southerners whining endlessly about "nobody likes us; they're all prejudiced; they all think we're a bunch of ignorant illiterate barefoot inbred rednecks with no teeth" that I could just about puke! I do NOT think that. I was making a FACTUAL POINT based on polling data.

Look, the poll was done according to standard methods, like every other poll that any reputable outfit conducts. If we were arguing about a couple of percentage points, then there might be some question about methodology, but we're talking about a factor of five, for chrissake! "Birthers" are mostly in the south. Those are the FACTS according to the evidence . Make of them what you will; refute them if you can.

Big Woody
08-06-2009, 05:27 PM
Possession of a birth certificate is more or less meaningless.

But, supposedly Mr. Obama has an original long form birth certificate, and he is just choosing to legally keep it hidden from the over 22 million folks who doubt the legitimacy of his presidency. Why not release his original long form birth certificate which has NEVER been released. Only a COLB (Certificate Of Live Birth) has been released and it could have been gotten by the parents of a foreign born child at the time. This birther objection would have been pretty easy to diffuse if Obama was not choosing to withhold the appropriate document that would end all but the craziest of conspiracy theorists objections. Obama is wasting too much time and money fighting disclosure in the court system to convince me he is not hiding his original long form birth certificate (which certain Hawaiian officials claim to have seen) for a reason. His refusal to make public this public documentation of his birth is directly in opposition to his talk of openness and transparency. There may be nothing there.... but Obama's refusal to simply make public his long form birth certificate and largely defuze this whole mess does not pass the smell test.

ccmanuals
08-06-2009, 05:30 PM
Any time Obama wants to release his original long form birth certificate and clear this all up he is welcome to do so. :)

So much for transparency. I'm not certain where Obama was born, but I'm certain he's withholding his original long form birth certificate from the public if it exists, thereby creating a conflict that he could simply dispel if he chose to be a transparent leader and publicly release the document. But he is either instigating the conflict or hiding something, otherwise withholding the details of ones birth would serve no purpose to a public figure who is by choice constantly in the public eye.

I understand Obama will show us his birth certificate (again) as soon as Sarah Palin shows us her high school diploma. :)

pefjr
08-06-2009, 06:06 PM
Oh, for the love of God! :rolleyes: My mother was from Georgia. I went to high school in North Carolina. Most of my extended family lives in the south, and I've spent quite a lot of time there. I know as well as anyone that the south, or at least the cities, are not at all like they were thirty years ago, much less sixty. And I'm so goddamn sick of southerners whining endlessly about "nobody likes us; they're all prejudiced; they all think we're a bunch of ignorant illiterate barefoot inbred rednecks with no teeth" that I could just about puke! I do NOT think that. I was making a FACTUAL POINT based on polling data.


Look, the poll was done according to standard methods, like every other poll that any reputable outfit conducts. If we were arguing about a couple of percentage points, then there might be some question about methodology, but we're talking about a factor of five, for chrissake! "Birthers" are mostly in the south. Those are the FACTS according to the evidence . Make of them what you will; refute them if you can. No, you were distorting the survey data and you continue to distort "Birthers are mostly in the south".

I think what you need is a Southern Belle from the Suwanee River to smile at you, and call you handsome while rubbing your leg.

johnw
08-06-2009, 06:25 PM
No, you were distorting the survey data and you continue to distort "Birthers are mostly in the south".

I think what you need is a Southern Belle from the Suwanee River to smile at you, and call you handsome while rubbing your leg.

So tell us how to interpret the data without distortion. And keep your hand off my leg.

pefjr
08-06-2009, 07:35 PM
throw that survey in the trash bin, its biased. Oh, but how bout her

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmITcF0RRwo&feature=SeriesPlayList&p=841410917D41C2B1&index=0

Check out all those birthers. I think thats Joe Hudson in the front row

johnw
08-06-2009, 08:05 PM
I'm sorry, you've given me no reason to think the Research 2000 survey is biased. The fact that you don't like what it shows doesn't count. You have a right to your own opinions, not your own facts.

pefjr
08-06-2009, 08:21 PM
I'm sorry, you've given me no reason to think the Research 2000 survey is biased. The fact that you don't like what it shows doesn't count. You have a right to your own opinions, not your own facts.If you can't look at this survey and see the bigotry behind it I can't help you. I am not afraid of facts, in fact I do not care where the birthers are. I know this fact, there are quite a few in Nv. and Id.

B_B
08-06-2009, 08:44 PM
If you can't look at this survey and see the bigotry behind it I can't help you.
I guess you can't help me.

Keith Wilson
08-06-2009, 08:45 PM
No, you were distorting the survey data and you continue to distort "Birthers are mostly in the south".Please explain in detail how I was distorting the survey data. The question asked was "Do you believe that Barack Obama was born in the United States of America or not?" The choices for an answer were yes, no, and not sure. How is the survey biased? How can you tell there's "bigotry behind" the survey? I think you just don't like the results so you're making stuff up to try to discredit it.

pefjr
08-06-2009, 09:20 PM
I think the John and Keith tag team is prejudiced against civil war states or Southern states( forgot how this started) or any state but their own and grab surveys like this to justfy their own bigotry. What difference does it make? You can show some under educated people everywhere.

Glen Longino
08-06-2009, 09:25 PM
"I think you just don't like the results so you're making stuff up to try to discredit it."

Bingo!
And very obvious too!
He's a "closet birther"!:D

pefjr
08-06-2009, 09:25 PM
Don't have to go into detail, this alone shows it "Birthers" are mostly in the south" But it is an improvement on what you were saying. Keep tweaking it on down and I will probably agree with you at some point but not based on that phone survey of 2400 people.

pefjr
08-06-2009, 09:26 PM
What did I make up?

pefjr
08-06-2009, 09:36 PM
I don't like the survey, I could care less about the results. A survey of 2400? Do you believe everything or do you ever consider the source or motivation behind slanted articles. The red flag went up with me when the reference was made to the civil war states? ACB said it.

Chip-skiff
08-06-2009, 10:56 PM
I'll see your chimp. . .

I saw way too damn much of yours.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/174/413035532_c83015e90c.jpg?v=0

Soundbounder
08-07-2009, 06:46 AM
Surveys, who did it and how, and how does 23% of those surveyed turn into 22.6 million, and that into "mainstream",that into 480% ???

I did my own survey and went to the Second Baptist Church of the Holy Roller Kingdom in Ochlocknee, Ga., 15 miles north of the Fl. border. 93% believe Obama is an illegal Prez. They also believe that the moon landing in 1969 is Hollywood. Then I went to the University of Penn. campus did my questioning. Only 2% were birthers and they happened to be from Ochlocknee, Ga. on a Religious scholarship. So that survey speaks for itself.

If I am ignorant about the South,and want to prove it with a survey. What am I proving? My ignorance?
Comparing a university campus with an evangelical crowd????:confused:

That skewed the numbers more than geography did.

Soundbounder
08-07-2009, 07:08 AM
I don't like the survey, I could care less about the results. A survey of 2400? Do you believe everything or do you ever consider the source or motivation behind slanted articles. The red flag went up with me when the reference was made to the civil war states? ACB said it.If you think the survey is biased, then I disagree with you.

But the demographics need to be taken into consideration when interpreting the results.
If "the West" was divided into two seperate regions, Pacific Coast and Inland Region, I would bet the Inland Region of Utah, Idaho, Arizona, Oklahoma, Wyoming etc would have a very high percentage of Birthers as well. Those have been Republican stronghold states as well.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 08:13 AM
Comparing a university campus with an evangelical crowd????:confused:

That skewed the numbers more than geography did.Thats the point.
You can selectively survey up a desired result for almost anything you want. If you are selling an article of news and want to use a survey, its a cheap and easily skewed way to sell your opinion. Especially a small phone survey. But it feeds the masses their daily dose, and plays into the hands of the lockstep sheeple that have prejudices they want to vocalize.

John Smith
08-07-2009, 08:25 AM
Please explain in detail how I was distorting the survey data. The question asked was "Do you believe that Barack Obama was born in the United States of America or not?" The choices for an answer were yes, no, and not sure. How is the survey biased? How can you tell there's "bigotry behind" the survey? I think you just don't like the results so you're making stuff up to try to discredit it.

NOthing biased about the survey. Only bias is shown in the results.

John Smith
08-07-2009, 08:29 AM
I think the John and Keith tag team is prejudiced against civil war states or Southern states( forgot how this started) or any state but their own and grab surveys like this to justfy their own bigotry. What difference does it make? You can show some under educated people everywhere.
Please take some time to elaborate on this. Neither Keith or I took the survey or any of the similar polls.

The survey itself says a higher percentage of people in the south eastern part of the nation have trouble believing Obama is a citizen than in other parts of the nation.

The polls and their results are facts. Are we not all free to draw our own conclusions from the poll results?

You seem to have a problem with the results. You should take that up with the people who took the poll/survey.

John Smith
08-07-2009, 08:32 AM
I don't like the survey, I could care less about the results. A survey of 2400? Do you believe everything or do you ever consider the source or motivation behind slanted articles. The red flag went up with me when the reference was made to the civil war states? ACB said it.

Seems to me that our polling folks are pretty accurate in their results. I strongly suspect any polling institution that finds itself being less than accurate won't be in business very long.

I have no doubt they are more expert in the number of people needed to be contacted to get a fairly accurate trend.

A more pertinent question, I think, is that will all the coverage verifying his birth in Hawaii, and the discrediting of the false Kenya certificate, why do so many still believe he wasn't born in Hawaii?

Andrew Craig-Bennett
08-07-2009, 08:38 AM
A more pertinent question, I think, is that will all the coverage verifying his birth in Hawaii, and the discrediting of the false Kenya certificate, why do so many still believe he wasn't born in Hawaii?

(scuse me while I just grab this can of gasoline to pour on the flames..)

("Why, I can believe as many as four impossible things before breakfast" said the Red Queen)

If you believe that the War of Northern Aggression was not about slavery, it's quite easy to believe that your President was born in Kenya. ;)

Soundbounder
08-07-2009, 08:40 AM
Thats the point.
You can selectively survey up a desired result for almost anything you want. If you are selling an article of news and want to use a survey, its a cheap and easily skewed way to sell your opinion. Especially a small phone survey. But it feeds the masses their daily dose, and plays into the hands of the lockstep sheeple that have prejudices they want to vocalize.
But you have no basis for that accusation other than what you might have been told on talk radio. The idea that you are of clear, independent mind, while everyone is "sheeple" seems to be baseless.

Soundbounder
08-07-2009, 08:43 AM
The survey itself says a higher percentage of people in the south eastern part of the nation have trouble believing Obama is a citizen than in other parts of the nation.
I don't know that I would consider Texas as part of the Southeast.

Soundbounder
08-07-2009, 08:44 AM
(scuse me while I just grab this can of gasoline to pour on the flames..)

("Why, I can believe as many as four impossible things before breakfast" said the Red Queen)

If you believe that the War of Northern Aggression was not about slavery, it's quite easy to believe that your President was born in Kenya. ;)There are still people who link Iraq with September 11 as well.

TomF
08-07-2009, 08:50 AM
Pefjr, what are you disbelieving? The poll gives us raw numbers of the people contacted in each region, and % who replied one way or another to the questions. The math is simple to determine how many people in a region answered one way or the other, and what % of the overall they represent.

Only 11% (264 people out of 2400 nationwide) of the people polled are convinced Obama was born outside the US, but 165 of them (23% of 720 Southerners polled) live in the South. Those 165 Southerners are over 60% of all the confirmed birthers in the National sample.
Only 12% (288 out of 2400 nationwide) of the people polled were waffling on Obama's US birthplace ... but 216 of them (30% of 720 Southerners polled) live in the South. Those 216 Southerners are 75% of ALL the "wafflers" in the National sample.
Sure, there are confirmed and waffling "birthers" in other parts of the US ... but nowhere except in the South do % for either group even break into double-digits. Between 87%-93% of everyone in the other regions think Obama's telling the truth about his Hawaii birth ... less than half of the Southerners think so.

Why?

It's too simplistic to just say "it's Republicans." Most Republicans in other regions think Obama was born in Hawaii. What's so different in the South, that most of the people who think Obama's lying live there? I'm carefully NOT setting out any Southern stereotypes ... I'm Canadian, and have no dog in this fight.

It sure looks like a cultural difference; what do you set it down to?

Just recognize that the polling methodology's as sound as anything you'd see from Gallup etc. - it's 95% certain that the big percentages won't be off by more than 2%. And even if this is the exception, and the polling was so monumentally bolluxed up that it was off by 10% ... the South would still be home to most of the whole Nation's confirmed and waffling birthers.

Methodology

DKOS WEEKLY NATIONAL POLL 2009

The Daily Kos weekly National Poll was conducted by Research 2000 July 27 through July 30, 2009. A total of 2400 adults nationally were interviewed by telephone. A cross-section of calls was made into each state in the country in order to reflect the adult population nationally.

The margin for error, according to standards customarily used by statisticians, is no more than plus or minus 2% percentage points. This means that there is a 95 percent probability that the "true" figure would fall within that range if the entire adult population were sampled. The margin for error is higher for any demographic subgroup, such as gender, race, or region. GEOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN:
Northeast:
DC, ME, VT, NY, MD, PA, CT, DE, MA, NH, RI, WV, NJ
South:
FL, NC, SC, AL, MS, GA, VA, TN, KY, LA, AR, TX
Midwest:
IL, MN, MI, OH, WI, IA, MO, KS, IN, ND, SD, OK, NE
West:
NM, CA, OR, WA, AK, HI, MT, ID, UT, NV, AZ, WY, CO

Glen Longino
08-07-2009, 08:51 AM
I don't know that I would consider Texas as part of the Southeast.

Along the gulf coast and northeast Texas seems to act like the Southeast US.
From about Austin westward may be more like Southwest US.
All of Texas is heavily Republican Fundamentalist Christian Birther.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 09:09 AM
Pefjr is showing the kind of attitude expressed by the professionally oppressed; folks like Al Sharpton, who scream about bigotry if someone looks at them sideways. It often comes from more or less buried shame about one's heritage, hence hypersensitivity. Real bias exists, of course, but inventing it where it doesn't exist says more about one's psychology than anything.

Look, regional differences in attitudes in the US actually exist. That doesn't mean that everyone in a region thinks a certain way, but that the percentages of those with certain ideas are different in different parts of the country. The South really does tend to be more conservative both socially and politically, more traditional, has more evangelical Christians, and more Republicans. Incomes and amount of education really are somewhat lower. This says nothing about any one individual, and one may think it's a good or a bad thing depending on one's own ideas, but it's not bias, just fact.

Now there's a whole body of work on how to get accurate results with polls, techniques of statistical sampling which allow one to get an accurate idea of how a group people think without having to ask all of them. It's certainly possible to screw up, of course, and introduce some kind of conscious or unconscious bias into the selection of the sample, or the wording of the question, or something. However, there's absolutely no evidence that this is the case here. As far as anyone can tell, the survey was done according to standard methods and is as accurate as any other. You may not like the results, but you cannot dismiss them without some good evidence that the survey is flawed.

The survey data shows very clearly that "birthers" are largely a regional phenomenon, and that most of them are in the south. There are certainly elsewhere, but both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of the population, they're much more common in the south. That is a fact. You can interpret that fact as you wish - that more southerners have caught on to a truth that the rest of the country has largely missed, or that a larger number of them are willing to believe something ridiculous - but the fact is what it is regardless of what any of us might think about it.
If "the West" was divided into two seperate regions, Pacific Coast and Inland Region, I would bet the Inland Region of Utah, Idaho, Arizona, Oklahoma, Wyoming etc would have a very high percentage of Birthers as well. Could be. Good point.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 10:16 AM
"All of Texas is heavily Republican Fundamentalist Christian Birther. " Glen

These type statements are what I have a problem with. This feeds the weak minds and contributes to the stereotype bigotry of the south.

" I don't have a dog in this fight." TomF Then why are you here defending a cheap survey? That's half the problem. Are you defending the "Mainstream" comment, the 480%, and others?

"The survey itself says a higher percentage of people in the south eastern part of the nation have trouble believing Obama is a citizen than in other parts of the nation." John Smith

It does?

"I have no doubt they are more expert in the number of people needed to be contacted to get a fairly accurate trend."John

You blindly trust everything you read. I have a doubt.

Keith, are you posting to your audience and laying out more of your bigotry. Al Sharpton has a lot to do with this issue, Huh? You were tweaking your prejudices down, but now I guess you want to head in the opposite direction. Stay focused Keith. This is about your exaggerations of a cheap survey. And you don't need an Army to defend your "mainstream" do you?

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 10:23 AM
Bigotry, my a$$. I realize I'm getting uncharacteristically testy, but you have absolutely no reason to accuse me of bigotry when I am merely presenting what appear to be facts. Facts are facts; whether we like them or not. And I won't take responsibility for what anyone else writes; take that up with them if you have a problem with it.

If you have any evidence that the survey is not accurate, other than that the results embarrass you, then present it. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke.

TomF
08-07-2009, 10:24 AM
What's convinced you that it's a "cheap survey," rather than exactly what it purports to be? A national survey conducted using industry-standard sampling?

As C Ross said the other day, my research skills are pretty good. While I'm no polling expert, I've been involved in designing and using polls a few times over the years - this looks like pretty standard-issue methodology.

I understand that you don't like the results. But if the methodology is sound, like it seems to be, what's the cause of the very clear pattern it shows?

Glen Longino
08-07-2009, 10:37 AM
pefjr, you're simply in denial and being obtuse if you don't think there is a large concentration of Birther types in Texas.
If you want proof, come to my place and we'll take a tour of coffee shops and ask a simple question, "Do you think Obama's nationality is questionable?"
You'll get three or four answers from a large majority:
1...Go f...yourself!
2...Hell yes!
3...I don't know about that, but I do know he's a damn N!
4...What's nationality mean?

pefjr
08-07-2009, 10:38 AM
What's convinced you that it's a "cheap survey," rather than exactly what it purports to be? A national survey conducted using industry-standard sampling?

As C Ross said the other day, my research skills are pretty good. While I'm no polling expert, I've been involved in designing and using polls a few times over the years - this looks like pretty standard-issue methodology.

I understand that you don't like the results. But if the methodology is sound, like it seems to be, what's the cause of the very clear pattern it shows?OK, your opinion, I respect it, now address my other questions.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 10:41 AM
Once again, if you have any evidence that the survey is not accurate, other than that the results embarrass you, then present it.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 10:44 AM
"And I won't take responsibility for what anyone else writes; take that up with them if you have a problem with it." Keith

No, you will just conveniently use it to justify your prejudices. Why exaggerate that data?

Andrew Craig-Bennett
08-07-2009, 10:45 AM
OK, your opinion, I respect it, now address my other questions.

Are you by any chance Sam F?

pefjr
08-07-2009, 10:46 AM
pefjr, you're simply in denial and being obtuse if you don't think there is a large concentration of Birther types in Texas.
If you want proof, come to my place and we'll take a tour of coffee shops and ask a simple question, "Do you think Obama's nationality is questionable?"
You'll get three or four answers from a large majority:
1...Go f...yourself!
2...Hell yes!
3...I don't know about that, but I do know he's a damn N!
4...What's nationality mean?I am fully aware of that element, however that is not what you said.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 10:48 AM
Are you by any chance Sam F?
You have any contribution to post or just want a laugh? You started this.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 10:50 AM
pefjr, you're simply in denial and being obtuse if you don't think there is a large concentration of Birther types in Texas.
If you want proof, come to my place and we'll take a tour of coffee shops and ask a simple question, "Do you think Obama's nationality is questionable?"
You'll get three or four answers from a large majority:
1...Go f...yourself!
2...Hell yes!
3...I don't know about that, but I do know he's a damn N!
4...What's nationality mean?Your Coffee shop survey is probably more accurate than a selected phone survey.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 10:51 AM
TomF???

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 10:52 AM
Why exaggerate that data? Please show me exactly how I have "exaggerated the data". I have a strong dislike of lying with numbers, and I try very hard to avoid doing it. I would appreciate it if you would help me correct it, if that's really what I've done.

TomF
08-07-2009, 10:53 AM
OK, your opinion, I respect it, now address my other questions.Keith's comment that "birther" thinking in the South seems to be almost mainstream? When almost 63% of Southerners either believe or suspect that the Birthers are right, that seems pretty mainstream to me.


I Rowboat made a dig about a 480% stupidity factor in the South. Obviously that's crap. But when a sizeable majority in the South lean towards a position that a 9:1 majority in the rest of the country thinks is plain wrong ... you ask yourself why.

Maybe education differences?
Maybe differences in what sources people think give "reliable" information?
Maybe some regional cultural differences?
I dunno. I have some suspicions, but I'd much rather a Southerner tries to unpack it.

TomF
08-07-2009, 11:02 AM
Your Coffee shop survey is probably more accurate than a selected phone survey.More accurate than a skewed selection, sure. But not more accurate than a randomly selected phone survey ... of the type done by pollsters and market researchers every day.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 11:02 AM
Please show me exactly how I have "exaggerated the data". I have a strong dislike of lying with numbers, and I try very hard to avoid doing it. I would appreciate it if you would help me correct it, if that's really what I've done.I am not your clerk. I have already pointed that out to you. Nothing new except your trying to bring in Al Sharpton, and color me as the infidel.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 11:03 AM
More accurate than a skewed selection, sure. But not more accurate than a randomly selected phone survey ... of the type done by pollsters and market researchers every day. Sorry, I was referring to my other questions.

TomF
08-07-2009, 11:07 AM
Sorry, I was referring to my other questions.You asked me a couple of questions in your #145. I answered them in my #158.

Are there other questions for me that I've missed?

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 11:19 AM
I have already pointed that out to you.Where? Post number, please. If you make an accusation ("bigotry", "exaggerating the data") you have a responsibility to back it up if you want anyone to take you seriously.

In this thread, your behavior indeed resembles Al Sharpton's because you are claiming "bigotry" where none exists.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 11:26 AM
"Keith's comment that "birther" thinking in the South seems to be almost mainstream? When almost 63% of Southerners either believe or suspect that the Birthers are right, that seems pretty mainstream to me."

This is the answer I was looking for.
Almost 63%, and you believe this?

I have some beautiful campground property near Immokolee Fl. I am trying to sell cheap, maybe you or Keith would be a buyer.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 11:27 AM
Where? Post number, please. If you make an accusation ("bigotry", "exaggerating the data") you have a responsibility to back it up if you want anyone to take you seriously.

In this thread, your behavior indeed resembles Al Sharpton's because you are claiming "bigotry" where none exists.none you are aware of, maybe

pefjr
08-07-2009, 11:30 AM
You probably believe the % of skinheads in Idaho is high. Or the % of KKK in Alabama is high.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 11:32 AM
none you are aware of, maybe That's what Al says too. So act like an adult, stop whining about how you're hard done by, and tell me how I'm "exaggerating the data".

John Smith
08-07-2009, 11:33 AM
Bigotry, my a$$. I realize I'm getting uncharacteristically testy, but you have absolutely no reason to accuse me of bigotry when I am merely presenting what appear to be facts. Facts are facts; whether we like them or not. And I won't take responsibility for what anyone else writes; take that up with them if you have a problem with it.

If you have any evidence that the survey is not accurate, other than that the results embarrass you, then present it. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke.
Don't let it get under your skin. Back during the campaign I questioned if the nation was ready to elect a black president.
That made me quite the racist in many circles, although I believe it was a legitimate question.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 11:35 AM
That's what Al says too. So act like an adult, stop whining about how you're hard done by, and tell me how I'm "exaggerating the data".I am not your clerk, call Al

pefjr
08-07-2009, 11:37 AM
Don't let it get under your skin. Back during the campaign I questioned if the nation was ready to elect a black president.
That made me quite the racist in many circles, although I believe it was a legitimate question. Why do you say black prez??? Maybe you are a racist.

John Smith
08-07-2009, 11:38 AM
"Keith's comment that "birther" thinking in the South seems to be almost mainstream? When almost 63% of Southerners either believe or suspect that the Birthers are right, that seems pretty mainstream to me."

This is the answer I was looking for.
Almost 63%, and you believe this?

I have some beautiful campground property near Immokolee Fl. I am trying to sell cheap, maybe you or Keith would be a buyer.
My question is: Why don't you believe it? We've got Lou Dobbs and other MSM anchors still saying their are many unanswered questions about Obama's birth. This in spite of the fact that their own networks have determined otherwise.

Find me a few republicans who, when asked directly, say Obama is a U.S. Citizen.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 11:44 AM
My question is: Why don't you believe it? We've got Lou Dobbs and other MSM anchors still saying their are many unanswered questions about Obama's birth. This in spite of the fact that their own networks have determined otherwise.

Find me a few republicans who, when asked directly, say Obama is a U.S. Citizen.You find them, you will not have to look too far or take up much of your time. I am more interested in why you say "black Prez."

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 11:46 AM
I am not your clerkNo you're not. But if you make a claim, you need to support it. That's how rational adults discuss serious issues.

However, you can't support your claims, and have no presented evidence at all to back them up. I'm not exaggerating the data in the slightest. The survey appears to be reasonably accurate. Roughly 2/3 of those who believe Obama wasn't born in the US live in the South. A considerable majority of southerners either think he wasn't born in the US or say they don't know, while in other regions, it's a very small minority. This is not bias. This is the truth. If you don't like it, it's not my problem

John Smith
08-07-2009, 11:56 AM
No you're not. But if you make a claim, you need to support it. That's how rational adults discuss serious issues.

However, you can't support your claims, and have no presented evidence at all to back them up. I'm not exaggerating the data in the slightest. The survey appears to be reasonably accurate. Roughly 2/3 of those who believe Obama wasn't born in the US live in the South. A considerable majority of southerners either think he wasn't born in the US or say they don't know, while in other regions, it's a very small minority. This is not bias. This is the truth. If you don't like it, it's not my problem

He won't, either.

He already took the bait, so to speak, with my post. I point out that there is racism in this country, and he bends in the direction of me being the racist.

Guess if I point out some people like to drive too fast, that makes me a speeder.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 12:00 PM
He won't, either.

He already took the bait, so to speak, with my post. I point out that there is racism in this country, and he bends in the direction of me being the racist.

Guess if I point out some people like to drive too fast, that makes me a speeder.I'll take that as you can't face the answer. A little self reflection usually helps.

Gonzalo
08-07-2009, 12:00 PM
pefjr, I, too, missed the post where you explained Keith's errors, though I've seen quite a few in which you stated that he misrepresented the data. I'm a southerner, and I've heard quite a few comments about Obama's birth. The poll data has a ring of truth to me, though it grieves me to say so.

TomF and Keith have explained pretty clearly how Keith did the math, so I don't think they have misrepresented the data in this one poll, though I haven't verified Keith's population figures by region.

You clearly seem to think the poll is biased, but don't explain how you know that it is. Frankly, I think you just don't like the poll numbers and are disputing them without any other reason for doing so.

Of course, you are under no obligation to explain your reasoning. But as others have pointed out, if you make accusations, and you expect to be taken seriously on this forum, it is incumbent on you to explain them. On the other hand, if you don't mind portraying yourself as an idiot, keep on keeping on. You'll earn the respect you deserve.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 12:08 PM
. . .though I haven't verified Keith's population figures by region.
They were from the US census website, rounded off. I might have might made an error in the math, but I doubt it.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 12:08 PM
pefjr, I, too, missed the post where you explained Keith's errors, though I've seen quite a few in which you stated that he misrepresented the data. I'm a southerner, and I've heard quite a few comments about Obama's birth. The poll data has a ring of truth to me, though it grieves me to say so.

TomF and Keith have explained pretty clearly how Keith did the math, so I don't think they have misrepresented the data in this one poll, though I haven't verified Keith's population figures by region.

You clearly seem to think the poll is biased, but don't explain how you know that it is. Frankly, I think you just don't like the poll numbers and are disputing them without any other reason for doing so.

Of course, you are under no obligation to explain your reasoning. But as others have pointed out, if you make accusations, and you expect to be taken seriously on this forum, it is incumbent on you to explain them. On the other hand, if you don't mind portraying yourself as an idiot, keep on keeping on. You'll earn the respect you deserve. Another reading impaired. Coming out of the woodwork now.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 12:11 PM
Ah, from weak arguments to insults. John has his vices, but I've known him for 35 years, and "reading impaired" is one thing he's not. :D

pefjr
08-07-2009, 12:14 PM
Then he should have no problem reading the posts.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 12:28 PM
He won't, either.

He already took the bait, so to speak, with my post. I point out that there is racism in this country, and he bends in the direction of me being the racist.

Guess if I point out some people like to drive too fast, that makes me a speeder.John, sorry I asked you such a tough question, take all the time you need to answer, or if you choose to not answer, its OK.

Gonzalo
08-07-2009, 12:39 PM
Another reading impaired. Coming out of the woodwork now. You did it. Your insults have earned you the respect you deserve. I expected as much.

Even still, I'd be glad to be shown where I mis-read anything you posted.

TomF
08-07-2009, 12:47 PM
"Keith's comment that "birther" thinking in the South seems to be almost mainstream? When almost 63% of Southerners either believe or suspect that the Birthers are right, that seems pretty mainstream to me."

This is the answer I was looking for.
Almost 63%, and you believe this?

I have some beautiful campground property near Immokolee Fl. I am trying to sell cheap, maybe you or Keith would be a buyer.Ah. Memory lapse - what I posted on the previous page after doing the math was 53%, not 63%. Mea culpa. Over half of all Southerners lean towards the Birther view.


Only 11% (264 people out of 2400 nationwide) of the people polled are convinced Obama was born outside the US, but 165 of them (23% of 720 Southerners polled) live in the South. Those 165 Southerners are over 60% of all the confirmed birthers in the National sample.
Only 12% (288 out of 2400 nationwide) of the people polled were waffling on Obama's US birthplace ... but 216 of them (30% of 720 Southerners polled) live in the South. Those 216 Southerners are 75% of ALL the "wafflers" in the National sample.
Yeah, I believe that the polling is accurate +/- 2%. Half of the South either suspects Obama's lying about being born in Hawaii, or is sure he's lying. In contrast, everywhere else in the country believes Obama's Hawaii story by a 9:1 margin.

The upshot is that most of the "birthers" in the whole country are concentrated in the South.

I'm asking why that might be - have asked a couple of times so far. You've yet to even give a hint of a suggestion, except to say that the whole poll's screwy, and that anyone who believes it is a loon.

It's your turn. Give us some evidence - (maybe an alternative poll?) that the survey showed vast bias, or give some thought to why attitudes might be so different in the South.

B_B
08-07-2009, 12:57 PM
Give us some evidence
You don't pay attention - he's already dealt with that.

you find them,

I am not your clerk,

I am not your clerk

johnw
08-07-2009, 01:09 PM
If you can't look at this survey and see the bigotry behind it I can't help you. I am not afraid of facts, in fact I do not care where the birthers are. I know this fact, there are quite a few in Nv. and Id.

All the people surveyed were asked the same questions. The difference was in their answers.

Instead of telling me in what way the survey is flawed, you just keep repeating that it is. That's not going to convince anyone.

And insults don't convince anyone, either.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 01:33 PM
I doubt the accuracy of any poll like this as I have stated.

"Over half of all Southerners lean towards the Birther view." That's BS math TomF
The poll only says of 720 southeners polled 23% are convinced. or 165. Waffles add up to more than 50%. Is that "mainstream" south? or mainstream of those polled. Its bait for the prejudiced.

"Half of the South either suspects Obama's lying about being born in Hawaii, or is sure he's lying."

This I serious doubt. I know the math but the poll is just saying 720 polled and I know what kind of people they asked and I take that in consideration. If they had wanted a true indication then there are a lot better ways to get accurate data. And I sure there are many birthers , but not that high. Of the 2400 polled over 25% are birthers. I doubt that is true nationally.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 01:35 PM
If they had wanted a true indication then there are a lot better ways to get accurate data. How?

pefjr
08-07-2009, 01:50 PM
I can tell you how not to. Do a phone survey and talk to only the weak minded lonely that are confined to the home, and will answer your questions. No doubt they are high % of birthers.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 02:01 PM
Still mostly in the south.

But you are really claiming that no poll data is worth anything, since this one used standard methodology. OK, it's good to know that you understand this so much better than those who make their living trying to improve the accuracy of polling.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 02:04 PM
Keith, wonder how many calls were made to get one person to respond to a survey, so ridiculous? 10 ? the one that you finally get, do you trust?

James McMullen
08-07-2009, 02:05 PM
pefjr, I think that you need to do some study on the science and methodology behind statistical sampling. The multiple millions of dollars to be made in the field of advertising alone has made the science very mature. The people who create these surveys have huge financial incentive to figure out just how many people they need to sample to truly get an accurate picture of the public's opinion. Your statements implying that you don't think they're doing it right are a reflection of your own ignorance and a prime example of the anecdotal bias typical of those untrained in statistical science.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 02:05 PM
"But you are really claiming that no poll data is worth anything, since this one used standard methodology" you said this, I didn't.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
08-07-2009, 02:06 PM
You seem to be confusing the audience for daytime television with the survey sample used by a polling firm.

They are not the same.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 02:09 PM
You seem to be confusing the audience for daytime television with the survey sample used by a polling firm.

They are not the same. About time you got in this, who are they calling?

pefjr
08-07-2009, 02:12 PM
pefjr, I think that you need to do some study on the science and methodology behind statistical sampling. The multiple millions of dollars to be made in the field of advertising alone has made the science very mature. The people who create these surveys have huge financial incentive to figure out just how many people they need to sample to truly get an accurate picture of the public's opinion. Your statements implying that you don't think they're doing it right are a reflection of your own ignorance and a prime example of the anecdotal bias typical of those untrained in statistical science.This is not a poll with profit in mind.

TomF
08-07-2009, 02:13 PM
I doubt the accuracy of any poll like this as I have stated.

"Over half of all Southerners lean towards the Birther view." That's BS math TomF
The poll only says of 720 southeners polled 23% are convinced. or 165. Waffles add up to more than 50%. Is that "mainstream" south? or mainstream of those polled. Its bait for the prejudiced.

"Half of the South either suspects Obama's lying about being born in Hawaii, or is sure he's lying."

This I serious doubt. I know the math but the poll is just saying 720 polled and I know what kind of people they asked and I take that in consideration. If they had wanted a true indication then there are a lot better ways to get accurate data. And I sure there are many birthers , but not that high. Of the 2400 polled over 25% are birthers. I doubt that is true nationally.What do you know about sampling and polling? Getting a representative sample isn't an art anymore; statisticians doing political and market research polling have simplified it into cookie-cutter standard techniques. The sample's chosen using a random Computer dialer, eliminating bias. That's why the poll data is considered reliable ... "+/- 2%, 19 times out of 20" is the usual disclaimer.

A 720 sample across the states classified as "the South" is too small? Most Canadian surveys I've worked with use about 1000 respondants for a national poll with provincial breakouts. Getting detail within a province means increasing the sample there by 250-500, depending on how much you want to drill down. But this poll didn't dis-aggregate any of the Southern states ... just reported on them as a block. 720 is plenty to be reliable in that kind of high-level geography.

And I said that 53% of the Southerners lean towards the Birther view. That combines those convinced Obama's lying (23%) and those who think he might be (30%). In my view if 1 person in 2 thinks that way, it's mainstream.

Combine those same "convinced" and "maybe" groups anywhere else in America and you've got 1 person in 10. Anywhere except the South, it's a "fringe" view.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 02:26 PM
[quote=TomF;2281325]What do you know about sampling and polling? Getting a representative sample isn't an art anymore; statisticians doing political and market research polling have simplified it into cookie-cutter standard techniques. The sample's chosen using a random Computer dialer, eliminating bias. That's why the poll data is considered reliable ... "+/- 2%, 19 times out of 20" is the usual disclaimer.

So if you have a machine calling, the % of birthers is higher because most people I know hang up on a machine more easily.

Figmental
08-07-2009, 02:32 PM
I think that birthers are clinging to this issue as a way to keep up their denial that a black man won the presidency. Too many of their heads would implode if the full realization of that ever resonated throughout themselves. It's a desperate move to be followed by more desperate moves.

America having a black man at the helm is too much for a few.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 02:33 PM
. . . most people I know hang up on a machine more easily. No, you misunderstand. A machine selects the numbers at random to eliminate any possible bias by the person picking them; a human asks the questions.

Remember that the same methodology was used for the whole survey. Any error which would have increased the numbers of "birthers" in the south should have done so elsewhere as well.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 02:38 PM
How many calls do you guess were made to get a person that wanted to participate in such a survey? Does that have any bearing on your thinking?

TomF
08-07-2009, 02:38 PM
So if you have a machine calling, the % of birthers is higher because most people I know hang up on a machine more easily.Pefjr,

Polling firms make their bread-and-butter doing market research, for corporations that want to make a profit. If a pollster hasn't solved issues like how to preserve a representative sample when people hang up ... their corporate clients will go elsewhere. Changing market research firms is a lot cheaper than launching a product that fails, due to poor information.

Political polling is an offshoot, though a fairly big one. But they ride on the methodological coat-tails of beer, tobacco, soap, and breakfast cereal makers ... with refinements made by outfits like the Bureau of the Census.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 02:45 PM
I think that birthers are clinging to this issue as a way to keep up their denial that a black man won the presidency. Too many of their heads would implode if the full realization of that ever resonated throughout themselves. It's a desperate move to be followed by more desperate moves.

America having a black man at the helm is too much for a few.John has mentioned that. So I ask you the same question. Why do you say we have a "black " President?

pefjr
08-07-2009, 02:47 PM
[quote=pefjr;2281342]Pefjr,

Polling firms make their bread-and-butter doing market research, for corporations that want to make a profit. If a pollster hasn't solved issues like how to preserve a representative sample when people hang up ... their corporate clients will go elsewhere. Changing market research firms is a lot cheaper than launching a product that fails, due to poor information.

Political polling is an offshoot, though a fairly big one. But they ride on the methodological coat-tails of beer, tobacco, soap, and breakfast cereal makers ... with refinements made by outfits like the Bureau of the Census.Were there refinements made? I think maybe they forgot to refine.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 02:49 PM
Why do you say we have a "black " President? Because historically in the US, both culturally and legally, someone with one African-American and one white parent was considered "black". No it doesn't make rational sense, but that's the way it's been. Obama's actually Irish.

Again, if you have any evidence that there was something wrong with the poll rather than just empty words, I'd be interested to see it.

TomF
08-07-2009, 03:12 PM
John has mentioned that. So I ask you the same question. Why do you say we have a "black " President?What, he looks Asian to you? Perhaps Nordic? How about Native American?

Sure, Obama's mixed race.

Why is it, you think, that North American culture has pretty much always described people with any significantly visible African characteristics as "black?"

Flying Orca
08-07-2009, 03:13 PM
How many calls do you guess were made to get a person that wanted to participate in such a survey? Does that have any bearing on your thinking?

IIRC my actual experience as an actual political pollster (non-partisan, national, widely respected independent polling firm), one call in fifteen or twenty typically resulted in a completed survey. Sometimes you'd get lucky and complete three out of ten, but that's unusual.

Bear in mind though, the computer generated numbers could be not in service, could be faxes or other modems, could have nobody home, could have nobody qualified to do the survey home, could have someone qualified but not interested, or could have someone qualified and interested but not available.

Believe it or not, people generally like to participate in political polls.

Now, to get back to your question, allow me to put it back to you: why should the number of calls - not the number of interviews, but the number of calls - have any prima facie bearing on the reliability of the sample?

pefjr
08-07-2009, 03:14 PM
Because historically in the US, both culturally and legally, someone with one African-American and one white parent was considered "black". No it doesn't make rational sense, but that's the way it's been. Obama's actually Irish.

Again, if you have any evidence that there was something wrong with the poll rather than just empty words, I'd be interested to see it.Think Figmetal can answer that question?

John of Phoenix
08-07-2009, 03:18 PM
:D Man, what a hoot this is! :D

Flying Orca
08-07-2009, 03:22 PM
Were there refinements made? I think maybe they forgot to refine.

Well, by all means, introduce your new and improved polling expertise - it's a lucrative business. Your objection must be rooted in some understanding of the science, yes?

Oh wait, it seems that you really don't understand anything about it, you're just bitching 'cause you don't like the result. It's a pity there isn't a better way to point and laugh on the 'net...

TomF
08-07-2009, 03:22 PM
Were there refinements made? I think maybe they forgot to refine.The "refinements" are now at least 30 years old in the business, and are written into the standard software for the call-computer. The pollster would have had to do a bunch of extra work to take the "refinements" out, and intentionally bugger up the results.

Why would they bother? Polling is a business, and this was a single (and fairly small) job. In a field where their reputation for accuracy is quite literally the firm's stock-in-trade, intentional messing with the data would make many of their other clients very uneasy.

TomF
08-07-2009, 03:25 PM
Err, Orca? Could you pls. fix the attribution in your post #209? My reply to Pefjr's post did the same thing ...

Flying Orca
08-07-2009, 03:27 PM
Yikers! Certainly.

TomF
08-07-2009, 03:29 PM
Yikers! Certainly.Thx! :D

pefjr
08-07-2009, 03:31 PM
IIRC my

Now, to get back to your question, allow me to put it back to you: why should the number of calls - not the number of interviews, but the number of calls - have any prima facie bearing on the reliability of the sample? Because in my opinion this is a ridiculous survey intended to be biased to influence those interested in using the data to lockstep blast the south. I didn't know the number of calls to get a bite would be so high, and if it is , it only confirms that the final interview is likely to be a high % of weak minded people therefore a higher % of birthers. They have nothing to do and would more likely talk about the question, than the average person that knows its a joke.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 03:35 PM
This is truly silly. Pefjr doesn't believe the results of the poll, that "birthers" are largely a southern thing, or is possibly embarrassed that so many southerners would believe something so ridiculous, so he makes the following arguments:
- We're biased against southerners. While that may be true for some people, it has nothing at all to do with the accuracy of the survey.
- The survey is somehow biased . He doesn't explain why, but if "we don't see it he can't help us".
- The survey was designed to make southerners look bad. Delusions of persecution.
- The very concept of statistical-sample polling is flawed. Again, he doesn't say why.

John of Phoenix
08-07-2009, 03:36 PM
it only confirms that the final interview is likely to be a high % of weak minded people therefore a higher % of birthers. If ALL the respondents are weak minded, why do the ones in the south believe Obama is not a US citizen.



Because in my opinion this is a ridiculous survey intended to be biased to influence those interested in using the data to lockstep blast the south.

Yeah, people make tons of money trashing the south.

TomF
08-07-2009, 03:38 PM
Gentlemen? Our work here is done ...

John of Phoenix
08-07-2009, 03:40 PM
Gentlemen? Our work here is done ...
Aww, geez. Just when I was gonna have some fun. :D

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 03:41 PM
Best to take pity on our unarmed friend.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 03:42 PM
Why is it, you think, that North American culture has pretty much always described people with any significantly visible African characteristics as "black?"

Its habit that comes from a deeply rooted past of racial hatred. John Smith is not a racist, and I am not calling anyone that has the habit a racist but I do ask them why, and generally they break the habit.

Keith Wilson
08-07-2009, 03:46 PM
Some historical background. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule)

pefjr
08-07-2009, 03:47 PM
Oh you will not take pity on me, I was born in the South.

I'm "Mainstream"

John of Phoenix
08-07-2009, 03:50 PM
Born in the south? No kidding?

:D Who would have guessed? :D

LeeG
08-07-2009, 03:52 PM
Oh you will not take pity on me, I was born in the South.

I'm "Mainstream"

do you like Glenn Beck?

pefjr
08-07-2009, 03:52 PM
Buzzing around in yo copter, JT? looking for a hit? I'm yo huckleberry, fire away.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 03:54 PM
do you like Glenn Beck?OK I've paused the laughing long enough to answer, no.

johnw
08-07-2009, 03:55 PM
Oh you will not take pity on me, I was born in the South.

I'm "Mainstream"

So what? I was born in the South, too.

John of Phoenix
08-07-2009, 03:57 PM
"Fire away"

it only confirms that the final interview is likely to be a high % of weak minded people therefore a higher % of birthers.
If ALL the respondents are weak minded, why do the ones in the south believe Obama is not a US citizen.

Or are you changing the subject?

pefjr
08-07-2009, 04:01 PM
[quote=John Teetsel;2281421]"Fire away"

If ALL the respondents are weak minded, why do the ones in the south believe Obama is not a US citizen.

Land your copter and read, concentrate real hard, you can do it.

John of Phoenix
08-07-2009, 04:02 PM
:D That's what I thought. :D

pefjr
08-07-2009, 04:03 PM
Hmmmm... uh, too hard?

John of Phoenix
08-07-2009, 04:06 PM
Who can make sense of nonsense? Other than you, that is.

TomF
08-07-2009, 04:07 PM
Who can make sense of nonsense? Other than you, that is.Where's Popeye when you need him?

pefjr
08-07-2009, 04:16 PM
Show me where I said all the respondents were weak minded, JT Nonsense

pefjr
08-07-2009, 04:17 PM
Where's Popeye when you need him?I guess your work is not done, calling in your tag team?

SchoonerRat
08-07-2009, 04:23 PM
Bill Maher on the birthers


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4apBc87h5-A

pefjr
08-07-2009, 04:26 PM
[quote=SchoonerRat;2281444]Bill Maher on the birthers


I like the one on "do you know any Mormons?"

pefjr
08-07-2009, 04:27 PM
My work is done here, as JT has turned tail and fllew off into the wild blue yonder.

John of Phoenix
08-07-2009, 04:32 PM
it only confirms that the final interview is likely to be a high % of weak minded people therefore a higher % of birthers.
Again, how does the concentration wind up in the south? These "weak minded people" are pretty evenly distributed throughout the country, right?

Bob Cleek
08-07-2009, 04:36 PM
I'm not taking sides here... just a disinterested observer, but, hey, Milo, you say,

"At this point, following accepted liberal practices, I have earned the right to CARICATURIZE ANY SITTING PRESIDENT I want, almost as blatantly as I want. Except that I'm not allowed to be perceived to be a racist in my caricatures, like the thing that got me banned for three freakin' months. Which wasn't intended to be racist, but was a poor attempt at a caricature."

But you WROTE: "You guys still don't get the real joke, do you? I'll see your CHIMP and raise you a Joker."

Sorta sounds like what that Boston cop got fired for writing. Maybe Obama ought to invite you and TomF over for a beer!

Actually, I don't think that much can be made of the survey results everybody's arguing about here. While it may be true that 50% of Southerners believed Obama was born in the US, 20% believed he wasn't, and 30% "weren't sure," the survey also produced results of 50% "sure was," 20% "sure wasn't," and 30% "not sure" on the question, "Is Hawaii a state?"

Captain Intrepid
08-07-2009, 04:47 PM
Show me where I said all the respondents were weak minded, JT Nonsense

So you're saying that southerners are in general weak minded? :confused:

John of Phoenix
08-07-2009, 04:50 PM
Carry on lads, I'm off for a weekend of hiking. Getting ready for the Grand Canyon again.

pefjr
08-07-2009, 05:27 PM
Again, how does the concentration wind up in the south? These "weak minded people" are pretty evenly distributed throughout the country, right?Yep, that's right. The concentration is in the south I said the % of birthers is not mainstream, and could not be near half the population.

John Smith
08-07-2009, 06:30 PM
IIRC my

Now, to get back to your question, allow me to put it back to you: why should the number of calls - not the number of interviews, but the number of calls - have any prima facie bearing on the reliability of the sample? Because in my opinion this is a ridiculous survey intended to be biased to influence those interested in using the data to lockstep blast the south. I didn't know the number of calls to get a bite would be so high, and if it is , it only confirms that the final interview is likely to be a high % of weak minded people therefore a higher % of birthers. They have nothing to do and would more likely talk about the question, than the average person that knows its a joke.
Is it your opinion that your opinion is better informed on this than that of the professional pollsters?

John Smith
08-07-2009, 06:34 PM
Bill Maher on the birthers


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4apBc87h5-A
Yes! That was a good one.

High C
08-07-2009, 06:51 PM
Hey cool! Yet another anti-southerner thread for the giddy little bigots of the Wooden Boat Forum. And they have a survey and everything!!! :D

What fun!!! :D :cool: :D

pefjr
08-07-2009, 06:57 PM
Because in my opinion this is a ridiculous survey intended to be biased to influence those interested in using the data to lockstep blast the south. I didn't know the number of calls to get a bite would be so high, and if it is , it only confirms that the final interview is likely to be a high % of weak minded people therefore a higher % of birthers. They have nothing to do and would more likely talk about the question, than the average person that knows its a joke.
Is it your opinion that your opinion is better informed on this than that of the professional pollsters?[/quote]

I think its off, call it common sense, hunch, or whatever you want. I would not form an opinion based on this data. I base this on my knowledge of southern people, and its nothing to do with an embarrassment or shame. Its simply the numbers extrapolated out mathematically do not match up to my experience, a caution flag goes up and I question the validity. Extrapolation is sometimes not accurate and sometimes very far off.

John Smith
08-07-2009, 06:59 PM
Is it your opinion that your opinion is better informed on this than that of the professional pollsters?

I think its off, call it common sense, hunch, or whatever you want. I would not form an opinion based on this data. I base this on my knowledge of southern people, and its nothing to do with an embarrassment or shame. Its simply the numbers extrapolated out mathematically do not match up to my experience, a caution flag goes up and I question the validity. Extrapolation is sometimes not accurate and sometimes very far off.[/quote]
IN other words, your opinion is based on your opinion, while their results are based on 2400 phone calls.

Now I get it.

PeterSibley
08-07-2009, 07:03 PM
While it may be true that 50% of Southerners believed Obama was born in the US, 20% believed he wasn't, and 30% "weren't sure," the survey also produced results of 50% "sure was," 20% "sure wasn't," and 30% "not sure" on the question, "Is Hawaii a state?"

:eek::eek::eek: !!

johnw
08-07-2009, 08:53 PM
Hey cool! Yet another anti-southerner thread for the giddy little bigots of the Wooden Boat Forum. And they have a survey and everything!!! :D

What fun!!! :D :cool: :D

So, tell me, is the poll result anti-Southern? I'd say it's just a fact. What opinions people hold based on that fact can be anti-Southern, but the poll result is just one more stubborn fact.

If, for example, Southerners think Obama was born outside the US because they think Hawaii is not a state, the problem is geography rather than racism. If they think Hawaii is not a state because Obama was born there, that would be another interesting result.

It's been more than 20 years since I've lived in the South. That's why I asked those currently living in the South what their opinion is on the reason for this poll result. Pefjr thinks it's another example of Northern Liberals oppressing the South. What do you think is the cause of this remarkable poll result?

To be honest, I had thought the birthers were a fringe phenomenon everywhere. I'm quite surprised by the poll result.

John Smith
08-08-2009, 08:13 AM
:eek::eek::eek: !!
Guess that means they're not so much racist as just plan stupid.