Wednesday's NYT/CBS poll on the 18 percent of Americans who identify themselves with the tea-party movement was myth-busting in certain ways. Tea-partiers are wealthier and more educated than most Americans, the poll found. They are largely disinterested in the existence of a third party. And they don't particularly care about social issues (three-fifths favor some form of legal recognition for same-sex couples).
Another stereotype, however, rings true: tea-partiers are disproportionately attached to, and perhaps influenced by, FOX News. And they are particularly enamored of Glenn Beck. Nationally, just 18 percent of people have a favorable opinion of Beck (the majority have no opinion whatsoever about him). But most tea-partiers do. Do the math, and you'll find that 59 percent of those who do think highly of Beck consider themselves a part of the tea-party. This is, in fact, the single biggest differentiator of any of the items that the NYT asked about: not ideology, not any particular political belief, but whom they watch on television:
Relatedly, about half of those who get most of their news from FOX consider themselves part of the tea-party. This compares with 37 percent of those who identify as Republican.
This does not necessarily mean that the tea parties have become an offshoot of FOX News -- an allegation that liberals throw around a bit too loosely. But FOX, and particularly Beck's program, have become intimately intertwined with the movement. Indeed, once one begins to think of the tea parties through this paradigm, everything else starts to fit together. The tea-partiers skew older and college-educated: that's basically the cable news demographic.
Their viewpoints, too, reflect the general tenor of FOX News, whose hosts frequently assert that Obama is socialist or extremely liberal, but are often circumspect in providing evidence for those claims. The tea-partiers, likewise, are deeply distrustful and in fact quite angry at government -- but have more trouble at putting their finger on exactly why. They aren't especially likely to want Roe versus Wade overturned, for instance, or to favor restricted rights for gays, or to be preoccupied with illegal immigration, or to think their taxes are unfair, or to want Medicare and Social Security undone. It's mostly, rather, in the way that all these events fit into their meta-narrative about American society, a society which they see as leaving them increasingly victimized and disempowered.
This meta-narrative -- especially when articulated by Beck -- may have conspiratorial undertones. But the tea-partiers aren't especially likely to believe in outright, specific instances of conspiracy. "Only" 30 percent believe Obama was born in a foreign country, for instance, and only a small minority think violent action against the government is justified. (A possible exception: if one regards disbelief in global warming as concomitant with a belief in a global warming 'conspiracy', that is one of the more characteristic beliefs of the movement.)
Academic studies have found that FOX News in fact has quite a bit of ability to persuade voters and reformulate public opinion. That Beck (whose program debuted one day before Barack Obama's inauguration) has become one of its prominent voices may help to explain why the tea-parties have become so influential, and why public opinion appears to have shifted so dramatically within the past 18 months. FOX may, or may not, have a role in directly promoting the tea-parties. But its opinion programming has become the water-cooler around which the tea-partiers gather.
4.16.2010
Tea Party Bears Beck's Imprint
by Nate Silver @ 3:38 AM...see also beck, fox news, media theory, msm, tea parties
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)




441 comments
SCARY... this shows how large a responsibility rests on the shoulders of the media and its representatives. It would be great if media would bring news as objective as possible allowing people to make their own choices.
"This does not necessarily mean that the tea parties have become an offshoot of FOX News -- an allegation that liberals throw around a bit too loosely."
Could you say a little more about this? I'm not in the US so my information about this is somewhat filtered, but this seems plausible from what I've seen (eg "FNC TAX DAY TEA PARTIES" BANNERS http://mediamatters.org/research/200904090038 ). You've written very eloquently here about what ties the teabaggers to Fox, could you say more about what separates them?
Funny and scary because to an outside observer, it's pretty obvious that Glenn Beck is nothing more than a circus clown. The fact that people take him seriously says maybe our education system isn't very good at teaching critical-thinking skills.
Again, how reliable is the poll and what's the incentive for TP'ers to tell the truth w/their answers as one would think 80% or more love Beck as fixednoise is the #1 sponsor of TP'ers, along w/wealthy Rep backers/funders.
ie fixed begets TP'ers er a self-fulfilling prophecy as one must take into consideration fixed, winger talk radio, and racist blogs were calling Obama a Communist, Marxist, Socialist, Islamo-Fascist, wealth distributor, Satan, The Devil Incarnate, The Anti-Christ, Muslim who was born in Kenya and wakes up every morning hating America, yada yada yada, as early as Feb/March 2008, long before he got the nomination.
and fixed continues to lie 24/7 as they preach to the choir, knowing who butters their bread.
This is not rocket science ~ 60 million voted for McCain and a good % of these yahoos are really, really upset an African/American family is living in the White House as Barbour, McDonnell et al sour loser, sour grape, whining racists are still fighting the American Civil War.
World opinion of America turned positive as Obama won the election after (8) years of cowboy diplomacy and what must knowledgeable/educated foreigners be thinking now that TP'ers have reared their ugly head.
Indeed interesting conservatives were never motivated enough to protest in America until an African/American was elected president.
And then the birthers, 10thers, deathers, truthers, teabaggers, secessionists, etc. came rushing out of the closet lol
>
>
>
coinkydink, you decide! ;)
"if one regards disbelief in global warming as concomitant with a belief in a global warming 'conspiracy', that is one of the more characteristic beliefs of the movement"
One should. It is not possible to reject anthropogenic global warming without supposing a grand conspiracy between scientists and government.
If these guys are educated, it leaves me to wonder where their education came from. Liberty University maybe?
This is an old stunt. Invent some catchy moniker, "Silent Majority", anyone?
Then you pump astroturf rightwing money into it to bus those crowds of unemployed drywallers and spray painters left high and dry by a building trades bust around the country with a bevy of addled retirees intent on keeping gubmint hands off their medicare and add the nations understated but still pervasive negrophobia and...voila your tea party is ready Mr Beck...
Serve it forth.
The 'educated' part is cute and speaks volumes of the diminishing returns of over emphasized education.
The angry white men will peel away when and if they get to resume their building trades work and the addled geezers will go back to their living rooms to wallow in their delusions as new hate spew oozes from the idiot box that fewer and fewer people watch with each passing year.
The tell is how apeshit the troll mob here goes whenever a whiff of suggestion that they racist boobs wafts across the news cycle.
I also find it telling that a near instant tone down and make over happened after they made a spectacle of themselves in the tense days just before Health care got the votes.
How likely is it that a supposedly large sprawling and decentralized thing would turn on a dime and pipe down after spilling the beans?
And one useful indice of a big fail is how Fux News doesn't crow about these media events when the anticipated big crowd numbers turn puny on them.
It is like the pump and dump ploy we see with Wall street shills plugging crappy stocks.
Roger Ailes, DICK Cheney and Karl Rove should be ashamed. To have Koch Industries behind this group seems average to me, they hate everyone but themselves, but to have people who claim to be thinking individuals simply stimulate fervor in fearful individuals who fear change is really a bad way to spend a life.
Dick, Karl and Roger are old and fat, may they can find a better place soon.
I think it's worth pointing out that there's a good chance that a great many of these numbers might change a lot if instead of polling people that "identify with the tea party" it looked at people who actually have attended one or more tea party rallies. It's just a hunch, but I'd like to see some data on that.
Well at least Glen Beck is rational and a reasonable fellow...
If they are not embarrassed to be associated with Glen Beck they are not going to be embarrassed by Obama as Hitler posters.
Nice article! Good read for the morning.
"FOX may, or may not, have a role in directly promoting the tea-parties."
Really? It may not? From what I've seen there isn't much room for that sort of weaseling.
'While discussing the April 15 protests on his April 6 program, Glenn Beck suggested that viewers could "[c]elebrate with Fox News" by either attending a protest or watching it on Fox News. Beck stated that in addition to himself, hosts Neil Cavuto, Greta Van Susteren, and Sean Hannity would be "live" at different protests. While Beck spoke, on-screen text labeled those protests as "FNC Tax Day Tea Parties."'
http://mediamatters.org/reports/200904080025
The Beck thing is just sad. I really just feel pity for people who are so completely lost as to accept political marching orders from a dimwitted, unstable shock jock.
First, anyone who gives credence to this obviously asinine NYT poll is himself an ass. So, that's you, 538. This might be the most credulous write-up of this poll I have seen - these clowns are "better educated" than most Americans but they also love Glenn Beck...can someone connect the dots here, since 538 won't? I mean, Jesus Christ, it doesn't take a college grad to know those two things are ANTITHETICAL. If 538 wants to act wide-eyed and innocent and give credit to a "movement" that is manifestly proud of ignorance and chock-full of folks who think free speech includes a right to be completely wrong, then 538 is going to be crossed off my list of essential reading.
The few times that I have seen a Beck show, he did come across as sort of a clown. He gave a great speech at CPAC, however, which included a segment about how our foreign adventurism is unsustainable and bankrupting us. If you go to a Tea Party rally, you will find signs to the same effect. So on the big government, fiscal responsibility issue, at least he's not a hypocrite like W/Cheney and the GOP Congress that spent this country into bankruptcy.
BTW, this Tea Partier went to Northwestern, not Liberty. Open your minds to what is going on. You don't have to agree, but you often delude yourselves about the political climate and the nature of your opponents.
I've watched Beck a few times too, and I find his arguments to be completely superficial. He somehow gets away with making snide, sarcastic remarks which makes his opinion "sound" like truth. Last time I saw the show, it was a town hall where someone asked the president about taxes. Beck insulted obama, and then fast forwarded through the entire answer. His conclusion: Obama is too long winded. How is that helping America when you're not even showing the other side of the debate? Just yelling at it?
So what I don't understand is how can teapartiers be on average smarter than most americans, yet still admire Glenn Beck?
"FOX may, or may not, have a role in directly promoting the tea-parties."
I'm not really seeing the "may not" here. It's pretty clear that FOX, as the media organ of the GOP, is in fact directly promoting the tea party ignorance.
Open your minds to what is going on. You don't have to agree, but you often delude yourselves about the political climate and the nature of your opponents.
Well, they would except that it's much funner to just sit in an echo chamber with like-minded individuals and make bitingly sarcasting remarks and insults while issuing charges of "racism", "homophobia", etc.
"Opening" their minds would actually require a bit of effort, and you're not going to see much of that from the close-minded, ignorant hard-left crowd.
Nate:
Tea-partiers are...more educated than most Americans, the poll found....Another stereotype, however, rings true: tea-partiers are disproportionately attached to, and perhaps influenced by, FOX News.
The former and the latter are related. The only other TV or radio news which approaches Fox News in content is NPR.
Also of note, the poll seems to indicate that Tea Party folks pay far closer attention to what is going on with their government than are the average adults. That may have more than a little to do with their voracious consumption of news.
And they are particularly enamored of Glenn Beck. Nationally, just 18 percent of people have a favorable opinion of Beck (the majority have no opinion whatsoever about him).
This is highly misleading. Adults predominantly have never heard of Beck or have no opinion of him.
This does not necessarily mean that the tea parties have become an offshoot of FOX News -- an allegation that liberals throw around a bit too loosely. But FOX, and particularly Beck's program, have become intimately intertwined with the movement.
Fox provided the first and the only favorable coverage of the Tea Party. The Dem media like the NYT has spent its time spreading BS slanders against them. Which do you think the TP folks would watch?
Beck caught onto the Tea Party movement from the outset and has completely dedicated his shows to their issues. This is called developing an audience.
Their viewpoints, too, reflect the general tenor of FOX News, whose hosts frequently assert that Obama is socialist or extremely liberal, but are often circumspect in providing evidence for those claims.
Circumspect? Go watch Special Report for news and Hannity/Beck for commentary. They have spent hundreds of hours detailing Mr. Obama's administration and programs. They are providing what the Tea Party folks want to consume.
The tea-partiers, likewise, are deeply distrustful and in fact quite angry at government -- but have more trouble at putting their finger on exactly why.
LMAO! A month ago, the Tea Party in Colorado Springs spent three hours grilling every GOP statewide candidate on every issue from the particulars of Obamacare to local military eminent domain policy.
During the townhall meetings, the Tea Party folks were busy quoting the Obamacare legislation to their clueless Congress critters who had not even read the bill.
Nate, you may want to actually do some research on the movement beyond perusing polls. The Tea Party is larger than labor, the greens and the anti-war movement combined - and we vote. The TEa Party is going to have a very significant impact on the elections, so you may want to get this right.
You may also want to go beyond the headline Tea Party data in the poll. There is a tremendous amount of data showing a large movement in the adult population away from government. The Tea Party is simply the purest expression of this movement.
It's an echo chamber, a hall of mirrors with zero negative feedback.
What can you expect.
Given that original premise, all the Beckster and Fox Noise has to do is the time honored method of telling the Big Lie: Start with a grain of the truth, add your lies.
With no negative feedback to challenge the false assertions, the little acorn grows to this oak.
@ Bart
Hope you got my apology for double counting the Bush I $1.4 Trillion deficit.
And hope got the $8.3 Trillion corrected number for the total National Debt rang up by the last three GOP admins.
Quite artful of you to try to use the WH's own budget numbers, that ignored the Social Security IOU's, in the calculation, just so it would make your GOP deficits look smaller. Love the shyster tactic.
Of course, then you'll come back later and bitch about those IOU's not being paid back
when YOU need that SS money!
Hope those kinds of tactics work better in court than here.
LOL!
Yeah, well. We've lived through eras of sensationalized and politicized media before, in which powerful interests sought to incite or manipulate public opinion for their own purposes. Rupert Murdoch, meet William Randolph Hearst.
Lon story short, if we get another Citizen Kane out of this, it will have been worth it.
"however, which included a segment about how our foreign adventurism is unsustainable and bankrupting us. If you go to a Tea Party rally, you will find signs to the same effect."
So explain why none of these people made a sound when the previous administration got us into our current "adventures" but is going ape shit at the current one who has pledged to get us out?
No sale.
I think its important to remember that old technology adage: garbage in, garbage out. Just because a tea partier watches 8 hours of Fox News a day, that doesn't mean they are receiving anything that is objectively true. Keep in mind that 98% of tea partiers polled a few months back incorrectly stated that Obama had either raised their income tax, or kept it the same. This is objectively false. I read things about the rising tide of tax anger, but nobody mentions that taxes are lower now than under Reagan, who actually does get treated like a messiah by many on the right.
I am glad that the tea partiers don't care about social conservatism, but they share the same affliction: holding objectively false beliefs while shutting off any sort of rational debate. This I think is the more empirically-friendly liberal's biggest problem with the tea party.
Nate,
You said that "unfair taxes" is not one of the specific Tea Party complaints, but unlike the other items on your list, I don't see an question about that in the poll. In fact, anecdotally I would say that comcerns about taxes are the single issue that covaries most with Tea Party identification.
It's an echo chamber, a hall of mirrors with zero negative feedback.
Was this in reference to the Tea Party or 538? I wasn't sure...
Chaboard,
Don't understand your being mystified?
Young Bushie was THEIR boy! Wouldn't be prudent to diss HIM!
BUT, as soon as the voters hand off the freakin' mess to the opposite party, AND to a BROTHER no less, well DAMN!
Time to go apeshit!
Steve851,
I don't feel deluded about the nature of the Tea Party, I attended our local Tea Party (the first one).
A bunch of angry white people who certainly are not representative of the American population at large.
Also, a rather small group if you ignore the propaganda about how many are showing up at their rallies (a large rally of 50,000 = 1 million plus to the Tea Partiers).
No wonder you think the Tea Party is more powerful than it is.
I am also not under the delusion that any changes need to be made to accomodate the Tea Party. One of their demands -- to defund and reverse the recent Health Care overhaul.
Good luck with that, we have elections and your side lost. Try again next time (and if your candidates do win, will they reverse Health Care Reform?).
For now get used to being in the minority and exercising your right to free speech, but don't think you should receive any special accomodation, no one in the Bush White House cared a whit for what the Democratic voters or progressives wanted from government.
At the very least, you could thank President Obama for cleaning up the mess left behind by the "conservative" Bush Jr administration.
NOT 538!
As long as we've got MR and BDP and Charles and brian to keep us "honest", no echo chamber here!
No such feedback in in the TP, though.
You know disrespect, can't connect, it's no object.
C'mon, c'mon. Fight the power!
Bring it, baby, bring it.
I do what's good for me. You do what's good for you.
Let's get it started. HA!
Yo. You want to bring the crazy? I got your Tea Party. I got your crazy shit in here. Yeah, freedom is just that, no time for slap back. No time for that Jack. Get off your ass.
Time to rhyme. Forget time. Time to get down. Time to reach out to the masses. No classes. Everlasting. Undulating exclamation of justification. Everybody, get with it. Don't quit it. You know what I'm talkin' about.
Everybody
Everybody
Yeah, it's clear.
Let's get retarded. HA!
Troll mobbing ape shittery is a fairly pervasive phenomenon around the web. Daily paper sites, national opinion columns and so on will get mobbed by trolls and sock puppets pounding away on rote talking points.
There are probably party centers where the bored hacks discovered a great way to manipulate opinion on the work shift.
Don't be surprised if we one day discover comment mobbing to be a new 'tool' of tools as a cheap way to load the dice.
We need filistro to paint a whimsy story picture of a day at the troll mob shift.
Hey, Mr. Evidence there!
When you chide liberals for throwing around allegations "throw around a bit too loosely," could you like, quote a single incorrect claim? Maybe throw up a stat or two explaining why liberals are "a bit" off-base when asserting something that is very consistent with the premises you're in the middle of elucidating?
I know everyone's default position is that liberals are shrill and overthink everything, but I expect more rigor from you. It's almost as if you are throwing allegations around a bit too loosely. Fer chrissake.
Wow,
Every response to this post has been a morning post. The trolls are out in force. Does that mean the respondents at 538 are all morning Republicans?
I can guarantee that I am an evening liberal. Good Night.
@filistro
I'll stay awake a little longer for you
Nate: "Only" 30 percent believe Obama was born in a foreign country, for instance, and only a small minority think violent action against the government is justified
I think both these points are a bit misleading.
Based on my research, I think more than 80% are to some extent birthers." Many do agree that Obama may well have been born in Hawaii (though they'd still like to see the "long form") but they have a tortuous argument involving the difference between "native born" and "natural born" that argues citizenship descends through the patrilineal and you cannot be a natural-born citizen, even if born in America, if your father was a foreign national.
It is utterly nuts, but Teapers mostly believe the Obama presidency is illegitimate because of birth issues.
Second, ALL of them believe "violent action against the government is justified." This in fact is their single unifying ideal, a noble and patriotic dream. That's why they need their guns, in case they ever need to rise up against their government! I do agree a majority probably don't see themselves actually doing it... but they all feel (and constantly tell each other) that a time may come when it will be "justified."
But of course only a few of them are crazy enough to say that to a pollster.
Unless you start removing your posts.
But the tea-partiers aren't especially likely to believe in outright, specific instances of conspiracy. "Only" 30 percent believe Obama was born in a foreign country
I realize you're being a bit sarcastic, but I should point out that rejecting birtherism does not imply rejecting conspiracy theories. Glenn Beck has dissed the birthers, but he certainly has promoted other conspiracy theories. Birthers are really a tip of the iceberg. They've received so much attention that many right-wingers are frankly embarrassed by being associated with them, but that doesn't mean they don't have a fundamentally paranoid, conspiratorial view of the world. I would be interested to see tea-partiers asked what role they think ACORN played in the 2008 election.
Have to organize our Coffee Party for next week today. Would like to eet Sarah Palin. Doubt that will happen but I am sure she'll know our presence.
MrU... Would like to eet Sarah Palin
LOL...
sweetie... get some sleep!
Oh sorry. MEET Sarah Palin. An unfortunate typo.
Other way to look at this:
50% do not blame Congress for the economy
50% aren't angry about government
51% get most of their news not from FOX
54% don't like Ron Paul
55% don't think Obama is "very liberal"
57% don't think Obama has "expanded government too much"
57% think government can be trusted
58% don't usually or never vote Republican
59% think global warming exists
60% approve of Obama
60% have an unfavorable opinion of Sarah Palin
62% have an unfavorable opinion of George Bush
63% do not identify as Republican
63% don't think Obama's policies favor the poor
64% think the stimulus did not make the economy worse
64% don't think the deficit is the most important problem
People see the long little red lines next to those points and it's called a "confirmation bias," Nate. Maybe if you'd flipped this around and said "Most Tea Partiers don't like Sarah Palin/like Obama/ believe in global warming/think the stimulus worked" that would've made more sense (and been true.)
Instead you highlight the Beck part as the most interesting conclusion of this.
Did you hear Bill Maher say Palin and Bachmann are both MILF's...
Morons I'd Like to Forget
@filistro
Right. Good night.
Kyle, I think thats the percentage of people who DO believe each of those statements who ALSO are tea partiers.
Nate writes:
"They [Tea-partiers] are largely disinterested in the existence of a third party."
I think you mean uninterested.
("Disinterested" means impartial)
"Nationally, just 18 percent of people have a favorable opinion of Beck (the majority have no opinion whatsoever about him). But most tea-partiers do. Do the math, and you'll find that 59 percent of those who do think highly of Beck consider themselves a part of the tea-party"
Does this really follow? 59 percent of those who think highly of Beck consider themselves part of the tea-party does not mean that 59 % of tea-partiers think highly of Beck. What's the relative size of each of these bars in terms of % of tea-partiers?
@Chris.. We need filistro to paint a whimsy story picture of a day at the troll mob shift.
I laughed when I read this... because halfway through your post I already had a vivid mental image of Pete Kent reporting for work at the troll center with hard hat, lunch pail, and a pile of well-thumbed nudie magazines to read during coffee break.
Man, it would be a tough job, though, wouldn't it? Imagine a typical shift, working with brian, MidPointMan, Rudy, Mule Rider... all that white-hot anger trapped in one room would be enough to create spontaneous combustion.
Have to agree with those questioning the credibility/reliability of this poll.
Sixty percent of teabaggers DO NOT disapprove of Obama???
That's a major stretch. He's the central focus of their anger.
Also note that you're reporting these numbers with a certain glass-half-full logic. For example, if 60% of tea-partiers support benefits for same-sex couples, that implies that 40% do not--which suggests that social conservatives, while not necessarily a majority of the movement, still constitute a substantial portion. I think Glenn Greenwald's observations from 2009 still stand:
Far more interesting than Beck himself is the increasingly futile effort to classify the protest movement to which he has connected himself. Here, too, confusion reigns. In part, this is due to the fact that these "tea party" and "9/12" protests are composed of factions with wildly divergent views about most everything. From paleoconservatives to Ron-Paul-libertarians to LaRouchians to Confederacy-loving, race-driven Southerners to Christianist social conservatives to single-issue fanatics (abortion, guns, gays) to standard Limbaugh-following, Bush-loving Republicans, these protests are an incoherent mishmash without any cohesive view other than: "Barack Obama is bad." There are unquestionably some highly noxious elements in these groups, but they are far from homogeneous. Many of these people despised the Bush-led GOP and many of them loved it.
They probably do red bull and jaegermeister shots to get in the proper white hot frenzy and manage the appropriate clumsy reasoning fabrications.
There is like a manic depression cycle, you've probably noticed too.
The mobbing intensifies in the lead up point to something they are outraged about and then when it all falls flat on its face...just the crickets.
But as hope springs eternal, a few days of recovery ensue where the watch video of Beck crying to recharge the frenzy, then it's off to the races again.
Here in Massachusetts, the Brown election was marked by busloads of insta crowds from a vast region. Bus charters aren't cheap and someone has to do all the dispatch logistics.
I also wouldn't be surprised if poll respondents identifying as Tea Baggers, exaggerate their accomplishments as exaggeration to the point of quasi comic hyperbole does seem to be their predilection.
Well educated might mean successful completion of a small engine repair course at a correspondence school found in the back pages of a spider man comic book.
The last Nate post that alluded to Negrophobia as a major TP aspect got more than 500 hissing and sputtering troll denials with an unusual shrillness because, absent their coherence and logic at any other notable grievance, the only remaining sore spot seems to relate to the president's decision to put an 'x' in the African American box on his census form.
very interesting..... I should point out a possible error in the number you have for the Tea Party identifiers disapproval of Obama...... you had 40%..... that is, in fact the number for the non Tea Party sample..... the TP's gave Obama a 7% approval and an 88% disapproval (according to the NYT site)..... I may be wrong, but the 40% seemed awfully low, which is why I went to the source.......
It takes a lot to change viewers' habits, and the networks losing share have alienated viewers by insulting their intelligence, both in content and presentation.
People watch Fox News because it generally presents the news in a more rational, logical and understandable manner. It is a superior product. The other networks have lost viewers because they have lost contact with their viewers' values, opinions and intelligence, becoming increasingly vapid, condescending and irrelevant.
No one is forcing people to turn the dial. They do so voluntarily, not becasue of some imagined mind-control tactics.
The poll result indicating that only 59% of Teapartiers have a favorable view of Glen Beck shows his relevancy is only incidental, not causative. I think most view him as someone who is jumping to the front of a parade and pretending to lead it.
Probably about 1/4 to 1/3 of the teabaggers are Ron Paulers, right? And Ron Paulers tend to be more educated than the average American (though their "solutions" are as impractical, scary and (thankfully) impossible as ever).
The Ron Paulers are strongly anti-war whereas the rest of the teabaggers are always itching to start the next war (and of course, they don't want to pay for it). If only the Democrats had a clue, they would use the war issue to drive a wedge into the teabaggers and split them.
I think you guys have misread the numbers.
They way Nate presented them is "of all the people who disapprove of Obama" (so that is your universe, people who disapprove) "40% are tea party supporters".
It does NOT follow that 40% of tea partiers are disapproving- in fact it could be 100% that disapprove.
This just tells you, given an opinion, how likely is that person to be a tea partier.
Nate's point is that having a favorable opinion of Glen Beck is an easy way to identify someone who is a tea party member. The numbers bear that out, but the math some are trying to do here doesn't line up with how he presented the figures above.
Kyle said :
Instead you highlight the Beck part as the most interesting conclusion of this.
I agree. I was looking forward to a real cerebral piece by Nate, given his track-record and his intellect. This article is such a disappointment.
To put it another way (in probably plainer English)
If I tell you that someone has a favorable opinion of Glen Beck, I have a 60% chance of guessing right if I assume they are a TP supporter.
If, on the other hand, I tell you that someone disapproves of Obama, I have a 40% chance of guessing right if I assume they are a TP supporter.
In neither case can I tell you what percentage of TP supporters hold a particular view however. Hope this clears up my last post.
@MuleRider
Liberal: [lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl] –adjective:
open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
con·serv·a·tive [kuhn-sur-vuh-tiv]
–adjective:
disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
just by pure word definition are you wrong
"Chaboard said...
"however, which included a segment about how our foreign adventurism is unsustainable and bankrupting us. If you go to a Tea Party rally, you will find signs to the same effect."
So explain why none of these people made a sound when the previous administration got us into our current "adventures" but is going ape shit at the current one who has pledged to get us out?
No sale."
right on
Here's what I don't get. These are largely college educated boomers yet they make grammar-school spelling errors. They throw around words like socialism, communism, Marxism and Nazism as generic synonyms for what they see as anti-Americanism, without understanding that these terms are each discrete ideological positions very different from one another.
They see no contradiction in opposing national healthcare yet are fiercely protective of their own government-run Medicare and Social Security.
And to top it all, they get their views from one pretty outrageous cable network.
Excuse me but I want to see the transcripts on these Partiers. I want to see the grade point averages. The college experience can't make you a scholar on its own but it does give you perspective, not to mention the basics of doing research at the library (now Google) and looking words up in a dictionary.
"Mule Rider said...
It's an echo chamber, a hall of mirrors with zero negative feedback.
Was this in reference to the Tea Party or 538? I wasn't sure..."
well you can look at it this way too. When one side completely shuts out all logical converstaion based on empirical evidence, scientific evidence, and pure facts - yes, sometimes we HAVE to talk to eachother about the truth, because no one else is listening!!!!
But I digress....get your 'party' together, have them study ACTUAL FACTS and lets talk. then we can have a discussion.
There's more to the teabaggers than Beck and FOX. Here's a list of nine of the sponsors of the Contract From America:
The Freedom Works board includes former Republican majority leader Dick Armey and Bush pere cabinet member James Burnely.
The Liberty Central board chair is Virginia (Ginni) Thomas, a former associate of Armey who has worked for the Heritage Foundation and the U. S. Chamber of Commerce.
The National Taxpayers Union board includes Republican Kenneth Blackwell, former Ohio Secretary of State and gubernatorial candidate. NTU president Duane Parde founded the corporate consulting firm Phoenix Strategies.
Americans for Tax Reform was founded in 1985 by alleged Jack Abramoff associate Grover Norquist at the request of President Ronald Reagan.
American Solutions is chaired by Newt Gingrich.
Let Freedom Ring founder Colin Hanna has advocated building a fence between the United States and Mexico, and in 2004 distributed videotapes to Pennsylvania pastors touting the personal faith of George Bush.
Fair Tax founder and chair Leo Linbeck is a construction executive and former director and chair of the Dallas Federal Reserve. Founder and finance chair Robert McNair owns the NFL Houston Texans and is an investor and utility executive.
Heartland Institute board chair is Hoover Institution fellow Herbert J. Walberg.
The Next Right is "the place for wired activists to build a new Republican Party." Its founders include a McCain presidential campaign operative and a campaign director of the Republican National Committee.
However, the 'baggers see themselves, they are being coopted by corporate interests and the Republican party establishment, with a dash of wingnut weirdness tossed into the mix. Ironically, what they need most to avoid this are experienced community organizers who know how to keep the interests of the organization front and center.
What surprises me is not the items at the top of the list, but the two items at the bottom.
If someone told me "this person thinks the stimulus made the economy worse and thinks the deficit is the most important problem" and then asked me what are the odds they are a tp supporter, I would have guessed upwards of 80%. Yet it isn't even half that- barely over a 1 in 3 chance.
The same thing for the Sarah Palin and Bush favorables... would have pegged that much higher.
So this means (for those trying to reverse the numbers)
A majority of people who:
Favor Bush
Favor Palin
think the stimulus made the economy worse
and think the deficit is the most important problem
are NOT tp supporters. Frankly that shocks me...
"filistro said...
Did you hear Bill Maher say Palin and Bachmann are both MILF's...
Morons I'd Like to Forget"
amen
Wait. Teabaggers have a 40% disapproval rating. That's lower than the overall numbers.
So Teabaggers like Obama more than the nation in general?
I would imagine that one of the reasons that Tes Party people get their news from Fox is this: it is the one place where they are described as racist or dangerous. Simply put, when the rest of the media starts reporting, instead of offering opinion and commentary with a decided liberal slant, then people will begin to trust them again.
It is all a question of perspective: while I don't support these people, I do understand (and sometimes feel) their anger at being marginalized, criticized and mocked in news reports, by lib comedians and elsewhere. Most on this message board view things from the left-wing end of the spectrum, so eveything to their right is right wing. These tea party activists are right wing, so they see everything to their left as left-wing. Until people start to own up to their biases, then all that happens is shouting and name-calling (on both sides).
What is telling about the comments here comments like "Educated? where, Liberty University" and promoting the idea that if you don't believe the global warming alarmists, then you believe its a conspiracy. You guys are steeped in the propaganda of the left, but only see the other side a steeped in the propaganda of the right.
Bias, bias, everywhere and not a drop of understanding in sight.
@ chris- read my post above.
40% of the people who disapprove of Obama are TPers, but their disapproval rate is much higher.
@uncommon senz
Thanks. Read the piece too quickly.
@Lehman
I disagree.
I think the reason these people are watching Fox is because it already subscribes to their way of thinking. They don't WANT to have alternate versions of their thoughts.
And I disagree that the rest of the media has marginalized the Tea Party. The only ones that really have are the FAR lefties, the rest of them have been giving the Tea Party WAY too much credit in my opinion.
There are too many news organizations that don't check facts and do real research, so when this tea party thing comes out - even some MSM that the righties declare LEFTWING media report on these things as if they are supper important - and a vocal majority.
Sadly, no one but the far lefties have dug around and found out where the Tea Party money is coming from, and where the information they preach comes from.
If only we had more middle ground journalists who would actually dig around a story to get the full picture, and show us everything so we can make up our own mind....
Nate, I love how you just refuse to ever truly call out Fox News and always throw in enough weasel words to make it obvious you didn't bring your spine to the discussion. You remind me of Obama and all those other wannabe liberals who replaced their backbone with a "post partisanship rod" that's about as straight as a wet noodle.
Regarding trolls, echo-chambers, self-reinforcing behavior and information voids, I have a question.
The only right-wing site I go to regularly is Free Republic. I've made an extensive study of Freepers, know a lot of individuals, understand their background and world view, etc. (Like Dian Fossey with her gorillas, I now recognize leaders, family groupings and dangerous rogue individuals.)
At Free Republic if you post a Democratic, progressive, or even mildly liberal opinion, you are almost instantly banned. They even have a IBTZ game, ("In Before The Zot") where they hurry to respond with brutal invective before the offending poster is banned and his/her words removed from the thread.
Are the other rightie sites (RedState, Townhall, Little Green Footballs, Michelle Malkin) all similar? Do they encourage opposing viewpoints and debate, or do they ban them?
Because I think most liberal websites (though I don't go to many of them, either) seem to be more like this one, where opposing viewpoints are accepted, and debate is lively and constant.
If you're afraid to even SEE somebody's opposing viewpoint, it seems to me you're not all that secure in your own.
Lehman,
Someone else here made a pretty good point about the global warming and conspiracy issue.
They said if you do deny global warming, you necessarily must believe in a conspiracy, because pretty much every scientific organization dealing with the study of climate has reached the conclusion that it is true and caused by man.
So, if global warming is not true, all of those organizations must be in some kind of conspiracy to dupe the public. Otherwise the first thing you have to explain, logically, is why all of these scientist are all finding the same thing.
That doesn't exclude the possibility the deniers could be correct, it just means for that to be true there has to be an explanation for why all of these scientist are saying the same thing.
Lehman,
Good point about biased comments, both sides.
Actually, I would wager that the predominate college grad TPer has a degree in Engineering, or other technical field, and BusAdmin. Both degree requirements have relatively little exposure in the "fuzzy" areas, as no more than a semester or two of government, history social sciences, etc.
Just a guess, no evidence to back up. But I spent 15 years working for a major university, non-teaching role, and my interactions with faculty and students lend much circumstantial evidence for my observation.
Bart DePalma said...
The former and the latter are related.
This is highly misleading.
Fox provided the first and the only favorable coverage of the Tea Party.
Circumspect?
LMAO!
~~~~~~~~~~
Was eagerly awaiting your song and dance ;) thanx for not disappointing!
Again Bart, you're not even trying anymore ...
How bad do CNN's ratings have to be until be just call Fox News watchers--"cable news watchers". Noone is watching the other channels!---unless you count airport TV's.
So lets see--more educated, wealthier, watch cable news. Clearly these people are irrelavant.
@filistro
I think most liberal websites (though I don't go to many of them, either) seem to be more like this one, where opposing viewpoints are accepted, and debate is lively and constant.
I was a regular on Daily Kos for about six months, and if you express any conservative-leaning opinion there, while you won't necessarily be banned, let's just say the people there will treat you as unwelcome.
Why the (feigned?) surprise of TPer's being wealthier than average? Didn't we recently have posts about 15-30 y/o's having little or no savings.
Wouldn't we EXPECT a data group from the OTHER end of the age spectrum to HAVE MORE MONEY?
A post composed largely of "Yeah, duh's".
Yes, the Tea Party is largely a populist, anti-government, anti-DC phenomena, and yes, it's largely, but not exclusively, composed to older, whiter, wealthier Americans who prefer to get their news from Fox as opposed to MSNBC and The Atlantic Magazine.
Also, Glenn Beck, a huge media phenomena himself, is pretty popular with...let's see...older, whiter, libertarian-leaning anti-DC populists...
Man, sometimes I feel like Nate is a vertibale, real-life Robert Langdon, the protagonist from The Da Vinci Code, he's so good at uncovering arcane clues and solving labyrinthine mysteries!!!
Kylopod... I was a regular on Daily Kos for about six months, and if you express any conservative-leaning opinion there, while you won't necessarily be banned, let's just say the people there will treat you as unwelcome.
Thanks, that's interesting, and I've made a note of it.
Personally (speaking as a leftie) I think 538 would be a pretty drab place without the right-wing regulars. It's hard to learn anything new if everybody is just constantly reinforcing each other's beliefs... and at this site I learn something new every day.
K. said...
The Freedom Works board ~ Dick Armey and Bush pere cabinet member James Burnely.
The Liberty Central board ~ Virginia (Ginni) Thomas, a former associate of Armey who has worked for the Heritage Foundation and the U. S. Chamber of Commerce.
The National Taxpayers Union board includes Republican Kenneth Blackwell, former Ohio Secretary of State and gubernatorial candidate.
Americans for Tax Reform ~ Grover Norquist
American Solutions is chaired by Newt Gingrich.
Let Freedom Ring ~ founder Colin Hanna
Fair Tax founder and chair Leo Linbeck, Robert McNair
Heartland Institute board chair is Hoover Institution fellow Herbert J. Walberg.
The Next Right is "the place for wired activists to build a new Republican Party." Its founders include a McCain presidential campaign operative and a campaign director of the Republican National Committee.
However, the 'baggers see themselves, they are being coopted by corporate interests and the Republican party establishment, with a dash of wingnut weirdness tossed into the mix. Ironically, what they need most to avoid this are experienced community organizers who know how to keep the interests of the organization front and center.
~~~~~~~~~~
Exactly, as there's no mystery to this Kabuki theater er small teabagger picnic gatherings funded by bigwig conservative groups ... and too funny Blackwell has a job ;) ok Beck, Billo and Hannity also have a job ...
Filistro, stay away from Freerepublic.
It's pretty banal.
Try out Hotair, or better yet, Ace of Spades HQ, to find truly cutting-edge right-wing discourse and thought (and satire and lampoon, which can be delicious).
Lastly, please, Little Green Footballs is NOT right-wing. He's about as "conservative" as Andrew Sullivan.
"filistro said...
Kylopod... I was a regular on Daily Kos for about six months, and if you express any conservative-leaning opinion there, while you won't necessarily be banned, let's just say the people there will treat you as unwelcome.
Thanks, that's interesting, and I've made a note of it.
Personally (speaking as a leftie) I think 538 would be a pretty drab place without the right-wing regulars. It's hard to learn anything new if everybody is just constantly reinforcing each other's beliefs... and at this site I learn something new every day."
But there is a big difference between our conservative brethren here who come forth with facts, and an honest head on their shoulders to set forth a real debate,
and those who, for whatever reason, say tons of factless BS just to hope that one person, somewhere, will turn to their lot.
I think we ALL want the former - a real discussion of topic with facts and a good head on each persons shoulders.
Walker... I come here to learn and think and laugh. I go to Freeperville to do research. (I'm working on a major piece about the effect of social conservatism on the American political process.)
If you want to study pit vipers, you gotta go to the pits :-)
Note to biological purists.. .I KNOW they're called "pit vipers" because of the anatomy of their heads. I just liked the pun.
Interesting point, PoliticalWiz, as I have an engineering degree and a medical degree. Funny thing is, those degrees force one to think in a direct and logical matter, utilizing facts and reproducible phenomena to reach a conclusion.
Don't know what it means, though.
And, UncommonSenz, one fact DOES NOT presuppose the other. I don't find the argument on global warming compelling enough to do things that would adversely effect to economy. I don't think it is some conspiracy to, I don't know, destroy the country, bring it under the New World Order, or any crazy shit like that. I think it is more likely an expectation bias combined with a great deal of cheerleading by well-meaning but clueless celebrities and others who care so much about the environment that they are willing to suspend a little academic rigor.
I realize that these are unpopular views here, but it doesn't make me a conspiracy theorist, just someone who has arrived at a different conclusion.
ANd no, I don't watch Fox News or listen to Glen Beck.... I work too much and when I am not working, I pay attention to my children and wife.
Filistro-
Luckily the discussiona are a little higher brow here. Most places, discussions get ugly pretty quickly--so its best to not even have them. Its nice to go to a site that isn't a constant food fight.
@ Lehman- "I don't find the argument on global warming compelling enough to do things that would adversely effect to economy."
That is entirely different than being a global warming denier. To say the cost of trying to slow global warming outweigh the benefits is perfectly reasonable and logical. I may disagree with it, but the argument is soundly constructed, and it presupposes that there is man made global warming (just not worth drastic action to stop it).
To say "global warming is a hoax", on the other hand, does require a conspiracy from all of the scientist involved who reached the conclusion that it is real.
So no, your argument requires no conspiracy, as it is just a cost benefit analysis. However those who claim it is a hoax, by definition, do require a conspiracy.
@Lehman
the question most of us have here though, is how can you look at the same data that scientists all around the world look at to show how the global warming and weather pattern changing of the earth is very much man made - and come to a completely different conclusion?
And, if you don't come to a different conclusion, but instead just say its better for the world to not hurt the economy for a short while, while letting us destroy the only place we can live... no one see's the logic in that.
So, keep the economy stable from all changes, and let the earth crumble so there will be no economy, or do things that change the way the economy works. change what it relies on, which may hurt if for a short time, but make it stronger in the the long run when our planet can continually be a habitat for us humans.
seems like a pretty logical argument to me.
FreeRepublic = DemocraticUndergound
Big Government/Big Media = Huffington Post
Hotair = Daily Kos
Ace of Spades HQ = ??? Is there a really smart AND funny lefty blog??
???? = 538.com
I guess, Lehman, my biggest question to you is this:
if you do believe that global warming is man made, and will give the world many problems in the future, how can any cost analysis that doesn't take in the effect of no society to have an economy in the future can have any logical basis.
Lehman said...
I would imagine that one of the reasons that Tes Party people get their news from Fox is this: it is the one place where they are described as racist or dangerous.
~~~~~~~~~~
Again, (60) million voted for McCain and being generous (2.8) million watch fixed in prime time. Whereas liberals want to be entertained by AI, CSI, reality TV etc. a small group of conservatives watch Fox News to be entertained as they preach to their choir. Congrats to Fox for catering to this lowbrow niche.
Median Age of Fox News Viewers is 65 – Average Dittohead Is a 67 Year Old Man
and Bias, bias, everywhere and not a drop of understanding in sight.
Indeed ;) as it's a meaningless throwaway line signifying nothing, but yes TP'ers are right wing ie reality!
brian... the best thing about a site like this is all the fraternizing with the enemy. People here may argue vigorously but they don't tend to dislike each other on a personal basis.
There's not a single winger at this site whom I actively dislike. I find this is true in most of life... if you ever make the mistake of chatting with somebody on a human level, it's hard to keep hating them.
Nate's site often reminds me of that true story during WWI when the two sides suspended firing on Christmas Eve, climbed out of their trenches and got together for an hour or two in No-Man's-Land to sing Christmas carols, exchange cigarettes and admire pictures of each other's kids.
Walker said...
FreeRepublic = DemocraticUndergound
Big Government/Big Media = Huffington Post
Hotair = Daily Kos
Ace of Spades HQ = ??? Is there a really smart AND funny lefty blog??
???? = 538.com
~~~~~~~~~~
Hopefully you feel better now ;) and thanx for sharing!
@filistro
Keep in mind that 538 is a relatively limited blog, where only a few select people are allowed to post articles, and they are generally liberal-leaning. The comments underneath articles are more diverse, obviously, but this is simply because the people who run this site aren't interested in taking the time to moderate them.
With sites like Kos, however, the articles themselves, not just the comments, can be written by almost anyone, and for these sites to maintain support for one side (whether left or right), they have to be monitored to some degree. Kos gets a pretty steady stream of trolls, including some outright white supremacists, as well as conspiracy theorists and other nuts, both right and left. The site would be of much lesser quality if it let all this stuff through.
While I have strong anti-censorship instincts, I have to say that in my experience moderated discussions are usually the most intelligent and productive. It's not that these discussions have to ban particular opinions, but when you let anyone post, it's almost inevitable that you'll get people who aren't interested in engaging in the discussion, but who simply are there to have their views heard.
I don't have a problem with debates between conservatives and liberals, but when someone starts posting long discredited stuff about Obama's birth certificate or the Democrats having used the "nuclear option" to pass health care, I don't see that engaging with that person is of much value. It tends to provoke the other side into being more aggressive, and before long, dialogue goes out the window.
Filistro Said:
"Personally (speaking as a leftie) I think 538 would be a pretty drab place without the right-wing regulars. It's hard to learn anything new if everybody is just constantly reinforcing each other's beliefs... and at this site I learn something new every day."
Let me point out that on Tom Schaller's last post, it was the lefties who immediately leaped on the conclusion (small sample size in pre-selected states). So the lefties here have some level of policing themselves. I don't think that's true for Freepers.
Although I'm fairly convinced that Freepers are just 4chan'ers who found a nice site to blow up. I think most of the people who post there are just looking for a fight, and don't actually believe what they're posting.
At least, I hope not.
Lehman, are you me?? Without the medical degree, though...I did once endeavor to be a doctor, though. A proctologist, in fact, but those dreams fell through the cracks. Cue snare crack and cymbol crash.
I, like you, largely see the global warming debate as hyper-politicized and driven by self-interested parties with lots to gain from so-called "consensus".
I wasn't at all suprised to see how slapshod and myopic the global scientists at East Anglia were. It just confirmed my suspicians.
Like you, when the economy and jobs are imperiled by actions to combat global warming, that's when I say, "No, thanks."
JamesY,
As far as I know, noone is claiming that world will crumble. They are postulating that there is a remote chance that the climate changes that are ocurring (or have they stopped? That guy at East Anglia stated that there had been no significant warming in the last 10-15 years) will have an adverse effect on this planet.
As long as people result to exaggerated arguments (on both sides) such as yours, then the discussion will remain as it is, with vehement supporters and just as vehement deniers.
As a writer of scientific papers in two disciplines, I just don't find the arguments to be worth the stated fixes (and their costs). You do. We disagree. I don't want to go off on a rant, but for me, when they can present data that has not been massaged and run through a tree-ring-ice-core-guesstimations-as-to-what-the-climate-was-like-1000years-ago decoder ring, then perhaps it will convince me. I simply know and have seen that you can (and people do) make data say whatever you want it to.
Leave it be.
Oh, and I should add, I think Daily Kos isn't that bad yet, but the comments are still bad. These are people trying to score points, not saying what they believe.
Fily said:
"Nate's site often reminds me of that true story during WWI when the two sides suspended firing on Christmas Eve, climbed out of their trenches and got together for an hour or two in No-Man's-Land to sing Christmas carols, exchange cigarettes and admire pictures of each other's kids."
They also played football (soccer).
Next day they were blowing each other up again.
Walker said...
Lehman, are you me??
I did
A proctologist,
I, like you,
I wasn't
Like you,
I say,
~~~~~~~~~~
I Me Mine
@ walker:
So since the investigation into "climategate" found no evidence of scientific wrongdoing, you of course amended your conclusions right?
If not, it seems kind of ironic that you want to accuse others of trying to reach a predetermined conclusion and ignoring contrary data, while you reach a predetermined conclusion ignoring contrary data.
Lehman,
Well stated, on Global Warming.
James Y,
Let's ask you another question. It is an absolute probability, that at some point in the future, an asteroid or comet will hit the earth, one large enough, that it could wipe out Human Civilization...
Why are we not doing everything we can to stop this event?
As an effort towards truth in advertising, perhaps we can now rename the Tea-Partiers as the "Fox-Beckerites" and the "Fox-Beckerite Movement". Tea is really quite a pleasant beverage and I don't think it is fair to malign it by association with a group of angry white xenophones crying for attention.
Pat said...
Let's ask you another question. It is an absolute probability, that at some point in the future, an asteroid or comet will hit the earth, one large enough, that it could wipe out Human Civilization...
Why are we not doing everything we can to stop this event?
~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, I don't know, probably the same reason we're not doing much to stop hurricanes, cyclones, tornadoes, earthquakes, volcano eruptions ...
just a thought
although Noah did build a boat!
Musing on this further... while I'm actually quite fond of most of our pet wingers, the only people at this site I truly dislike are some of the nasty, humorless, extremely far-lefties, who seem to hate everything and everyone if things aren't going exactly the way they'd like at all times.
Go figure, eh?
(Though I can excuse even these unpleasant guys to some degree because I tend to suspect they're very YOUNG :-)
Hey, has anyone else read this?
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/lakoff_the_poll_democrats_need.php
If you want to know what's REALLY going on in California's political arena, you need to read it.
btw, forgot tsunami, which Bart keeps saying is gonna happen to the Dems in Nov.
Pat said...
Let's ask you another question. It is an absolute probability, that at some point in the future, an asteroid or comet will hit the earth, one large enough, that it could wipe out Human Civilization...
Why are we not doing everything we can to stop this event?
April 16, 2010 11:59 AM
The problem is currently being studied.
Pat said...
"
Let's ask you another question. It is an absolute probability, that at some point in the future, an asteroid or comet will hit the earth, one large enough, that it could wipe out Human Civilization...
Why are we not doing everything we can to stop this event?"
let me add one thing to Shiloh's comment.
The biggest difference between the two scenarios is one is a possible future disaster made by man, while the other is a possible future disaster made by nature.
oh, and scientists around the world ARE trying to devise methods of being able to destroy said comet before it could harm the planet.
but yes, when WE do something that harms the planet we rely on to live...we should fix that!
Pat- Actually there are two big differences.
First off, the probabilities of the two events happening are much different. A consensus of scientific work says that the effects of global warming are already being felt, and are sure to become much worse in the future (how much worse is a subject of great debate). More importantly, there is evidence to suggest that if we wait much longer, we may not be able to stop it at all- so "wait and see" has a great cost to it. There is no consensus of the danger of an asteroid impact, and certainly not a consensus saying it is imminent.
Secondly, we know what we need to do and have developing technologies to combat global warming. We do not have the technology to deal with an asteroid. So, other than saying "hey- go invent something", it is unclear what an effort to prevent an asteroid attack would look like. It is clear what attempts to combat global warming would look like.
Let me add to my last statement: If you REALLY want to know how pollsters are substantially affecting the outcome of elections, you need to read this.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/lakoff_the_poll_democrats_need.php
In the category of being unable to see the forest for the trees, I found the data coming from the general respondent pool of adults in the NY TImes poll far more interesting than the data on the Tea Party folks, none of which is really new.
The most pro Dem group you can poll are adults. If the Dems lose this group, this suggests things are far worse among the actual voters. The very long NYT poll provided a treasure trove of data on this issue:
Q6-8: Disapproval eclipsed approval of Obama's work on the economy starting last January, on health care last summer and the budget deficit last summer.
Q9: Disapproval of the Dem Congress since February is the highest in the history of the NYT polling going back to 1977.
Q10: Support for their own member of Congress is the worst in NYT polling history, with a 36% high in disapproval and a low of 10% more approval than disapproval.
Q13: 77% think the economy is fairly or very bad now compared to 46% at this time before the 1994 wave election.
Q14: People are not buying the spin that the recession is over and things are getting better. 66% think the economy is the same or getting worse.
Q18: People are not buying that the Porkulus made the economy better. 62% think it made no difference or made things worse.
Q21: 78% think that you can only trust the government some of the time or not at all.
Q22-23: This is really interesting. 50% of adults would prefer a smaller government providing fewer services compared to only 37% who want more government services and 58% of those who prefer smaller government are willing to cut social security, medicare, education and defense to get there.
Q49: The Dem media like to portray the assertion that Obama is a socialist advancing socialist policies as a radical fringe position. Actually, this is a majority position. Adults think that Obama policies are moving the nation more towards socialism by a 52% to 38% margin.
@Michael
So what I don't understand is how can teapartiers be on average smarter than most americans, yet still admire Glenn Beck?
There is no evidence that Teapers are "smarter" than the average American.
They are a bit wealthier than average. Which makes sense. Lots of people who have more money tend to be more conservative, because they are scared to death that their taxes will go to helping people who are less fortunate than they.
Since they are wealthier, that means they are more likely to be able to afford college. Which means they are more educated. Of course, we don't know how well they did in college, nor whether most of them went to sham colleges like Liberty U.
Lots of educated people are pretty stoopid.
The NYT poll says Teapers tend to be a bit wealthier and a bit better educated than is average for Americans. Nowhere does it imply they are smarter.
Hello?
Shrinkers?
Filistro?
Shiloh?
Anyone listening out there?
Again, if you want to know how POLLSTERS RIG ELECTIONS, you need to read this.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/lakoff_the_poll_democrats_need.php
Actually shiloh and Pat, we ARE doing practically everything possible to deal with natural events y'all mentioned.
Near Earth observation and identification. Research as to HOW to deflect asteroid, etc.
Tsunami warning buoys and alarms, evac routes, building codes
Same for hurricanes and earthquakes.
Billions spent annually world wide.
Sacto Joe-
Either make your point, or go away.
You posted the same link, with the same inane comments a bunch of times.
Make the point yourself and provide the link as backup. Otherwise you are just spamming...
Okay, maybe that was a slight exaggeration, but hopefully I got your attention.
Seriously, people who read FiveThirtyEight need to read this article.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/lakoff_the_poll_democrats_need.php
BDP said
" The most pro Dem group you can poll are adults."
Is by logical extension of BDP's statement: "The most pro GOP/TP group you can poll children."???
Uncommon Senz, I'm not spamming, I'm trying to get this thread's attention on something very germaine to the whole reason for this blog. Honestly, you need to go read the article for yourself.
I came across this paper just by chance yesterday. To me, it's political dynamite. IMHO, Nate needs to read this, and blog on it. It's that important.
I now return you to your regular broadcast (mainly because I have to go back to work [I owe, I owe, so off to work I go....}).
@Rudy
People watch Fox News because it generally presents the news in a more rational, logical and understandable manner
OMG! You really should take you act on the road! Your material is hilarious!
Just sayin'. You could make a mint as a stand-up. It's brilliant satire, almost as good as Colbert. Kudos!
Sacto, instead of just saying -"go read the article", how about you actually say what it is about the article that you think is so important. Just saying "this is so important- go read it!" doesn't do much. You're hear, you are already typing- make a point. (I have to give credit to BDP for actually doing that in his post above)
@BDP: what you have shown is the ability for the right to win a propaganda war. Income taxes have gone down since Obama took office (for 98% of the public), but do you think that is the public perception? At one point a majority of people thought Iraq had WMD, which obviously isn't true. Again- the right won the messaging war.
So, given the right's ability to stay on message, regardless of the facts at hand, and more importantly, given the media's failure to challenge falsehoods, it does not surprise me.
@Sacto Joe
Fascinating article. Thanks.
Yes, liberals often frame polls in rather conservative ways, in an attempt to be "fair". Conservatives, having no concern for "fairness", tend to frame polls in conservative ways as a matter of course. The result is that opinion polls and issue polls tend to give responses that are far more conservative-leaning than a truly objective polls would be.
Fascinating stuff.
The medium is the message.
Sacto Joe said...
Hello?
Shrinkers?
Filistro?
Shiloh?
Anyone listening out there?
~~~~~~~~~~
All we need to know is the average American voter ain't that bright and ailes/atwater/rove have used this as a basis for their scorched earth hate/fear/division/misinformation presidential campaigns of the last (40+) years.
Again the irony of 9/11, a national security failure helping Bush get re-elected in 2004.
There's nothing new under the sun, only the Reps have been much, much better at presidential campaigns the last 40 years and have picked better national security ~ C-in-C candidates.
Presidential politics is not that complicated and senate/congressional elections are, as a rule, as Tip O'Neill said, mostly local. Which is why the Dems controlled congress from 1954 to 1994 even during Nixon's and Reagan's landslides because locally Dems have the advantage of We the people ...
>
>
>
Bottom line, Obama's team got a young, relatively inexperienced African/American elected the 44th President of the United States of America!
sooo, they know what they're doing.
again, America gets what it deserves ...
Doesn't matter if a disaster is caused by nature. Hurricanes are caused by nature---do we just not bother to build levees then?
Anyway, I'd like to know what is the 2nd biggest environmental problem next to global warming? I want one that I can touch.
PoliticalWiz said...
Actually shiloh and Pat, we ARE doing practically everything possible to deal with natural events y'all mentioned.
~~~~~~~~~~
Actually, that has to do w/warnings and the aftermath and very little to do w/stopping the cause.
ie the (12) steps before a nuclear attack, the last being: put your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye!
shit happens!
take care
Sacto Joe:
Your article reinforces my long-held belief that Frank Luntz is probably one of the most dangerous men in America ;-)
Seriously, though, the comments that follow it reinforce my theory that right and left-leaning mindsets are partly inborn.. and then reinforced by childhood experiences.
Pubs respond with furious aggression to anything they disagree with. Dems tend to be disconcerted by this and always want to give fair-minded reasonable consideration to the opposing view, even when it has no reasonable basis.
Republicans seem to have internalized the childhood message, "It's a tough world out there, kid... you gotta fight for what you want."
Dems are likely people who were taught as children that we should all share our toys, play nicely, get along and "think about how your friend is feeling."
The concept of a dogged, unswerving, give-as-good as-you-get, keep-fighting "tough Democrat" is such an appealing one. (That's why I admire Barack Obama... and why shiloh and shrinkers are both at the top of my "favorite people" list.:-)
Hmm, if you check out the poll results, question 34, "Which political figure in the United States living TODAY do you admire most?" shows Tea Party supporters ranking Glen Beck fairly low - he got 1% of responses, with the top 3 being Don't Know/NA (24%), other (20%), and Newt Gingrich (10%).
I'm not sure how to reconcile this with the idea that the 58% favorable opinion means they are looking to Glen Beck for leadership. Perhaps they don't consider Beck to be a political figure in the same way, and are just stating a favorable opinion of him as a commentator?
I thing these types of polls are only half useful. To make them fully useful would require polling a control group on the same questions, i.e., polling people who do NOT identify with the Tea Party. For example, you may find that in your control group only 10% get most of their news from FOX. That (hypothetical) contrast with the Tea Party is more informative than the isolated, context-less stats that we see here about Tea Partiers.
PredictionsOfMemory said...
I'm not sure how to reconcile this
~~~~~~~~~~
or perhaps some folk aren't very good at filling out questionnaires ...
er clueless
Has anybody here ever actually WATCHED Glenn Beck? I mean not just a soundbite but a whole show, from beginning to end?
I did it once, just for personal edification, and it's really horrific. The idea that anybody would watch this nonsense regularly... and ADMIRE it.. is stark evidence of the depth and vastness of the left-right divide in America.
brian said...
Anyway, I'd like to know what is the 2nd biggest environmental problem next to global warming? I want one that I can touch.
April 16, 2010 12:50 PM
You can touch global warming. Go to the Ganges River and stick your hand in the water. That is the Himalayan glaciers melting. In fact, glaciers all over the planet are disappearing. That is global warming you can touch.
Fili said:
"Pubs respond with furious aggression to anything they disagree with."
Not necessarily the case in my experience. Equal venom on both sides, truth be told. I have suffered teeth-clenched apoplexy from very agitated liberal-progessives who have become mad at me. I was at a a bar and almost got into a fistfight with the brother of a friend who was an Obama partisan. The aggression was all on his side. Eventually the size of my guns compelled him to just storm off in a huff...or maybe it was a minute and a huff.
"Dems tend to be disconcerted by this and always want to give fair-minded reasonable consideration to the opposing view, even when it has no reasonable basis."
Projection! Winsome, sweet, fair-minded souls exist on both sides.
"Republicans seem to have internalized the childhood message, "It's a tough world out there, kid... you gotta fight for what you want."
For me I would say its more like, "Beware of chalatans purring sweet sounding promises. It's best to rely on yourself."
'Dems are likely people who were taught as children that we should all share our toys, play nicely, get along and "think about how your friend is feeling."'
What, Republicans don't believe in sharing toys, playing nicely, or being empathetic?
"The concept of a dogged, unswerving, give-as-good as-you-get, keep-fighting "tough Democrat" is such an appealing one. (That's why I admire Barack Obama... and why shiloh and shrinkers are both at the top of my "favorite people" list.:-)"
Obama is "tough"? Really? I think Pelosi is tough. She pulled Obama's stones out of the fire on the HCB after it dithered in political oblivion for endless months. Obama's kind of passive and a along-for-the-ride type. She saved the bill, not him. His efforts at selling its merits were poor. Please, Obama is not "tough". If he's tough then Bill Clinton was Atilla the Hun Reborn.
Walker said...
His efforts at selling its merits were poor.
~~~~~~~~~~
Again, bottom line, Obama was president when health care reform passed, not Clinton.
How one keeps score politically ~ results vs. failure to achieve results ...
To my detractors on the asteroid bit, vs Global Warming bit...
Both problems are being studied. Yes. Billions thrown into studying the problem. Yes. I have no problem with any of this. Study is always good. And rather cheap in the big picture.
However, when it comes to action, whether it be a massive Apollo type space program, or carbon capping, you're talking about rather large chunks of US or world GDP. And then you want to be sure, and you want to run through a cost-benefit analysis.
For example: Is it worth a 10% reduction in US GDP to hypothetically lower temperatures 1 degree F over the next 100 years?.
Or
Is it worth a 10% reduction in US GDP to reduce that one in a million chance of an asteroid hitting the earth to one in 5 million, over the next 100 years?
@JamesY
if you do believe that global warming is man made, and will give the world many problems in the future, how can any cost analysis that doesn't take in the effect of no society to have an economy in the future can have any logical basis.
This is a little warped, but it's true. Straightforward cost/benefit - -
If we do something now to combat global warming, there is a cost. There is little or no immediate benefit. The present cost has no present advantage.
If we do nothing, and if everybody dies, then there will be no one around in the future to suffer from any cost from having done nothing. Doing nothing, therefore, has no cost to anyone.
Pretty simple, really.
Filistro, do you even read your posts for consitentcy?
We've just had months where people protesting the govt have been called racist T-bagger rednecks--and you're telling me Dems are driven by "think how your friend is feeling"!? Please spare me.
brian said...
do you even read your posts for consitentcy?
~~~~~~~~~~
One of the problems ~ Reps er extreme conservative radicals aren't very consistent so you have a dichotomy of discrepancies er conflicting opinions as wingers argue amongst themselves. ;)
Walker Eventually the size of my guns compelled him to just storm off in a huff...or maybe it was a minute and a huff.
LOL... Walker, I would never include you in my "Generic Republican" file.
As for Obama being tough... toughness is not just talking big and throwing your weight around. Anybody can do that. (Case in point... does anybody in here seriously believe Muley is "tough"?)
Toughness is not giving up, not giving in, just moving quietly forward regardless of the noise around you.
Toughness is living according to these precepts... and every time I read this poem, I think it was written for Barack Obama.
@walker:"What, Republicans don't believe in sharing toys, playing nicely, or being empathetic? "
Not the ones at the microphones, no they don't.
"Empathy" is now a bad word- they have come out and said that any Supreme Court nominee who places any creedence in empathy is a bad justice. They tarred and feathered Sotomayor for that.
As for sharing, look at the recent "the poor aren't paying anything in taxes" charade. So upset that someone who had less is paying less. Same with the HCR debates. Same with "welfare queens" etc. But if you even mention asking the rich to pay more (or for a corporation to give up a subsidy) you are wrecking the economy.
As to playing nicely, and I am sure we will disagree here, the republicans take their cure from the Frank Lutzes of the world. He said the way to win the financial reform debate was to call anything (regardless of what it actually did) a "bank bailout". This is on its face dishonest and manipulative. If you can oppose and label something you have never read, that is not playing fairly- it is baldfaced manipulation. Rove was the master of this for eight years.
@Pat
It is an absolute probability, that at some point in the future, an asteroid or comet will hit the earth, one large enough, that it could wipe out Human Civilization...
Why are we not doing everything we can to stop this event?
Excellent question. I think the answer is, Most people (and therefore, most governments) are shortsighted and stupid.
Actually addressing this possibility, in a big way, would give tremendous benefit to the nation and to the world. The advances in technology and human knowledge alone would be worth the price.
It's sad so few people have the imagination and long sight to engage in these far-reaching programs.
@brian.. We've just had months where people protesting the govt have been called racist T-bagger rednecks-
Brian... nobody has EVER called them T-baggers, that would be silly. (Who knows what these folks do for fun?) They are called Teabaggers because they wear teabags on their hats.
Also, nobody calls them rednecks... in fact, that is the whole purpose of the original post here, to confirm that they are NOT rednecks.
As for racist... well, you spit on black guys and call them n***gers, and for some unknown reason, people go and brand you as racist. It's so unfair, isn't it?
commenting on the left-right debate going on in this thread, I'd like to throw in my 2 cents...
I took a stroll through the Tea Party protest on Boston common on the 15th and I was absolutely shocked by the number of white people there. In the morning I took the T from Oak Grove (a little north of the city) and I was one of 3 white people on my car. 25 minutes later I was standing in the common and I could pick out a handful of people of blacks and Asians in the crowd (and I am counting both the Tea Party protesters and the people protesting the Tea Party)
Why are there so many whites on the common in the morning/ early afternoon?
My hypothesis is that "minorities" are actually the "silent majority". The people making the most noise politically are white (regardless of their political leaning). "minorities" are not well represented in the public discourse because they either exist outside the political sphere or they willfully abstain from political discourse.
BTW I had an excuse for why I was on the common in the early afternoon, I am a student at Suffolk Law (which sits across the street from Boston common) and, because I did not have any classes at the time of the protest, I was free to wander around.
I guess, to summarize my point, the people you actually see, involved in the political discourse are, on the majority, white (and empirically, I believe the percentage of white voices in political discourse is much greater than their percentage on the whole in this country, and much greater than their percentage of registered voters in the United States)
Pat said...
and you want to run through a cost-benefit analysis.
For example: Is it worth a 10% reduction in US GDP to hypothetically lower temperatures 1 degree F over the next 100 years?.
Or
Is it worth a 10% reduction in US GDP to reduce that one in a million chance of an asteroid hitting the earth to one in 5 million, over the next 100 years?
Pat, if the Greenland ice continues to melt at current rates it is likely that many of our coastal cities will be under water in the next 100 years. Not 1 in 5 million. Likely. How much do you think that will cut into our GDP? That is why we need to do something about it.
Of course, the ice might stop melting. In which case we won't have anything to show for the investment besides cleaner air and more sources of renewable energy.
Actually, I've called TP'ers rednecks which reminds me of a 2008 Obama campaign rally in TX of all places ;) where a couple of good ole boys were wearing Rednecks for Obama t-shirts! :)
There are rednecks and then there are rednecks ...
What I think is funny is that they hate governance, and then they blame congress for the bad economy. As if congress had outlawed prosperity or something. What could congress have done differently, regulate? But government is bad! Around and around we go.
filistro said:
As for racist... well, you spit on black guys and call them n***gers, and for some unknown reason, people go and brand you as racist. It's so unfair, isn't it?
No, but it is unfair to label an entire group of people as racist because of the actions of miniscule amount of people. That would be bigotry. Something I thought the left stood against.
The majority of the TP I have seen (and they may be a different form of TP than other parts of the country because I reside in Massachusetts) were 40+ years old, white, suburbanites (mostly from North Shore of Massachusetts communities like Peabody, Swampscott, and Danvers).
Many of the TP were educated, most carried themselves in a respectful manner, but they all had frustration pushing at the seams.
I am not a supporter of the TP but I am not going to let the media perception of the TP interfere with my own percention.
The import of the article I mentioned (and by inclusion the David Binder Research poll that supports it) is that it does in fact give powerful credence to the concept that how a question is asked helps to determine how that question is answered.
From the DBR letter to George Lakoff:
"A simple wording, "All legislative actions on revenue and budget must be determined by a majority vote," receives support from 73% of California voters likely to participate in the November election. This wording mirrors the actual initiative text. A different wording, taken exactly from the masure's title and summary prepared by the State Attorney general, receives support from only 38% of likely voters this November."
Words are weapons, and those that control the words control the weapons.
Now, people who post on this site, be they of the left or right persuasion, are generally (1) intelligent and (2) interested in civil discourse. They are also (3) political animals.
I'd love it if we could acknowledge BOTH sides of an issue and work TOGETHER to find a common means of "framing" it, one that would give that "33%-discrepancy group" an even chance at figuring out the facts before they vote.
But I seriously don't expect it.
@filistro -
Thank you for linking to that Kipling poem. I love Kipling. And I kiple often.
And thanks for the kind words earlier. I admire both your tenacity in exploring Freepers, and the uplifting and lovely turn of phrase you so often execute. I doff my hat, ma'am.
Uncommon Senz said:
""Empathy" is now a bad word- they have come out and said that any Supreme Court nominee who places any creedence in empathy is a bad justice. They tarred and feathered Sotomayor for that."
I don't want a Supreme Court judge to be "empathetic", I want a Supreme Court judge to be fair, aloof, and impartial. To me, it's very odd to describe a judge as "empathetic". The Scales of Justice balance on truth and fairness, not empathy. What is it, some kind of sewing circle?
"As for sharing, look at the recent "the poor aren't paying anything in taxes" charade. So upset that someone who had less is paying less. Same with the HCR debates. Same with "welfare queens" etc. But if you even mention asking the rich to pay more (or for a corporation to give up a subsidy) you are wrecking the economy."
This is a big problem. More people should be paying taxes, including those with more modest incomes. The middle class is paying too much in taxes and should be relieved.
Also, corporations need to pay more too.
Here's an article out today on how GE has just $0 in taxes:
http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/16/news/companies/ge_7000_tax_returns/index.htm
"As to playing nicely, and I am sure we will disagree here, the republicans take their cure from the Frank Lutzes of the world. He said the way to win the financial reform debate was to call anything (regardless of what it actually did) a "bank bailout". This is on its face dishonest and manipulative. If you can oppose and label something you have never read, that is not playing fairly- it is baldfaced manipulation. Rove was the master of this for eight years."
Legislators should read the bills put before them. Sadly, they don't. They don't even write them. Lobbyists do. Anger at Lutz is missplaced, in my opinion. He's a political operative and message framer. The Dems have their own, but not as talented:
http://www.buyingofthepresident.org/index.php/interviews/jim_margolis/
Voter anger should be directed at congress but both sides use manipulation, lies, and deceipt to win.
What, Democrats don't?
Sacto Joe:
It would help A LOT, in terms of my own personal level of cooperation, if the purported President of the United States would stop blocking the release of his original vital records on file with the State of Hawaii.
@GROG... No, but it is unfair to label an entire group of people as racist because of the actions of miniscule amount of people.
All of us modulate our behavior according to the perceived permissiveness of the immediate environment. Thus you might treat a woman differently at a strip club than in the office, tell a joke in the locker room that you wouldn't tell at church, and behave differently with close friends than with colleagues.
Also, a big group of people at a restaurant might be a little more rowdy than they would normally be because they have imported their own permissive environment.
The fact that even those few people found the Tea Party rally to be a permissive environment for their expressions of bigotry is very telling about the Tea Party in general. These kinds of expressions don't happen at other events where large numbers of people gather. They happen at Tea Parties because those disposed to such behavior sense the environment as permissive.
Educated folks often get their news online instead of via tv. It's a second-hand influence from FoxNews- from such sites as Drudge report and right-leaning blogs. These people will be influenced by Fox, but will not say they get their news from there.
@filistro: "Are the other rightie sites (RedState, Townhall, Little Green Footballs, Michelle Malkin) all similar? Do they encourage opposing viewpoints and debate, or do they ban them?"
Little Green Footballs, while still further right than any 538ers besides our wingnut visitors, has tacked considerably to the center from where it used to be. Charles (absolute monarch of LGF) is quick to ban posters who personally insult Charles (while leaving the posts visible) and to delete posts with obscene or vilely insulting language, but doesn't censor mere disagreement (not that I've ever tried posting there myself to see what happens; I just lurk).
And: Charles DESPISES the Tea Party. I mean, with a passion. A week or so ago, he had a brief post, just a photo with caption "Tea Partiers c. 1950"; the photo was actually identified by one of the posters as from August 1959 during the Little Rock High School crisis, with signs like "Race Mixing is COMMUNISM" and "America Beware of the ANTICHRIST". You can imagine the comments thread:
"No, those aren't Tea Partiers; everyone in that picture is dead now" -- "Well duh-uh-uhhh, but their children are Tea Partiers" -- "Do you have any proof of that?" -- "That rally was sponsored by the John Birch Society and the Concerned Citizens of America, who are back now, in the middle of the Tea Party" -- "Those fringe elements don't speak for all of us Tea Partiers" -- "Fringe elements? Those are your organizers!" and my personal favorite, "Of course those aren't Tea Partiers. The way they are dressed was typical for the time, and their signs are correctly spelled with letters well placed, and good use of fonts for emphasis."
I don't want a Supreme Court judge to be "empathetic", I want a Supreme Court judge to be fair, aloof, and impartial. To me, it's very odd to describe a judge as "empathetic". The Scales of Justice balance on truth and fairness, not empathy. What is it, some kind of sewing circle?
via dictionary.com: Empathy most often refers to a vicarious participation in the emotions, ideas, or opinions of others, the ability to imagine oneself in the condition or predicament of another.
Do you really think that our justices should be lacking in the ability to imagine themselves in the predicament of those who show up before their court? Seriously? How can you expect fairness from one who can't place themselves (figuratively) in the shoes of either party in a disagreement?
@ myself and the Grammar Nazis
I am working right now so I am typing these comments quickly, I am sorry for the spelling mistakes and incorrect dates, the common tea party was the 14th of April.
I would also like to add that, in my opinion, the majority of the TP supporters argue the wiseness of policies based on their own experiences.
One sign I saw summed up this point. it said (and I am paraphrasing) "yopu cannot spend your way out of debt"
The problem with that statement is that many people in this country become wealthy by doing exactly what the fed is doing, but on an individual's scale. What the fed is doing is "investing" the money allotted to the federal government in an asset (the american economy, the infrastructure of the US, the world economy, etc...) which, if the investment leads to the growth of the economy, would lead to an increase in the value of that asset. The dividend (if I am going to adopt stock terms to this analysis) is the yearly tax payment made by the individuals, corporations, etc...
As the economy grows, the size of these "dividend" payments grows, and the government's "income" grows.
I tried to explain this to one person (not at the tea party) but they just looked at me and said "i don't understand, if I am struggling with income I do not go out and take out a loan for a new car..." I tried to tell them that, if this new car offered you the opportunity to drastically increase your income, then it may be a good investment. If it was just a frivilous purchase then it is not a wise investment. The bailout, with it's potential to maintain and increase the taxable income in the US is a wise investment which, if one believes the economic data, is actually working.
I am not Charles (LGF). I am Charles (LP, for "lede piece").
@shrinkers
i know the logic i'm using is a little "there will be no earth" scary logic...
but still....there is some point to that, right?
even if the world doesn't go into destruction mode, you will have whole sections of the planet that are uninhabitable... and with a world population out of control...that feels like a much worse drain on our economy to me - than the meager amounts of drain that we would have right now if we acted to prevent that...
and yes, your logic is also pretty sound...no one will care about the economy when there is no world to have an economy anymore...
Kenny Allison:
It's not "working" today.
http://www.dowjones.com/
@Kenny Allison
interesting!!
I'd love to see some data to see past examples of what you witnessed...
makes sense though...at least as far as my experience goes.
Charles said...
Sacto Joe:
It would help A LOT,
~~~~~~~~~~
It would also help if one would stop beating-a-dead-horse, but that would be too much to ask of 538's friendly/harmless obsessed w/Obama conservative troll ...
I doubt Glen Beck has directly influenced public opinion. I think he may have indirectly influenced public opinion by shifting the narrative in the MSM to the right. The moderates and fence-sitters out there are reacting to all the negatively-toned stories in the MSM.
Once the economy continues to improve and people start feeling the benefits of health care reform, the momentum will begin to shift back toward Obama and the Democrats.
@ Robert
Do you really think that our justices should be lacking in the ability to imagine themselves in the predicament of those who show up before their court? Seriously? How can you expect fairness from one who can't place themselves (figuratively) in the shoes of either party in a disagreement?
I agree that empathy is an important quality in a judicial nominee; the only problem is that the Supreme Court is not historically known for empathy. Some in the legal community believe that empathy interferes with one’s ability to look at the facts, apply the law, and hold the "bright line." Any time that empathy is involved the bright line begins to become fuzzy and we get rulings which bend precedent.
I do believe that sometimes precedent is sometimes made to be broken, and I am a supporter of the "living, breathing constitution." I am just highlighting the opposing view point.
@Charles: "It would help A LOT, in terms of my own personal level of cooperation, if the purported President of the United States would stop blocking the release of his original vital records on file with the State of Hawaii."
Sigh... it would help A LOT if you would understand that he is not the governor of Hawai'i, and is not in charge of the procedures in the Hawai'ian department of health. They do not keep the old paper records (few states do, anymore); the originals are on microfiche, and the computer-printout Birth Certificate that Obama has publicly displayed is identical to what ANYONE in Hawai'i gets; the (Republican) governor of Hawai'i has verified that it is a genuine reflection of the microfiched records. Obama was born in the Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women and Children, in Honolulu, in August 1961.
wv: chase (what I am doing to my own tail, trying to talk sense to a birther)
@JamesY
I agree with you completely. I did not add that I find such barren cost/benefit analysis to be stunningly offensive and absurd.
The other analysis often done is that attempt to prevent or minimize global warming will cost me something, now. Benefits, if any, will accrue to someone else in the far future. Conversely, if I do nothing, I get the benefit of having not spent my money on it, and I get that benefit now. The risk is borne by someone else, long after I will be dead.
This analysis is simple greed and selfishness, but I suspect it is the analysis most deniers go through, consciously or not. Even if global climate change is happening, the costs to address it accrue to me and the benefits to someone else, so it's clearly not worth doing.
Again, this is offensive and stupid, shortsighted and absurd. It also discounts the benefits that we will see very quickly, in terms of improve air quality, thus lower disease, better health; also alternative energy sources, thus great growth potential, reduced reliance on unfriendly foreign nations; new and better technologies of many related industries, again more growth, expanding tax base, new markets and new products, etc., etc.
There is no sense in which working to address global climate change has a downside, except to the blind and foolish.
If it actually COSTS MORE to improve air quality (than the benefits of lower disease, better health; alternative energy sources, actual growth vs. unemployment for "dirty" jobs, reduced reliance on unfriendly foreign nations; new and better technologies of many related industries, expanding tax base vs. unemployment benefits, new markets and new products, etc., etc.) then I would still go for the lesser cost, especially since the world's largest CO2 emitter (China, with India not that far behind) are never going to curb themselves.
No, Bob X, the (Republican) governor of Hawai'i has NOT verified that the "certification of live birth" (SHORT FORM available to children born at the time outside of Hawaii) is a genuine reflection of the microfiched record, specifically the LONG FORM "birth certificate"
Some in the legal community believe that empathy interferes with one’s ability to look at the facts, apply the law, and hold the "bright line."
I don't see that empathy works against that goal, although there would certainly be an argument for that predicated on 'sympathy'. A lot of law is predicated on an individual's state of mind. For example what constitutes a "pre-meditated" murder can often be something thats a fully internal thought process. How can someone else evaluate it (objectively or not) without some form of empathy?
@Charles
If it actually COSTS MORE to improve air quality (than the benefits of lower disease, better health; ... then I would still go for the lesser cost...
And you claim to be pro-life?
Great argument, Charles. Human life and well-being should be subject to a strict dollar analysis of the economics -- the lives and well-being of the people affected should not be considered at all. I see. I assume you apply this logic to all considerations of the value of human life, right?
You already know my answers to those questions.
Bartbuster,
On sea level rise....
Well, it's always nice to look at the models, and exactly what sea level rise is expected...
The IPCC third report (2001), estimates that by 2100, Sea Levels will rise between 0.11 and 0.77 meters.
How much is that?
Not really a lot. Less than Tidal variation.
@Bob X
PLEASE don't discuss birtherism with Charles. He is not open to any other viewpoint, and has canned responses queued up.
are never going to curb themselves.
Where do you think they got the technology to pollute so much in the first place? Right here in the good ol' US of A, of course. If we develop cleaner technology, it will filter out to the rest of the world.
@ Charles especially since the world's largest CO2 emitter (China, with India not that far behind) are never going to curb themselves.
What makes you think so? China is actually a world leader in the very necessary "self-curbing" of its own population growth... but I'm betting that particular act of environmental responsibility impress you at all.
Bob X:
I am simply asking to see the doctor's signature on the original birth certificate. Why won't Obama allow that to be released?
...doesn't impress you...
Charles said...
If it actually COSTS MORE to improve air quality (than the benefits of lower disease, better health; alternative energy sources, actual growth vs. unemployment for "dirty" jobs, reduced reliance on unfriendly foreign nations; new and better technologies of many related industries, expanding tax base vs. unemployment benefits, new markets and new products, etc., etc.) then I would still go for the lesser cost, especially since the world's largest CO2 emitter (China, with India not that far behind) are never going to curb themselves.
April 16, 2010 2:27 PM
Chucklehead, how do you know what China and India are "never going to do"? China faces severe problems from expanding deserts, and India depends on the Himalayan glaciers for water. They might not be as stupid as yourself.
Of course, you don't have to discuss anything with me. As I've posted, with my "canned responses" several times now, if Obama would simply state "I authorize the Hawaii Department of Health to release of my original birth certificate to all credentialed media" then I wouldn't ask another question about where he was born.
The empathy battle really got to me personally (I know, me getting all worked up about something- imagine that!).
Every jurist is a human being (leaving Thomas aside), and as such has their own bias and world view. You cannot be truly objective, because nobody can. So, your worldview shapes your decisions.
Empathy simply means being able to try and understand another person's situation, which will widen your worldview. The law remains the law, but you take in more context when applying it.
Without empathy (not to be confused with sympathy, which many on the right did), we get Dred Scott. We get separate but equal (probably the most "unempathetic" -- sorry grammarians-- decision ever made).
Maybe some think it is acceptable to pretend that white males have the ability to be "objective" and all others are inherently biased.
But the court serves all of us- those with different races, religions (or lack thereof), sexual orientations, levels of education, economic resources, political persuasions and ages. To serve all of us, equally under the law, it needs to try to understand us- which means empathy.
I wish libs were as concerned about Medicare's impending insolvency as our impending warming. If you want to help your grandkids--its a better problem to tackle....and about 100 times more likely.
Is it shocking we're going bankrupt when libs say they find cost-benefit analyses "offensive"
Charles said...
Of course, you don't have to discuss anything with me. As I've posted, with my "canned responses" several times now, if Obama would simply state "I authorize the Hawaii Department of Health to release of my original birth certificate to all credentialed media" then I wouldn't ask another question about where he was born.
April 16, 2010 2:37 PM
Chucklehead, have you considered that Obama might want morons like you to continue to ask questions about where he was born?
If anyone else wants to discuss the actual thread topic (tea-partiers aren't especially likely to believe in outright, specific instances of conspiracy. "Only" 30 percent believe Obama was born in a foreign country, for instance) let me know.
WOW - Pat doesn't think that a rise of up to 2.5' in the sealevel is important...
tell that to the Seychelles when their islands all but disappear [especially during tidal surges]
of course, a 2.5 foot rise would make my property here in FL almost waterfront along the ICW !!!
too bad for those poor suckers who currently live between me & the water now - I can watch them go under in my lifetime
do you really NOT see how even a one FOOT rise will negatively impact the entire world ???
odds are that with the additional exacerbation coming from Co2 emissions in China & India will raise the sea even above that conservative projection - and that then it will be too late...
invest in land near water so that I will get mine with patience !!!
how cynical & short-sighted but telling
Bob X:
I addressed that post already.
WV: lobaster (catapulting crustaceans)
Walker said...
"Empathy"
~~~~~~~~~~
Empathy is just alright if your name is Samuel Alito
U.S. SENATOR TOM COBURN (R-OK): Can you comment just about Sam Alito, and what he cares about, and let us see a little bit of your heart and what's important to you in life?
ALITO: Senator, I tried to in my opening statement, I tried to provide a little picture of who I am as a human being and how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point.
ALITO: I don't come from an affluent background or a privileged background. My parents were both quite poor when they were growing up.
And I know about their experiences and I didn't experience those things. I don't take credit for anything that they did or anything that they overcame.
But I think that children learn a lot from their parents and they learn from what the parents say. But I think they learn a lot more from what the parents do and from what they take from the stories of their parents lives.
And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.
And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.
But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."
When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me.
And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them.
So those are some of the experiences that have shaped me as a person.
The Empathy Dodge
In recent weeks, conservatives have turned "empathy" into a talking-points staple in order to preemptively cast doubt on whomever Obama picked to replace Souter. They characterize liberal justices as bleeding hearts intent on reading ephemeral rights into the Constitution while conservative jurists are merely content to interpret the law.
But the conservative justices on the court -- Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, John Roberts, and Clarence Thomas are not emotionless robots able to interpret the law without bias or personal experience coloring their rulings. They don't lack empathy; they simply don't empathize with the people Obama or liberals might like them to. Conservatives want their justices to empathize with the religious, the unborn, and powerful corporate interests. "emphasis mine" Liberals want their justices to empathize with women and minorities, workers and the downtrodden.
Is it shocking we're going bankrupt when libs say they find cost-benefit analyses "offensive"
I thought the same thing, brian. And sadly, these turds in a punch bowl (people like shrinkers, Bartbuster, filistro, etc.) are a pervasive part of our society.
WOW... talk about Obama's cool and toughness!
Just across the wire... all 41 Senate Republicans have now signed onto Mitch McConnell's letter opposing financial regulatory reform.
Now, there's a message to take to the People in November! "We Republicans are united in our opposition to reforms of the industry that caused all the pain you are feeling right now."
Of course the Pubbies have no choice. It's not like they can safely bite the hand that feeds them.
Still... awesome development. I hope they filibuster; that will be even better.
Just to comment on the actual topic.
I'm a Teaparty sympathizer, but Glenn Beck....I like hime about 15%of the time....the other 85% he is a screwball.
@Charles: YES, the Republican governor of Hawai'i HAS verified that the Certificate of Live Birth (which is the SAME EXACT form that every person born in the state of Hawai'i gets, and identical for that matter to what the majority of states issue these days) matches the microfiched records-- and that the state of Hawai'i is not about to change their procedures for a bunch of lunatics who wouldn't believe the sun rises in the east if they were staring right at it.
wv: antinat. I think I'm actually fighting against a "gnat"
@brian
I wish libs were as concerned about Medicare's impending insolvency as our impending warming. If you want to help your grandkids--its a better problem to tackle....and about 100 times more likely.
I actually mostly agree with you here. Medicare needs to be made solvent. There are some proposals being worked on, and I expect the issue to be addressed. Unfortunately, the current political climate is pretty toxic, and it may be a couple years before Congress can do much.
Replacing Medicare Part D with something that is actually funded will help. The HCR bill that was just enacted is a first step.
Having better data on procedures that work and those that don't, sharing information on tests so that fewer tests are needed -- these and other common sense reforms are already in the new law. (Of course, the right wing calls this stuff "death panels" - an example of the toxicity that makes addressing the real problems difficult).
The part of your statement I disagree with is the estimate of odds. It seems at least as likely that global climate change will affect my grandkids as it is that Medicare will have serious solvency issues -- which is to say, if we do nothing, both are certain.
@ Charles
It doesn't help that the Stock price of Goldman Sachs is taking a hit over the news that they are being sued by the SEC.
One day's performance on the stock market is like one at bat in a baseball game. You cannot judge a whole season on one at bat.
OK, breaking 'news' over @ Political Wire
'Crist Admits He's Considering Independent Bid'
Florida Gov. Charlie Cris (R) once again did not deny he's mulling an independent U.S. Senate bid, the Miami Herald reports.
In fact, he admitted for the first time he'll consider it.
Said Crist: "I'm not thinking about that today. We'll look at that later on."
==============================
just sayin' - the TBers have pushed into into dropping OUT of the GOP primary before the end of this month, and "as I have been predicting" Charlie WILL run as an IND [and with his teacher tenure veto this week] Crist may very well WIN in November [orMat a minimum probably prevent Marco Polo/Rubio from winning a 3-way race]
GO TBers - screw that pooch = cost the GOP a senate seat
next Senate update I predict that the 'odds' on flipping the FL senate seat will rise substantially to at least 50/50
but the CONs on here have been slagging my predictions of a Crist IND candidacy [saying he 'owes' it the the party to be a loyal loser]
FAIL
Charles- you misread the post.
Once again, it isn't that 30% of TPers think Obama was born in a foreign country. It is that of the people that believe Obama was born in a foreign country, 30% are TPers.
So this does nothing to say if TPers are conspiracy theorist, just that for that conspiracy theory, only 30% of believers are also in the TP.
Wv anglupsy- I don't know, but it sounds filthy
DCM...any chance Crist as an Indy might be sufficiently PO'd that he would caucus with Dems?
For the record, Charles doesn't have any firm die hard political positions as mentioned previously at 538.
I'm not even sure if he's truly a homophobe as he dances around every issue ad nauseam.
No, he's just here to be a 24/7 nuisance at a liberal blog ~ nothing more, nothing less ...
What Gov. Lingle ACTUALLY "verified":
http://24ahead.com/lingle-obama-hawaii
Post a Comment