Being a pitbull with lipstick on may not be a good thing. Personally, I am not too crazy about people who flaunt their religion too much. It seems like they are hiding something. Either way, Palin is not HALF as bad as Bush. Her church might be a bit nuttier, but at least she is sincere in her beliefs, which I dont think can be said for Bush.
No. I'm not the sort of person who picks a side to begin with, and then proceeds from there. That is not the way I think. I simply disagree with her opinions and worldview. I vote for the person, not the party. I voted for Ross Perot and Ralph Nader, for example.
I've never really trusted Newsweek. But if you put on your thinking caps and crunch the numbers, it's obvious that these numbers are weird. The report says that statistics are taken with an average sample size of 900 people over a 3-day period. The stated margin of error is 3.3%. If you plug that into the formula for calculating statistical margins of error, and compare with various percentages, you come up with a sample size of around 230 people for 9/17. That's 20% fewer people than their statistics imply. For their claims to be true AND their numbers to calculate correctly, they would have to be sampling much fewer people recently than in the past. Also, note the significant statistical bias of Democrats over Republicans in the sample, which disagrees with broader party affiliation studies; in particular, Democrats have a party affiliation rate of about 34% nation-wide, whereas this poll quotes 41% from their data. Republican and independent are way off, too. Also note that men out-represent women in this study (whereas there are actually more women than men in this country). That's around a 4% misalignment on gender, and... well the political party misalignment is so bad, that I'm not sure how to assign a number to it.
"The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it." -- Morpheus, The Matrix
Being a pitbull with lipstick on may not be a good thing. Personally, I am not too crazy about people who flaunt their religion too much. It seems like they are hiding something. Either way, Palin is not HALF as bad as Bush. Her church might be a bit nuttier, but at least she is sincere in her beliefs, which I dont think can be said for Bush.
No. I'm not the sort of person who picks a side to begin with, and then proceeds from there. That is not the way I think. I simply disagree with her opinions and worldview. I vote for the person, not the party. I voted for Ross Perot and Ralph Nader, for example.
why? because she is a republican?
Her views differ greatly from mine. Simple as that.
WHY???
Man, I hope so. It's getting hard to keep in mind that this country was founded on principles of the Enlightenment.
I have. I trust her even less.
Yeah, I know. Newsweek DOES lean to the Right. But it would still be a step up, because it is a very large and well-established magazine.
Why?
I wouldn't take that as a compliment.
No, but thanks for the high opinion of me. A writer for a major magazine like Newsweek? That would definitely be a step up for me.
Did you write this artical for newsweek buddy?
Good observation
I've never really trusted Newsweek. But if you put on your thinking caps and crunch the numbers, it's obvious that these numbers are weird. The report says that statistics are taken with an average sample size of 900 people over a 3-day period. The stated margin of error is 3.3%. If you plug that into the formula for calculating statistical margins of error, and compare with various percentages, you come up with a sample size of around 230 people for 9/17. That's 20% fewer people than their statistics imply. For their claims to be true AND their numbers to calculate correctly, they would have to be sampling much fewer people recently than in the past. Also, note the significant statistical bias of Democrats over Republicans in the sample, which disagrees with broader party affiliation studies; in particular, Democrats have a party affiliation rate of about 34% nation-wide, whereas this poll quotes 41% from their data. Republican and independent are way off, too. Also note that men out-represent women in this study (whereas there are actually more women than men in this country). That's around a 4% misalignment on gender, and... well the political party misalignment is so bad, that I'm not sure how to assign a number to it.
"The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it." -- Morpheus, The Matrix
That's a good way to roll. I would encourage you and anyone else to remain suspicious, so long as you are suspicious of either side.
The fact that she is less popular makes her MORE popular?