Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 65
  1. #1
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536



    There’s plenty of proof of an authoritarian streak and animus toward democratic ideals in today’s conservative movement. There was the movement’s use of its judicial power to halt a vote recount and instead install a president who had lost the popular vote.

    There is the ongoing GOP effort to make it more difficult for people to cast a vote in an election.

    There is the GOP’s record use of the Senate filibuster to kill legislation that the vast majority of the country supports.

    There is a GOP leader’s declaration that what the American people want from their government simply “doesn’t matter.”


    Up until today, you might have been able to write all that anti-democratic pathology off as one infecting only the Republican Party’s politicians and ins utional leadership, but not its rank-and-file voters. But then this morning Fairleigh inson University released this gun control-related pollshowing that authoritarianism runs throughout the the entire party.


    Take a look at the cross-tabs on page 3 of the national survey.

    That’s right, you are reading it correctly: Almost half (44 percent) of all self-described Republican voters say they believe “an armed revolution might be necessary to protect our liberties.”

    Just as bad, more Republicans believe an armed revolution might be necessary than believe one isn’t necessary.


    This poll raises two obvious questions, each more disturbing than the next.


    The first question is about gun control and gun ownership, and more specifically, what the latter is all about.


    Typically, GOP leaders say that their opposition to minimal gun regulations has nothing to do with helping arm those who want to commit acts of violence, and everything to do with wanting to make sure people can defend themselves. Based on the poll, of course, it is certainly likely that many are buying such weapons in an effort to defend themselves, both for day-to-day life and in the event of a sudden armed revolution. But here’s the scary part: How many are buying weapons to arm themselves in order to foment an armed revolution? Maybe none, but maybe a lot. I don’t have an answer, but this poll suggests the question should at least be aired.


    The other question is about republican democracy: Can it survive in an age when almost one-half of one of the major parties seems to support the concept of violently thwarting it?


    “Politics is war by other means”: That aphorism sums up the democratic theory undergirding the American idea for two centuries. Though we haven’t always lived up to that ideal, it is a pretty simple one: A civilized society should solve disputes through a democratic process and democratic ins utions, rather than through the barrel of a gun. And while our democracy has been corrupted by Big Money, it still functions better than autocracy. In that sense, Churchill had it right when he said “democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”


    Incredibly, though, almost half of Republicans don’t seem to necessarily see it that way. According to the Fairleigh inson poll, 44 percent of rank-and-file Republicans seem to believe that because they aren’t getting their way through the ballot box, bloodshed may be justified to impose their will on everyone else. Think of it as sore loser-ism juiced by violence.


    Of course, GOP apologists will say that the poll just asked specifically about armed revolution “to protect liberties,” the idea being that almost half of Republican voters don’t support using violence to advance their own political agenda, they only support it in the face of a future dystopian nightmare whereby the population is terrorized by police-administered drone bombings and Waco-esque invasions of private homes.


    But that’s the thing: We can’t be so sure that’s really true when conservative media voices and politicians are using the broad and incendiary language they now regularly employ. Today, those voices often claim that almost everything in the Democratic/liberal agenda — from Obamacare to taxes to environmental regulations to contraception policy — is an assault on “liberty.”


    That means the poll might indicate something much more significant than understandable opposition to Big Brother turning our country into Oceania. It might show us that all the vitriolic language employed by the right is undermining the most basic nonviolent democratic ideals that are supposed to define America.



    http://www.salon.com/2013/05/01/rise...volutionaries/




  2. #2
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321



    There’s plenty of proof of an authoritarian streak and animus toward democratic ideals in today’s conservative movement. There was the movement’s use of its judicial power to halt a vote recount and instead install a president who had lost the popular vote.

    There is the ongoing GOP effort to make it more difficult for people to cast a vote in an election.

    There is the GOP’s record use of the Senate filibuster to kill legislation that the vast majority of the country supports.

    There is a GOP leader’s declaration that what the American people want from their government simply “doesn’t matter.”


    Up until today, you might have been able to write all that anti-democratic pathology off as one infecting only the Republican Party’s politicians and ins utional leadership, but not its rank-and-file voters. But then this morning Fairleigh inson University released this gun control-related pollshowing that authoritarianism runs throughout the the entire party.


    Take a look at the cross-tabs on page 3 of the national survey.

    That’s right, you are reading it correctly: Almost half (44 percent) of all self-described Republican voters say they believe “an armed revolution might be necessary to protect our liberties.”

    Just as bad, more Republicans believe an armed revolution might be necessary than believe one isn’t necessary.


    This poll raises two obvious questions, each more disturbing than the next.


    The first question is about gun control and gun ownership, and more specifically, what the latter is all about.


    Typically, GOP leaders say that their opposition to minimal gun regulations has nothing to do with helping arm those who want to commit acts of violence, and everything to do with wanting to make sure people can defend themselves. Based on the poll, of course, it is certainly likely that many are buying such weapons in an effort to defend themselves, both for day-to-day life and in the event of a sudden armed revolution. But here’s the scary part: How many are buying weapons to arm themselves in order to foment an armed revolution? Maybe none, but maybe a lot. I don’t have an answer, but this poll suggests the question should at least be aired.


    The other question is about republican democracy: Can it survive in an age when almost one-half of one of the major parties seems to support the concept of violently thwarting it?


    “Politics is war by other means”: That aphorism sums up the democratic theory undergirding the American idea for two centuries. Though we haven’t always lived up to that ideal, it is a pretty simple one: A civilized society should solve disputes through a democratic process and democratic ins utions, rather than through the barrel of a gun. And while our democracy has been corrupted by Big Money, it still functions better than autocracy. In that sense, Churchill had it right when he said “democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”


    Incredibly, though, almost half of Republicans don’t seem to necessarily see it that way. According to the Fairleigh inson poll, 44 percent of rank-and-file Republicans seem to believe that because they aren’t getting their way through the ballot box, bloodshed may be justified to impose their will on everyone else. Think of it as sore loser-ism juiced by violence.


    Of course, GOP apologists will say that the poll just asked specifically about armed revolution “to protect liberties,” the idea being that almost half of Republican voters don’t support using violence to advance their own political agenda, they only support it in the face of a future dystopian nightmare whereby the population is terrorized by police-administered drone bombings and Waco-esque invasions of private homes.


    But that’s the thing: We can’t be so sure that’s really true when conservative media voices and politicians are using the broad and incendiary language they now regularly employ. Today, those voices often claim that almost everything in the Democratic/liberal agenda — from Obamacare to taxes to environmental regulations to contraception policy — is an assault on “liberty.”


    That means the poll might indicate something much more significant than understandable opposition to Big Brother turning our country into Oceania. It might show us that all the vitriolic language employed by the right is undermining the most basic nonviolent democratic ideals that are supposed to define America.



    http://www.salon.com/2013/05/01/rise...volutionaries/



    "44 percent of rank-and-file Republicans seem to believe that because they aren’t getting their way through the ballot box, bloodshed may be justified to impose their will on everyone else. Think of it as sore loser-ism juiced by violence."

    lol salon fail. The survey/poll says no such thing.

    lol question phrasing. "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties." WTF? This poll is a joke.

  3. #3
    Veteran Halberto's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    2,164
    boutons, do something productive with your life

  4. #4
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    page 3

    "Just 18 percent of Democrats think an armed revolution may be necessary, as opposed to 44 percent of Republicans and 27 percent of independents."

    freedom!

    liberty!

    water the tree!

    marans!

    tea baggers and Repugs are totally ing crazy.

  5. #5
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    lol moonbot.

    Its a ridiculous poll. But, it says what you want it to.....

  6. #6
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,765
    tea baggers and Repugs are totally ing crazy.
    Unfortunately for us, you give them more oxygen in this forum than any other poster. Maybe even all of em put together.

    You should reflect on that.

  7. #7
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,765
    Not to worry, boutons_deux, once a Republican is voted in as President, they'll become Tories instantly. Same thing just happened to the Dems.

  8. #8
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,765
    , the Republicans might even improve Obamacare . . .

  9. #9
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    Unfortunately for us, you give them more oxygen in this forum than any other poster. Maybe even all of em put together.

    You should reflect on that.
    you non-oxygenators have your heads up your asses. Reflect on that.

    Name one policy or law or regulation the Repugs have done FOR THE COUNTRY since 2001. And now they've been pulled into blind extremism by the ing weirdo "Christian" supremacists and red-state Confederate Repugs,

    and then list all the like Ryan's budgets, they have voted for.

    All the stuff we all about, like financial reform, gun b/g checks, that Repugs have blocked or gutted.
    Last edited by boutons_deux; 05-02-2013 at 09:16 AM.

  10. #10
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    lol moonbot.

    Its a ridiculous poll. But, it says what you want it to.....
    the question about armed revolution, marans!, was straightforward, the responses, too. You're the typical right-wing fantasist, if you don't like the facts, you deny them and make up your own facts.

  11. #11
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    the question about armed revolution, marans!, was straightforward, the responses, too. You're the typical right-wing fantasist, if you don't like the facts, you deny them and make up your own facts.
    No, it was ridiculously construed. Weighting it with a time-frame qualifier instantly renders any context-free conclusion meaningless. It's obvious you know nothing of survey/polling methodology. You're the typical left-wing fantasist. If you don't understand the underlying facts, you just ignore them and make up your own facts.

  12. #12
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    lol WH ting all over the bot.

  13. #13
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    TB What's wrong with the survey and Repug revolutionary marans' answers, other than you not liking it?

  14. #14
    Veteran Th'Pusher's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    6,130
    TB What's wrong with the survey and Repug revolutionary marans' answers, other than you not liking it?
    I'd like to know the answer to this as well. How does adding 'in the next few years' as a qualifier render the result useles? Too vague?

  15. #15
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    It weights the results with an implied time frame. Lots of issues seem relevant in the context of immediacy. This is a known fact among pollsters and, less often, statisticians. If the Pew Research group built this poll, it would have no such qualifications unless the poll was built specifically to explore the likelihood of armed insurrection. Even then, I doubt that Pew would weight a question like that.
    If it were an open question, free of qualifiers, the data would likely be quite different.

  16. #16
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    Somebody translate this to bot-speak for boutons.

  17. #17
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    Go to the bottom this post to see a good example of this polling methodology in action.

    http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=1#post4604309


    "The leading statement: "A full 14 percent of Republicans said that it was "definitely true" that Obama sympathized with the fundamentalists and wanted to impose Islamic law across the globe. An additional 38 percent said that it was probably true -- bringing the total percentage of believers to 52 percent. Only 33 percent of Republicans said that the "allegation" (as Newsweek put it) was "probably not true." Seven percent said it was "definitely not true." The rest (eight percent) either didn't know the answer or didn't read the question." is equally disingenuous.
    Here's the answer they didn't show:

    36 Probably not true Rep33%, Dem 37%, Ind. 37%

    The question is also very poorly composed.
    Some people have alleged that Barack Obama sympathizes with the goals of Islamic fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world. From what you know about Obama, what is your opinion of these allegations? Do you think they are…

    Some people? Allegations? These are they types of descriptors that prompt particular behaviors. Some people is a soft target. We all agree with some people some of the time. Allegations often invokes images of legal system and legal structures...much different than "Rumors".

    Suppose the descriptor "Some people" was left off and allegations are removed from the question and the question is simply stripped down to: Barack Obama sympathizes with the goals of Islamic fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world.
    What do you suspect the answers would look like then? Probaly very similar to the Pew Ins utes poll conducted in July.
    http://people-press.org/report/645/

    Here's the poll...read for yourself.
    http://nw-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/pdf/1004-ftop.pdf


    Contrast the way the questions are asked in both polls. Notice that Pew's are clean and concise, with no open ended descriptors like "Some People" nor ID labels like "Allegations". Also notice that the results overall of the Pew and the Princeton don't exacltly jive.

    Wonder why that is."

  18. #18
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321

  19. #19
    Veteran Th'Pusher's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    6,130
    Very good. Thanks.

  20. #20
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    Very good. Thanks.

  21. #21
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    51,121
    But that’s the thing: We can’t be so sure that’s really true when conservative media voices and politicians are using the broad and incendiary language they now regularly employ. Today, those voices often claim that almost everything in the Democratic/liberal agenda — from Obamacare to taxes to environmental regulations to contraception policy — is an assault on “liberty."
    I have begun to wonder about how the right wing in this country are self-radicalizing, especially given the recent Boston bombings, i.e. lone, alienated people who do this.

    Start with a violent subculture, introducea mythology of oppression, and reinforce that continuously, until someone decides to act.

    What worries me most is the "god is on our side" part, in which you start rationalizing all manner of evil things in furtherance of your cause.

  22. #22
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    Go to the bottom this post to see a good example of this polling methodology in action.

    http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=1#post4604309


    "The leading statement: "A full 14 percent of Republicans said that it was "definitely true" that Obama sympathized with the fundamentalists and wanted to impose Islamic law across the globe. An additional 38 percent said that it was probably true -- bringing the total percentage of believers to 52 percent. Only 33 percent of Republicans said that the "allegation" (as Newsweek put it) was "probably not true." Seven percent said it was "definitely not true." The rest (eight percent) either didn't know the answer or didn't read the question." is equally disingenuous.
    Here's the answer they didn't show:

    36 Probably not true Rep33%, Dem 37%, Ind. 37%

    The question is also very poorly composed.
    Some people have alleged that Barack Obama sympathizes with the goals of Islamic fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world. From what you know about Obama, what is your opinion of these allegations? Do you think they are…

    Some people? Allegations? These are they types of descriptors that prompt particular behaviors. Some people is a soft target. We all agree with some people some of the time. Allegations often invokes images of legal system and legal structures...much different than "Rumors".

    Suppose the descriptor "Some people" was left off and allegations are removed from the question and the question is simply stripped down to: Barack Obama sympathizes with the goals of Islamic fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world.
    What do you suspect the answers would look like then? Probaly very similar to the Pew Ins utes poll conducted in July.
    http://people-press.org/report/645/

    Here's the poll...read for yourself.
    http://nw-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/pdf/1004-ftop.pdf


    Contrast the way the questions are asked in both polls. Notice that Pew's are clean and concise, with no open ended descriptors like "Some People" nor ID labels like "Allegations". Also notice that the results overall of the Pew and the Princeton don't exacltly jive.

    Wonder why that is."
    so your nitpicking totally negates that your extremist, secessionist, nullificationist, armed revolutionary gun-fellating fellow travellers don't exist, don't hold the "we need armed revolution to defend our liberty" position? GFY

  23. #23
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    so your nitpicking totally negates that your extremist, secessionist, nullificationist, armed revolutionary gun-fellating fellow travellers don't exist, don't hold the "we need armed revolution to defend our liberty" position? GFY
    No, my factual analysis of your "poll" renders it useless, like most of your thinkprogressbabble.

  24. #24
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    Knowledge of polling methodology = nitpicking.

    All that book learnin' aint no use, boy!

  25. #25
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    I have begun to wonder about how the right wing in this country are self-radicalizing, especially given the recent Boston bombings, i.e. lone, alienated people who do this.

    Start with a violent subculture, introducea mythology of oppression, and reinforce that continuously, until someone decides to act.

    What worries me most is the "god is on our side" part, in which you start rationalizing all manner of evil things in furtherance of your cause.
    smh

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •