Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81: Raiders thinks that political polls are narrow and are not impacted by political and media context, candidates in upcoming elections, sitting president, and current events. You clearly cannot be this clueless can you? You think people's views of Hunter and Joe Biden are not impacted by Trump (former President) and likely 2024 candidate when he is the opposing candidate on the ticket. Come on man, just admit you are wrong, the two are related, even if you are too stubborn to admit it. Everyone in the forum except you can see that.
Where did I say that about polls? They ARE related if you make it a binary choice -- I do not accept that. I gave you the examples of Romney and McCain, etc. The poll did NOT ask about Trump. That was not the intent. Would the information have impacted voters if they knew beforehand -- they said yes. You imply for you, no. I am asking you why not for you? That is a question you should be able to answer. I am asking why you do not see that for others it would have mattered -- that seems to be where your lack of critical thinking is coming into play.
Perhaps you should re-read your own posts. You are saying that about this poll. That somehow this poll about Hunter Biden has nothing to do with Trump, which is obviously very wrong. The election is indeed a binary choice. What are you saying? Either you vote for Biden or Trump (Binary choice). We all know third party candidates have no chance, so you are wrong. The election is absolutely a binary choice.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81: Raiders thinks that political polls are narrow and are not impacted by political and media context, candidates in upcoming elections, sitting president, and current events. You clearly cannot be this clueless can you? You think people's views of Hunter and Joe Biden are not impacted by Trump (former President) and likely 2024 candidate when he is the opposing candidate on the ticket. Come on man, just admit you are wrong, the two are related, even if you are too stubborn to admit it. Everyone in the forum except you can see that.
Where did I say that about polls? They ARE related if you make it a binary choice -- I do not accept that. I gave you the examples of Romney and McCain, etc. The poll did NOT ask about Trump. That was not the intent. Would the information have impacted voters if they knew beforehand -- they said yes. You imply for you, no. I am asking you why not for you? That is a question you should be able to answer. I am asking why you do not see that for others it would have mattered -- that seems to be where your lack of critical thinking is coming into play.
Perhaps you should re-read your own posts. You are saying that about this poll. That somehow this poll about Hunter Biden has nothing to do with Trump, which is obviously very wrong. The election is indeed a binary choice. What are you saying? Either you vote for Biden or Trump (Binary choice). We all know third party candidates have no chance, so you are wrong. The election is absolutely a binary choice.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81: Raiders thinks that political polls are narrow and are not impacted by political and media context, candidates in upcoming elections, sitting president, and current events. You clearly cannot be this clueless can you? You think people's views of Hunter and Joe Biden are not impacted by Trump (former President) and likely 2024 candidate when he is the opposing candidate on the ticket. Come on man, just admit you are wrong, the two are related, even if you are too stubborn to admit it. Everyone in the forum except you can see that. Where did I say that about polls? They ARE related if you make it a binary choice -- I do not accept that. I gave you the examples of Romney and McCain, etc. The poll did NOT ask about Trump. That was not the intent. Would the information have impacted voters if they knew beforehand -- they said yes. You imply for you, no. I am asking you why not for you? That is a question you should be able to answer. I am asking why you do not see that for others it would have mattered -- that seems to be where your lack of critical thinking is coming into play. Perhaps you should re-read your own posts. You are saying that about this poll. That somehow this poll about Hunter Biden has nothing to do with Trump, which is obviously very wrong. The election is indeed a binary choice. What are you saying? Either you vote for Biden or Trump (Binary choice). We all know third party candidates have no chance, so you are wrong. The election is absolutely a binary choice.
No sir. This poll did not ask about Trump -- especially if it were known BEFORE the primaries. It is NOT binary. You can NOT vote for Biden and NOT vote for Trump. That was my whole point about the folks that refused to vote for what they saw as subpar Republican candidates.
It was especially NOT binary before Biden got the nomination.
Still the question remains -- not for you and other far-Left, maybe -- but others might STILL have had some issues even after the primaries. THAT is the whole point of the poll. I think this is what you are missing.
Even allow for the fact that YOU are one of the people that WOULD vote no matter what the choices are --are you saying the information would NOT have given you reservations? At all?
Would you at least see how they would have given others some second thoughts?
These really are NOT that hard to answer. It is not to say, 'Aha, those folks would have voted for Trump.' That is NOT the point. You seem to think that is a corner to get painted into; it is not.
Do you at least understand why this should be asked?
Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81: Raiders thinks that political polls are narrow and are not impacted by political and media context, candidates in upcoming elections, sitting president, and current events. You clearly cannot be this clueless can you? You think people's views of Hunter and Joe Biden are not impacted by Trump (former President) and likely 2024 candidate when he is the opposing candidate on the ticket. Come on man, just admit you are wrong, the two are related, even if you are too stubborn to admit it. Everyone in the forum except you can see that. Where did I say that about polls? They ARE related if you make it a binary choice -- I do not accept that. I gave you the examples of Romney and McCain, etc. The poll did NOT ask about Trump. That was not the intent. Would the information have impacted voters if they knew beforehand -- they said yes. You imply for you, no. I am asking you why not for you? That is a question you should be able to answer. I am asking why you do not see that for others it would have mattered -- that seems to be where your lack of critical thinking is coming into play. Perhaps you should re-read your own posts. You are saying that about this poll. That somehow this poll about Hunter Biden has nothing to do with Trump, which is obviously very wrong. The election is indeed a binary choice. What are you saying? Either you vote for Biden or Trump (Binary choice). We all know third party candidates have no chance, so you are wrong. The election is absolutely a binary choice.
No sir. This poll did not ask about Trump -- especially if it were known BEFORE the primaries. It is NOT binary. You can NOT vote for Biden and NOT vote for Trump. That was my whole point about the folks that refused to vote for what they saw as subpar Republican candidates.
It was especially NOT binary before Biden got the nomination.
Still the question remains -- not for you and other far-Left, maybe -- but others might STILL have had some issues even after the primaries. THAT is the whole point of the poll. I think this is what you are missing.
Even allow for the fact that YOU are one of the people that WOULD vote no matter what the choices are --are you saying the information would NOT have given you reservations? At all?
Would you at least see how they would have given others some second thoughts?
These really are NOT that hard to answer. It is not to say, 'Aha, those folks would have voted for Trump.' That is NOT the point. You seem to think that is a corner to get painted into; it is not.
Do you at least understand why this should be asked?
Look at it this way: a lot of Republicans turned away from your guy Trump. For a lot of reasons! I guarantee you that they will NOT vote for him not matter what if he gets the nomination.
Now my question to you is very simple: do you see that with your guys or not?
Look at it this way: a lot of Republicans turned away from your guy Trump. For a lot of reasons! I guarantee you that they will NOT vote for him not matter what if he gets the nomination.
Now my question to you is very simple: do you see that with your guys or not?
No sir. This poll did not ask about Trump -- especially if it were known BEFORE the primaries. It is NOT binary. You can NOT vote for Biden and NOT vote for Trump. That was my whole point about the folks that refused to vote for what they saw as subpar Republican candidates. It was especially NOT binary before Biden got the nomination. Still the question remains -- not for you and other far-Left, maybe -- but others might STILL have had some issues even after the primaries. THAT is the whole point of the poll. I think this is what you are missing. Even allow for the fact that YOU are one of the people that WOULD vote no matter what the choices are --are you saying the information would NOT have given you reservations? At all? Would you at least see how they would have given others some second thoughts? T
These really are NOT that hard to answer. It is not to say, 'Aha, those folks would have voted for Trump.' That is NOT the point. You seem to think that is a corner to get painted into; it is not. Do you at least understand why this should be asked?[/Quote]
I never said that this poll asked about Trump. However, it does ask about voting in the election in which Trump was the opposition. For some reason you cannot comprehend how Trump is related to this poll or the election in which he was a candidate (sitting president), or it is simply you cannot admit you are wrong. This poll also does not ask about primaries but simply the 2020 election. It says nothing about selections in primaries. Again you are making assumptions.
For me personally, no this information does not give me reservations because Hunter Biden was not on the ticket, unless I missed what he was running for. Why I should I hold the Biden family to a standard that the sitting president at the time and his family is not held to? You cannot see how the two are correlated? Again, you must be pretty naive. Real voters make comparisons and draw conclusions. Everything is not as narrow as you seem to think.
As for the Binary choice, you are technically correct, but history shows us elections are binary. We have hundreds of years that show us that the vast majority of voters simply do not vote for third party candidates. So technically you are right that this information could motivate voters to NOT vote for Biden or NOT voter for Trump. But I operate in reality and statistics show that voters either vote Republican or Democrat, so shifting to vote for third party is highly unlikely. Voters could also choose to not vote at all but turnout in 2020 was the highest in decades so that was also unlikely. I operate in reality not hypotheticals, so yes the 2020 election was indeed a BINARY Choice.
As for my questions about the poll where are my answers?
How many people responded to the poll? What was the political affiliation of respondents? You claimed the poll shows a lot of Democrats would have been swayed. Where is the data to support this? This small poll was only Democrat participants? If so, it is not very representative because Independent Voters sway elections. What other polls align with the results of this one? How many other polls drew similar conclusions?
No sir. This poll did not ask about Trump -- especially if it were known BEFORE the primaries. It is NOT binary. You can NOT vote for Biden and NOT vote for Trump. That was my whole point about the folks that refused to vote for what they saw as subpar Republican candidates. It was especially NOT binary before Biden got the nomination. Still the question remains -- not for you and other far-Left, maybe -- but others might STILL have had some issues even after the primaries. THAT is the whole point of the poll. I think this is what you are missing. Even allow for the fact that YOU are one of the people that WOULD vote no matter what the choices are --are you saying the information would NOT have given you reservations? At all? Would you at least see how they would have given others some second thoughts? T
These really are NOT that hard to answer. It is not to say, 'Aha, those folks would have voted for Trump.' That is NOT the point. You seem to think that is a corner to get painted into; it is not. Do you at least understand why this should be asked?[/Quote]
I never said that this poll asked about Trump. However, it does ask about voting in the election in which Trump was the opposition. For some reason you cannot comprehend how Trump is related to this poll or the election in which he was a candidate (sitting president), or it is simply you cannot admit you are wrong. This poll also does not ask about primaries but simply the 2020 election. It says nothing about selections in primaries. Again you are making assumptions.
For me personally, no this information does not give me reservations because Hunter Biden was not on the ticket, unless I missed what he was running for. Why I should I hold the Biden family to a standard that the sitting president at the time and his family is not held to? You cannot see how the two are correlated? Again, you must be pretty naive. Real voters make comparisons and draw conclusions. Everything is not as narrow as you seem to think.
As for the Binary choice, you are technically correct, but history shows us elections are binary. We have hundreds of years that show us that the vast majority of voters simply do not vote for third party candidates. So technically you are right that this information could motivate voters to NOT vote for Biden or NOT voter for Trump. But I operate in reality and statistics show that voters either vote Republican or Democrat, so shifting to vote for third party is highly unlikely. Voters could also choose to not vote at all but turnout in 2020 was the highest in decades so that was also unlikely. I operate in reality not hypotheticals, so yes the 2020 election was indeed a BINARY Choice.
As for my questions about the poll where are my answers?
How many people responded to the poll? What was the political affiliation of respondents? You claimed the poll shows a lot of Democrats would have been swayed. Where is the data to support this? This small poll was only Democrat participants? If so, it is not very representative because Independent Voters sway elections. What other polls align with the results of this one? How many other polls drew similar conclusions?
Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81: Democratic Party is not the party of the KKK. Again, Confederate, slave owning Southern Democrats started the organization but many Democrats strongly opposed it. The parties strongly switched positions on race and racial equality in the early 20th century. DeezyAZ81 is right. History shows democrat party didn't start the civil war to preserve slavery or establish the Ku Klax Klan. This is confirmed by fact checkers politifact, associated press and USA today. In mid 20th century, republican and democrat parties switch stance on racial equity. Many racist voters who oppose civil rights left democrat party to become republicans. Now democrat party has support of most black voters.
Who needs to go all the way back to the civil war?
Washington Post; As a young man, Mr. Byrd was an ‘exalted cyclops’ of the Ku Klux Klan. Although he apologized numerous times for what he considered a youthful indiscretion, his early votes in Congress--notably a filibuster against the 1964 Civil Rights Act--reflected racially separatist views.
2001; ABC NEWS;
Asked about race relations today, the 83-year-old Byrd said inthe interview taped Friday with Fox News Sunday that they are“much, much better than they’ve ever been in my lifetime. ... Ithink we talk about race too much. I think those problems arelargely behind us.”
He continued: “I think we try to have good will. My old mom told me, ‘Robert, you can’t go to heaven if you hate anybody.’ We practice that. There are white ni**ers. I’ve seen a lot of whiten**ggers in my time; I’m going to use that word.
And to think Biden eulogized him.
1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT; The House passed the bill after 70 days of public hearings and testimony in a 290-130 vote. The bill received 152 “yea” votes from Democrats, or 60 percent of their party, and 138 votes from Republicans, or 78 percent of their party.
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81: Democratic Party is not the party of the KKK. Again, Confederate, slave owning Southern Democrats started the organization but many Democrats strongly opposed it. The parties strongly switched positions on race and racial equality in the early 20th century. DeezyAZ81 is right. History shows democrat party didn't start the civil war to preserve slavery or establish the Ku Klax Klan. This is confirmed by fact checkers politifact, associated press and USA today. In mid 20th century, republican and democrat parties switch stance on racial equity. Many racist voters who oppose civil rights left democrat party to become republicans. Now democrat party has support of most black voters.
Who needs to go all the way back to the civil war?
Washington Post; As a young man, Mr. Byrd was an ‘exalted cyclops’ of the Ku Klux Klan. Although he apologized numerous times for what he considered a youthful indiscretion, his early votes in Congress--notably a filibuster against the 1964 Civil Rights Act--reflected racially separatist views.
2001; ABC NEWS;
Asked about race relations today, the 83-year-old Byrd said inthe interview taped Friday with Fox News Sunday that they are“much, much better than they’ve ever been in my lifetime. ... Ithink we talk about race too much. I think those problems arelargely behind us.”
He continued: “I think we try to have good will. My old mom told me, ‘Robert, you can’t go to heaven if you hate anybody.’ We practice that. There are white ni**ers. I’ve seen a lot of whiten**ggers in my time; I’m going to use that word.
And to think Biden eulogized him.
1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT; The House passed the bill after 70 days of public hearings and testimony in a 290-130 vote. The bill received 152 “yea” votes from Democrats, or 60 percent of their party, and 138 votes from Republicans, or 78 percent of their party.
I never said that this poll asked about Trump. However, it does ask about voting in the election in which Trump was the opposition. For some reason you cannot comprehend how Trump is related to this poll or the election in which he was a candidate (sitting president), or it is simply you cannot admit you are wrong. This poll also does not ask about primaries but simply the 2020 election. It says nothing about selections in primaries. Again you are making assumptions.
Not that it asked about Trump. It is strictly about having reservations about Biden. Yes, you can extrapolate from the poll what folks responses might have been if this was known BEFORE the primaries.
So, the question to you is the same as before --IF YOU KNEW this before the primaries would it have changed your thoughts about voting for Biden? Or would you have looked at another candidate at that time. The poll seems to indicate that others would have. Never forget that Biden was not an overwhelming favorite early on. I get that YOU were going to vote AGAINST ANY Republican. I am saying more moderate voters may not have. What do you think?
For me personally, no this information does not give me reservations because Hunter Biden was not on the ticket, unless I missed what he was running for. Why I should I hold the Biden family to a standard that the sitting president at the time and his family is not held to? You cannot see how the two are correlated? Again, you must be pretty naive. Real voters make comparisons and draw conclusions. Everything is not as narrow as you seem to think.
Not about being narrow or wide -- whatever you think this means as far as determining who to vote for.
BECAUSE it sure seems it is VERY NARROW for you. Vote Democrat no matter what reason there might be not to.
That is what is naive.
@DeezyAZ81
I never said that this poll asked about Trump. However, it does ask about voting in the election in which Trump was the opposition. For some reason you cannot comprehend how Trump is related to this poll or the election in which he was a candidate (sitting president), or it is simply you cannot admit you are wrong. This poll also does not ask about primaries but simply the 2020 election. It says nothing about selections in primaries. Again you are making assumptions.
Not that it asked about Trump. It is strictly about having reservations about Biden. Yes, you can extrapolate from the poll what folks responses might have been if this was known BEFORE the primaries.
So, the question to you is the same as before --IF YOU KNEW this before the primaries would it have changed your thoughts about voting for Biden? Or would you have looked at another candidate at that time. The poll seems to indicate that others would have. Never forget that Biden was not an overwhelming favorite early on. I get that YOU were going to vote AGAINST ANY Republican. I am saying more moderate voters may not have. What do you think?
For me personally, no this information does not give me reservations because Hunter Biden was not on the ticket, unless I missed what he was running for. Why I should I hold the Biden family to a standard that the sitting president at the time and his family is not held to? You cannot see how the two are correlated? Again, you must be pretty naive. Real voters make comparisons and draw conclusions. Everything is not as narrow as you seem to think.
Not about being narrow or wide -- whatever you think this means as far as determining who to vote for.
BECAUSE it sure seems it is VERY NARROW for you. Vote Democrat no matter what reason there might be not to.
As for the Binary choice, you are technically correct, but history shows us elections are binary. We have hundreds of years that show us that the vast majority of voters simply do not vote for third party candidates. So technically you are right that this information could motivate voters to NOT vote for Biden or NOT voter for Trump. But I operate in reality and statistics show that voters either vote Republican or Democrat, so shifting to vote for third party is highly unlikely. Voters could also choose to not vote at all but turnout in 2020 was the highest in decades so that was also unlikely. I operate in reality not hypotheticals, so yes the 2020 election was indeed a BINARY Choice.
Fair enough -- for you it is. I just told you I get that it is for extremists. That was NOT the case for Republicans as I showed you.
I am asking if you ever see a time that Democrats would be that way?
As for my questions about the poll where are my answers?
How many people responded to the poll? What was the political affiliation of respondents? You claimed the poll shows a lot of Democrats would have been swayed. Where is the data to support this? This small poll was only Democrat participants? If so, it is not very representative because Independent Voters sway elections. What other polls align with the results of this one? How many other polls drew similar conclusions?
You can go back to the links and look all of that up. It explained the methodology etc. It seems like it was a standard size -- 1000, or so. Of course they polled Democrats or folks that voted for Biden --That was the WHOLE POINT!
That is not a question for me -- that is a question for you! You were the one disputing a poll and/or the results.
So, now the burden of proof is on you to dispute it with evidence. What polls show the opposite? What do you see that might lead you to believe otherwise, if not polls?
See-- we are right back where we started. You have not provided another poll or other types of evidence to counter this poll?
As for the Binary choice, you are technically correct, but history shows us elections are binary. We have hundreds of years that show us that the vast majority of voters simply do not vote for third party candidates. So technically you are right that this information could motivate voters to NOT vote for Biden or NOT voter for Trump. But I operate in reality and statistics show that voters either vote Republican or Democrat, so shifting to vote for third party is highly unlikely. Voters could also choose to not vote at all but turnout in 2020 was the highest in decades so that was also unlikely. I operate in reality not hypotheticals, so yes the 2020 election was indeed a BINARY Choice.
Fair enough -- for you it is. I just told you I get that it is for extremists. That was NOT the case for Republicans as I showed you.
I am asking if you ever see a time that Democrats would be that way?
As for my questions about the poll where are my answers?
How many people responded to the poll? What was the political affiliation of respondents? You claimed the poll shows a lot of Democrats would have been swayed. Where is the data to support this? This small poll was only Democrat participants? If so, it is not very representative because Independent Voters sway elections. What other polls align with the results of this one? How many other polls drew similar conclusions?
You can go back to the links and look all of that up. It explained the methodology etc. It seems like it was a standard size -- 1000, or so. Of course they polled Democrats or folks that voted for Biden --That was the WHOLE POINT!
That is not a question for me -- that is a question for you! You were the one disputing a poll and/or the results.
So, now the burden of proof is on you to dispute it with evidence. What polls show the opposite? What do you see that might lead you to believe otherwise, if not polls?
See-- we are right back where we started. You have not provided another poll or other types of evidence to counter this poll?
Fair enough -- for you it is. I just told you I get that it is for extremists. That was NOT the case for Republicans as I showed you. I am asking if you ever see a time that Democrats would be that way? As for my questions about the poll where are my answers? How many people responded to the poll? What was the political affiliation of respondents? You claimed the poll shows a lot of Democrats would have been swayed. Where is the data to support this? This small poll was only Democrat participants? If so, it is not very representative because Independent Voters sway elections. What other polls align with the results of this one? How many other polls drew similar conclusions? You can go back to the links and look all of that up. It explained the methodology etc. It seems like it was a standard size -- 1000, or so. Of course they polled Democrats or folks that voted for Biden --That was the WHOLE POINT! That is not a question for me -- that is a question for you! You were the one disputing a poll and/or the results. So, now the burden of proof is on you to dispute it with evidence. What polls show the opposite? What do you see that might lead you to believe otherwise, if not polls? See-- we are right back where we started. You have not provided another poll or other types of evidence to counter this poll?
1 poll of a 1000 Democrats only is obviously not generalizable to the entire population obviously, so you are undermining your entire argument.
1000 participants is also not many Democrats nationwide agree as you claimed. That is just an absurd statement based on the so-called results of a single poll.
If it is only Democrats, that is also not very accurate. Independents now make up the majority of voters, so why weren't they polled?
Also where are the other polls showing the same? There are hundreds of Republican leaning polls, why didn't they choose to conduct a similar poll? Where is the research?
No polls show the opposite because they don't exist. Ding Ding!
This is the basis of my point that no one actually cares this much about Hunter Biden, other than obsessed Trumpers. For pollsters the subject is not even worth researching, which is why there are none showing the opposite because none have been conducted or executed. The topic just isn't very important.
Polls are also not an exact science and not generally very accurate anyway, so why are you drawing conclusions on a single poll to apply to the entire country? You should know better than that.
After all, nothing has even been proven about Hunter Biden yet, it is based on conjecture. I guess a laptop exists, but what investigations have been executed? Enlighten us.
What are the conclusions of the investigations? How would Dems be swayed when all of this Hunter Biden controversy is not founded on facts? Think about it and report back.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
Fair enough -- for you it is. I just told you I get that it is for extremists. That was NOT the case for Republicans as I showed you. I am asking if you ever see a time that Democrats would be that way? As for my questions about the poll where are my answers? How many people responded to the poll? What was the political affiliation of respondents? You claimed the poll shows a lot of Democrats would have been swayed. Where is the data to support this? This small poll was only Democrat participants? If so, it is not very representative because Independent Voters sway elections. What other polls align with the results of this one? How many other polls drew similar conclusions? You can go back to the links and look all of that up. It explained the methodology etc. It seems like it was a standard size -- 1000, or so. Of course they polled Democrats or folks that voted for Biden --That was the WHOLE POINT! That is not a question for me -- that is a question for you! You were the one disputing a poll and/or the results. So, now the burden of proof is on you to dispute it with evidence. What polls show the opposite? What do you see that might lead you to believe otherwise, if not polls? See-- we are right back where we started. You have not provided another poll or other types of evidence to counter this poll?
1 poll of a 1000 Democrats only is obviously not generalizable to the entire population obviously, so you are undermining your entire argument.
1000 participants is also not many Democrats nationwide agree as you claimed. That is just an absurd statement based on the so-called results of a single poll.
If it is only Democrats, that is also not very accurate. Independents now make up the majority of voters, so why weren't they polled?
Also where are the other polls showing the same? There are hundreds of Republican leaning polls, why didn't they choose to conduct a similar poll? Where is the research?
No polls show the opposite because they don't exist. Ding Ding!
This is the basis of my point that no one actually cares this much about Hunter Biden, other than obsessed Trumpers. For pollsters the subject is not even worth researching, which is why there are none showing the opposite because none have been conducted or executed. The topic just isn't very important.
Polls are also not an exact science and not generally very accurate anyway, so why are you drawing conclusions on a single poll to apply to the entire country? You should know better than that.
After all, nothing has even been proven about Hunter Biden yet, it is based on conjecture. I guess a laptop exists, but what investigations have been executed? Enlighten us.
What are the conclusions of the investigations? How would Dems be swayed when all of this Hunter Biden controversy is not founded on facts? Think about it and report back.
Yes, you can extrapolate from the poll what folks responses might have been if this was known BEFORE the primaries. So, the question to you is the same as before --IF YOU KNEW this before the primaries would it have changed your thoughts about voting for Biden? Or would you have looked at another candidate at that time. The poll seems to indicate that others would have. Never forget that Biden was not an overwhelming favorite early on. I get that YOU were going to vote AGAINST ANY Republican. I am saying more moderate voters may not have. What do you think? For me personally, no this information does not give me reservations because Hunter Biden was not on the ticket, unless I missed what he was running for. Why I should I hold the Biden family to a standard that the sitting president at the time and his family is not held to? You cannot see how the two are correlated? Again, you must be pretty naive. Real voters make comparisons and draw conclusions. Everything is not as narrow as you seem to think. Not about being narrow or wide -- whatever you think this means as far as determining who to vote for. BECAUSE it sure seems it is VERY NARROW for you. Vote Democrat no matter what reason there might be not to. That is what is naive.[/Quote]
Where are you getting this primary stuff up? This poll asks nothing about if voters knew Hunter Biden allegations before Primaries? You seem to just be making $hit up as you go and adding your own twist to the survey to suit a narrative.
Secondly, you have no clue as to how I vote, so don't make assumptions. I can do the same. It seems you are very partisan and just vote Republican not matter the reason.
See I can make baseless claims too. You know nothing about me, other than I don't care for Trump as person, President, or candidate. That hardly means I vote Democrat no matter what. But you have a narrative to push but I see through your games.
Yes, you can extrapolate from the poll what folks responses might have been if this was known BEFORE the primaries. So, the question to you is the same as before --IF YOU KNEW this before the primaries would it have changed your thoughts about voting for Biden? Or would you have looked at another candidate at that time. The poll seems to indicate that others would have. Never forget that Biden was not an overwhelming favorite early on. I get that YOU were going to vote AGAINST ANY Republican. I am saying more moderate voters may not have. What do you think? For me personally, no this information does not give me reservations because Hunter Biden was not on the ticket, unless I missed what he was running for. Why I should I hold the Biden family to a standard that the sitting president at the time and his family is not held to? You cannot see how the two are correlated? Again, you must be pretty naive. Real voters make comparisons and draw conclusions. Everything is not as narrow as you seem to think. Not about being narrow or wide -- whatever you think this means as far as determining who to vote for. BECAUSE it sure seems it is VERY NARROW for you. Vote Democrat no matter what reason there might be not to. That is what is naive.[/Quote]
Where are you getting this primary stuff up? This poll asks nothing about if voters knew Hunter Biden allegations before Primaries? You seem to just be making $hit up as you go and adding your own twist to the survey to suit a narrative.
Secondly, you have no clue as to how I vote, so don't make assumptions. I can do the same. It seems you are very partisan and just vote Republican not matter the reason.
See I can make baseless claims too. You know nothing about me, other than I don't care for Trump as person, President, or candidate. That hardly means I vote Democrat no matter what. But you have a narrative to push but I see through your games.
The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on?
Dude I applaud you. This person MIGHT be an independent, but he's Democrat at heart. I was asked for a poll, I provided it. They dig their heels in and won't budge no matter what. He's being critical of the number of people. These polls don't poll millions of people, they vote a certain demographic or sometimes it's just registered voters. You are running your head into a brick wall with these people.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on?
Dude I applaud you. This person MIGHT be an independent, but he's Democrat at heart. I was asked for a poll, I provided it. They dig their heels in and won't budge no matter what. He's being critical of the number of people. These polls don't poll millions of people, they vote a certain demographic or sometimes it's just registered voters. You are running your head into a brick wall with these people.
@DeezyAZ81 Yes. That is how polls are done. They obviously have to sample a variety of folks. Usually about 1000 is a good statistical size. What dd you expect, 200,000? Yes. The questions in the poll were phrased to explain the facts. That was the whole point of the poll. IF IT WERE PROVEN FACTUAL -- would it then change your opinion or at least give you pause. This is not the complicated. It is obvious: some folks it would matter; to you, it would not.
You are clueless. Yes, I understand how polls are done. You seem to be missing the point, yet again. If there were multiple polls that showed the same thing, then perhaps this would be relevant, but there aren't.
You realize there are thousands of polls right? Each conducts polls on public opinion and predictions on elections. Yet, only one poll out of the thousands decided to ask respondents about Hunter Biden? Why do you think that is??? HMMMM. Figure it out. Because it isn't that important.
If allegations were proven to be factual and true and the investigation showed that Joe Biden committed some kind of crime and not Hunter Biden, then of course I would consider the facts.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
@DeezyAZ81 Yes. That is how polls are done. They obviously have to sample a variety of folks. Usually about 1000 is a good statistical size. What dd you expect, 200,000? Yes. The questions in the poll were phrased to explain the facts. That was the whole point of the poll. IF IT WERE PROVEN FACTUAL -- would it then change your opinion or at least give you pause. This is not the complicated. It is obvious: some folks it would matter; to you, it would not.
You are clueless. Yes, I understand how polls are done. You seem to be missing the point, yet again. If there were multiple polls that showed the same thing, then perhaps this would be relevant, but there aren't.
You realize there are thousands of polls right? Each conducts polls on public opinion and predictions on elections. Yet, only one poll out of the thousands decided to ask respondents about Hunter Biden? Why do you think that is??? HMMMM. Figure it out. Because it isn't that important.
If allegations were proven to be factual and true and the investigation showed that Joe Biden committed some kind of crime and not Hunter Biden, then of course I would consider the facts.
Absolutely I know how you voted. It is a pretty fair assumption YOU voted FOR Biden. Or at least AGAINST Trump. So, the poll was for PEOPLE exactly like you.
So this means I vote Democrat every election? Where do you come up with these assumptions? You are far out there man. It is possible for people to simply vote for candidates and not political party like you as a partisan vote.
You voted for Trump, so you must vote Republican every election, regardless of candidate and election rigging claims. I must be right.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
Absolutely I know how you voted. It is a pretty fair assumption YOU voted FOR Biden. Or at least AGAINST Trump. So, the poll was for PEOPLE exactly like you.
So this means I vote Democrat every election? Where do you come up with these assumptions? You are far out there man. It is possible for people to simply vote for candidates and not political party like you as a partisan vote.
You voted for Trump, so you must vote Republican every election, regardless of candidate and election rigging claims. I must be right.
The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on?
I gave you the burden of proof but you lack critical thinking skills.
The Burden of Proof is that polls about Hunter Biden are not even being conducted by hundreds of polling outlets, which shows it isn't even important to ask about because no one aside from you and the 10 trump lovers in this forum no one really cares. You are basing your opinion on a single Republican leaning poll, and then saying refute it. Do you know how stupid that sounds? To base an entire perspective on one poll of 1000 participants when others outlets aren't even polling on it because it lacks relevance.
You are very weak at debating.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on?
I gave you the burden of proof but you lack critical thinking skills.
The Burden of Proof is that polls about Hunter Biden are not even being conducted by hundreds of polling outlets, which shows it isn't even important to ask about because no one aside from you and the 10 trump lovers in this forum no one really cares. You are basing your opinion on a single Republican leaning poll, and then saying refute it. Do you know how stupid that sounds? To base an entire perspective on one poll of 1000 participants when others outlets aren't even polling on it because it lacks relevance.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: @DeezyAZ81 Yes. That is how polls are done. They obviously have to sample a variety of folks. Usually about 1000 is a good statistical size. What dd you expect, 200,000? Yes. The questions in the poll were phrased to explain the facts. That was the whole point of the poll. IF IT WERE PROVEN FACTUAL -- would it then change your opinion or at least give you pause. This is not the complicated. It is obvious: some folks it would matter; to you, it would not. You are clueless. Yes, I understand how polls are done. You seem to be missing the point, yet again. If there were multiple polls that showed the same thing, then perhaps this would be relevant, but there aren't. You realize there are thousands of polls right? Each conducts polls on public opinion and predictions on elections. Yet, only one poll out of the thousands decided to ask respondents about Hunter Biden? Why do you think that is??? HMMMM. Figure it out. Because it isn't that important. If allegations were proven to be factual and true and the investigation showed that Joe Biden committed some kind of crime and not Hunter Biden, then of course I would consider the facts.
"I'm the MOST HONEST human being that GOD EVER created!" - Donald "the felon" Trump
Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: @DeezyAZ81 Yes. That is how polls are done. They obviously have to sample a variety of folks. Usually about 1000 is a good statistical size. What dd you expect, 200,000? Yes. The questions in the poll were phrased to explain the facts. That was the whole point of the poll. IF IT WERE PROVEN FACTUAL -- would it then change your opinion or at least give you pause. This is not the complicated. It is obvious: some folks it would matter; to you, it would not. You are clueless. Yes, I understand how polls are done. You seem to be missing the point, yet again. If there were multiple polls that showed the same thing, then perhaps this would be relevant, but there aren't. You realize there are thousands of polls right? Each conducts polls on public opinion and predictions on elections. Yet, only one poll out of the thousands decided to ask respondents about Hunter Biden? Why do you think that is??? HMMMM. Figure it out. Because it isn't that important. If allegations were proven to be factual and true and the investigation showed that Joe Biden committed some kind of crime and not Hunter Biden, then of course I would consider the facts.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: @DeezyAZ81 Yes. That is how polls are done. They obviously have to sample a variety of folks. Usually about 1000 is a good statistical size. What dd you expect, 200,000? Yes. The questions in the poll were phrased to explain the facts. That was the whole point of the poll. IF IT WERE PROVEN FACTUAL -- would it then change your opinion or at least give you pause. This is not the complicated. It is obvious: some folks it would matter; to you, it would not. You are clueless. Yes, I understand how polls are done. You seem to be missing the point, yet again. If there were multiple polls that showed the same thing, then perhaps this would be relevant, but there aren't. You realize there are thousands of polls right? Each conducts polls on public opinion and predictions on elections. Yet, only one poll out of the thousands decided to ask respondents about Hunter Biden? Why do you think that is??? HMMMM. Figure it out. Because it isn't that important. If allegations were proven to be factual and true and the investigation showed that Joe Biden committed some kind of crime and not Hunter Biden, then of course I would consider the facts.
Thanks! Fair enough. So, it is reasonable to assume others would as well. I do not even think a poll needed to be done. I think it is common sense. Which I think is the whole point about why they tried to suppress it.
But I do applaud you for admitting it.
Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: @DeezyAZ81 Yes. That is how polls are done. They obviously have to sample a variety of folks. Usually about 1000 is a good statistical size. What dd you expect, 200,000? Yes. The questions in the poll were phrased to explain the facts. That was the whole point of the poll. IF IT WERE PROVEN FACTUAL -- would it then change your opinion or at least give you pause. This is not the complicated. It is obvious: some folks it would matter; to you, it would not. You are clueless. Yes, I understand how polls are done. You seem to be missing the point, yet again. If there were multiple polls that showed the same thing, then perhaps this would be relevant, but there aren't. You realize there are thousands of polls right? Each conducts polls on public opinion and predictions on elections. Yet, only one poll out of the thousands decided to ask respondents about Hunter Biden? Why do you think that is??? HMMMM. Figure it out. Because it isn't that important. If allegations were proven to be factual and true and the investigation showed that Joe Biden committed some kind of crime and not Hunter Biden, then of course I would consider the facts.
Thanks! Fair enough. So, it is reasonable to assume others would as well. I do not even think a poll needed to be done. I think it is common sense. Which I think is the whole point about why they tried to suppress it.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on? I gave you the burden of proof but you lack critical thinking skills. The Burden of Proof is that polls about Hunter Biden are not even being conducted by hundreds of polling outlets, which shows it isn't even important to ask about because no one aside from you and the 10 trump lovers in this forum no one really cares. You are basing your opinion on a single Republican leaning poll, and then saying refute it. Do you know how stupid that sounds? To base an entire perspective on one poll of 1000 participants when others outlets aren't even polling on it because it lacks relevance. You are very weak at debating.
You did not provide any proof. Nothing to refute the results of the poll. Hard to be weaker than you when you try to do it with emotion alone.
Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on? I gave you the burden of proof but you lack critical thinking skills. The Burden of Proof is that polls about Hunter Biden are not even being conducted by hundreds of polling outlets, which shows it isn't even important to ask about because no one aside from you and the 10 trump lovers in this forum no one really cares. You are basing your opinion on a single Republican leaning poll, and then saying refute it. Do you know how stupid that sounds? To base an entire perspective on one poll of 1000 participants when others outlets aren't even polling on it because it lacks relevance. You are very weak at debating.
You did not provide any proof. Nothing to refute the results of the poll. Hard to be weaker than you when you try to do it with emotion alone.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on? One question for you? Please explain how any poll can be wrong.
Stay focused on this poll. Unless you want to start another thread on your issues with polling. I am not questioning whether polls can be right or wrong. Not what I am trying to get the fellow to see.
Quote Originally Posted by darkhorse12:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on? One question for you? Please explain how any poll can be wrong.
Stay focused on this poll. Unless you want to start another thread on your issues with polling. I am not questioning whether polls can be right or wrong. Not what I am trying to get the fellow to see.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on? One question for you? Please explain how any poll can be wrong.
The guy cannot because he does not operate with logic or reasoning. He is clueless. He does not even understand that refuting a single opinion poll of a small sample is not possible. It's like saying prove i didn't murder someone. The burden of proof is on you. Clownish behavior and silly non-argument.
He thinks this small single opinion poll sums up all Democrats views on Hunter Biden and the election and swears he is making a sound argument.
Quote Originally Posted by darkhorse12:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: The burden of proof is still on you. Was the poll wrong? If so, what do you base that on? One question for you? Please explain how any poll can be wrong.
The guy cannot because he does not operate with logic or reasoning. He is clueless. He does not even understand that refuting a single opinion poll of a small sample is not possible. It's like saying prove i didn't murder someone. The burden of proof is on you. Clownish behavior and silly non-argument.
He thinks this small single opinion poll sums up all Democrats views on Hunter Biden and the election and swears he is making a sound argument.
[Fair enough. So, it is reasonable to assume others would as well. I do not even think a poll needed to be done. I think it is common sense. Which I think is the whole point about why they tried to suppress it. But I do applaud you for admitting it.[/Quote]
Who the eff is they??? The media? For claiming to not be a Trumper, you sure sound just like him. "They tried to suppress it." If "they" tried to suppress it, "they" surely did a poor job because Hunter Biden and the laptop story was all over the Internet and social media during the election cycle and it sure didn't change the election results.
[Fair enough. So, it is reasonable to assume others would as well. I do not even think a poll needed to be done. I think it is common sense. Which I think is the whole point about why they tried to suppress it. But I do applaud you for admitting it.[/Quote]
Who the eff is they??? The media? For claiming to not be a Trumper, you sure sound just like him. "They tried to suppress it." If "they" tried to suppress it, "they" surely did a poor job because Hunter Biden and the laptop story was all over the Internet and social media during the election cycle and it sure didn't change the election results.
Hot Forum Topics
