Quinnipiac Poll May 1st, 2007

[red states rule]

no...you are pathetic. a coward who is chased around the board running away from questions. that is what you do. you run away.

I am right here - driving you nuts with facts

 

[maineman]

I am right here - driving you nuts with facts

you are "here", as in "online" "logged in"... but you are always running. you do not have the courage or the intellect to stand and discuss issues. You like to bring up the democrat's poll numbers but will not stand and debate the clear data I bring from polls.

you run away from answering every question.... because you are a coward.

 

[red states rule]

you are "here", as in "online" "logged in"... but you are always running. you do not have the courage or the intellect to stand and discuss issues. You like to bring up the democrat's poll numbers but will not stand and debate the clear data I bring from polls.

you run away from answering every question.... because you are a coward.

and you are a angry liberal who sees his party falling apart and can't accept it

 

[maineman]

and you are a angry liberal who sees his party falling apart and can't accept it

I am not angry at all. I see my party struggling to find a way to do the people's business and move their agenda forward.... I am seeing my party trying to end a terrible mistake in Iraq and I see the people solidly behind their efforts to do so.... I see a public that is growing uneasy at the inaction in washington about the war, But I certainly do not see my party falling apart.... and I wonder what you think the 13% disparity says about how poorly the american public thinks of YOUR party.

I ask you questions. simple questions. you are either too frightened to answer or you are too ignorant to answer....I have no idea which, I only know that you run away from everything.

let me know when you grow a set of balls.

 

[red states rule]

I am not angry at all. I see my party struggling to find a way to do the people's business and move their agenda forward.... I am seeing my party trying to end a terrible mistake in Iraq and I see the people solidly behind their efforts to do so.... I see a public that is growing uneasy at the inaction in washington about the war, But I certainly do not see my party falling apart.... and I wonder what you think the 13% disparity says about how poorly the american public thinks of YOUR party.

I ask you questions. simple questions. you are either too frightened to answer or you are too ignorant to answer....I have no idea which, I only know that you run away from everything.

let me know when you grow a set of balls.

It's going to get worse..the leadership in the congress has absolutely no idea what the people of this country expect of them..except what they get from the moveon.. Sheehan, Soros camps...and that IS NOT the majority of the voters of this country...

and your anger will grow

 

[maineman]

like I said...if you want to discuss issues, and ask questions and answer questions, you let me know.

When you have quit running from anything that you don't like..... just stop and answer my questions and we'll be all set.

 

[red states rule]

like I said...if you want to discuss issues, and ask questions and answer questions, you let me know.

When you have quit running from anything that you don't like..... just stop and answer my questions and we'll be all set.

I have answered them

One of your many problems is you want people to debate your way and answer your questions the way you want them to answer

Facts have never mattered much to you

 

[maineman]

your "answer" to the 13% disparity in the Harris poll is that they MAY have a higher democratic sample. That is not a valid answer. To suggest that is to suggest that the Harris poll does not know how to normalize data...to suggest that is to suggest that the Harris poll is a partisan poll....

to suggest that as your "answer" for the 13% disparity is cowardly and pathetic and continued evidence of your running away from everything.

when you grow a set of balls.... you be sure and let me know, OK?

 

[red states rule]

your "answer" to the 13% disparity in the Harris poll is that they MAY have a higher democratic sample. That is not a valid answer. To suggest that is to suggest that the Harris poll does not know how to normalize data...to suggest that is to suggest that the Harris poll is a partisan poll....

to suggest that as your "answer" for the 13% disparity is cowardly and pathetic and continued evidence of your running away from everything.

when you grow a set of balls.... you be sure and let me know, OK?

Logic is not one of your stronger points MM

Are you wanting borrow a pair son - try sucking it up and getting your own

 

[red states rule]

PELOSI LOWERS THE BOOM
Wed May 16 2007 14:43:59 ET

After losing a string of embarrassing votes on the House floor because of procedural maneuvering, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has decided to change the current House Rules to completely shut down the floor to the minority.

The Democratic Leadership is threatening to change the current House Rules regarding the Republican right to the Motion to Recommit or the test of germaneness on the motion to recommit. This would be the first change to the germaneness rule since 1822.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm

In protest, the House Republicans are going to call procedural motions every half hour.

That's how ALOT of little children handle it when they don't get their way - they throw a temper tantrum.

 

[red states rule]

your "answer" to the 13% disparity in the Harris poll is that they MAY have a higher democratic sample. That is not a valid answer. To suggest that is to suggest that the Harris poll does not know how to normalize data...to suggest that is to suggest that the Harris poll is a partisan poll....

to suggest that as your "answer" for the 13% disparity is cowardly and pathetic and continued evidence of your running away from everything.

when you grow a set of balls.... you be sure and let me know, OK?

I should have know not to clog your pea brain with logic and reason

 

[maineman]

If you claim that your suggestion that explanation as to the 13% disparity between congressional democrats and republicans is that the Harris poll is biased .... if that claim is an example of your "logic and reason", we really don't speak the same language, I guess.

from my vantage....you don't have an answer to that question..... so you run away from it.

every day...every question..... run away....run away.

 

[maineman]

so...if you think Harris is biased, let's look at some others, shall we?

ABC News/Washington Post Poll. April 12-15, 2007. N=1,141 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3. Fieldwork by TNS.

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democrats in Congress are doing their job?"

Approve 54%
Disapprove 44%
Unsure 2%

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republicans in Congress are doing their job?"

Approve 39%
Disapprove 59%
Unsure 2%

USA Today/Gallup Poll. Feb. 9-11, 2007. N=1,006 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democrats in Congress are handling their job?"

Approve 41%
Disapprove 50%
Unsure 9%

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republicans in Congress are handling their job?"

Approve 33%
Disapprove 59%
Unsure 8%


All I am saying is: if I were a REPUBLICAN and my party had those sorts of approval numbers when compared to DEMOCRATS, I don't think I would be crowing too much about poll numbers

 

[maineman]

who wants to bet that RSR won't spin and dance and avoid answering that question?

Or perhaps he'll just claim that those polls called more democrats than republicans.....

Clearly, America is not thrilled with the performance of Congress - they rarely are.... but equally clearly, America is much less disappointed with Democrats than they are with Republicans.

Clearly, a majority of American's supported the democrat's troop funding bill that included withdrawal deadlines - and did NOT support Bush's veto of that bill... even though RSR tries desperately to avoid answering that as well.

 

[maineman]

RSR.... let's see how you can avoid addressing the substance of these latest poll numbers.

are you gonna suggest that the sample size MAY have had more democrats and that's why it should be ignored?

 

[red states rule]

RSR.... let's see how you can avoid addressing the substance of these latest poll numbers.

are you gonna suggest that the sample size MAY have had more democrats and that's why it should be ignored?

I have addressed the Gallop that shows the Dem Congress has lower numbers then Pres Bush

I know it depresses the hell out of you - but that what happens when a political party pushes for surrender

 

[maineman]

I have addressed the Gallop that shows the Dem Congress has lower numbers then Pres Bush

I know it depresses the hell out of you - but that what happens when a political party pushes for surrender

and I have addressed the Gallup poll results as well. YOu have not addressed the quinnipiac poll which was the subject of this thread. If you have no intention of addressing the very subject of a thread, why spam it with a bunch of bullshit? Address the polling data that I have presented in this thread or run away from it.... if you want to start a thread about the fucking gallop poll... feel free. This thread is not about that poll. talk about this poll and this thread or run away...it really is that simple.

fly fly

 

[red states rule]

and I have addressed the Gallup poll results as well. YOu have not addressed the quinnipiac poll which was the subject of this thread. If you have no intention of addressing the very subject of a thread, why spam it with a bunch of bullshit? Address the polling data that I have presented in this thread or run away from it.... if you want to start a thread about the fucking gallop poll... feel free. This thread is not about that poll. talk about this poll and this thread or run away...it really is that simple.

fly fly

as I said, it may have had a bigger Dem sample

It would not be the first time it happened

 

[maineman]

as I said, it may have had a bigger Dem sample

It would not be the first time it happened

lol


you know that Gallup poll you keep touting?

It is fucking WORTHLESS why? because it may have had a bigger republican sample. It would not be the first time. THE GALLUP POLL IS NOT WORTH THE PAPER IT IS PRINTED ON! QUIT MENTIONING IT!!!!

 

[maineman]

DO ALL THESE HAVE BIGGER DEMOCRATIC SAMPLES TOO? DO RESPECTED POLLING ORGANIZATIONS NOT KNOW HOW TO NORMALIZE POLLING RESULTS?

so...if you think Harris is biased, let's look at some others, shall we?

ABC News/Washington Post Poll. April 12-15, 2007. N=1,141 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3. Fieldwork by TNS.

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democrats in Congress are doing their job?"

Approve 54%
Disapprove 44%
Unsure 2%

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republicans in Congress are doing their job?"

Approve 39%
Disapprove 59%
Unsure 2%

USA Today/Gallup Poll. Feb. 9-11, 2007. N=1,006 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democrats in Congress are handling their job?"

Approve 41%
Disapprove 50%
Unsure 9%

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republicans in Congress are handling their job?"

Approve 33%
Disapprove 59%
Unsure 8%


All I am saying is: if I were a REPUBLICAN and my party had those sorts of approval numbers when compared to DEMOCRATS, I don't think I would be crowing too much about poll numbers