How Obama Got Elected
- Thread starter blondechick
- Start date
More than shocking it's frightening. The absolute stupidity of Obama supporters, many of whom are far too stupid to be allowed to vote as this video clearly illustrates. Additionally, the media itself that is so against the first amendment in it's intended form. It's the dawn of a very sad era for this nation.
scottanhelen
Seasoned Expediter
Wow they found 12 people who voted that could not answer some questions. That is what % of the Obama voters??? I wonder if all of the ones that voted for the other side could pass this test???
Not too hard to find 12 morons of any political persuasion on the streets. What I found interesting is how their source of current events (mainstream media) shaped their answers. The woman who couldn't even give an answer other than "I don't know" to 90% of the questions got her news and information from NPR.
On a junior high school science test the multiple choice extra credit question was: Who is buried in Grant's tomb? One of the four answers was Grant. Something that obvious had to be wrong so I took a stab at one of the remaining three. No extra credit for me.
Sacagawea?
Black Sheep
Expert Expediter
It wasn't 12, it was 512. Scroll to the bottom of the screen and you'll see these results of the Zogby poll which these interviews were designed to support:
Zogby Poll
512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points
97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates
Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions
57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)
71.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)
82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)
88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)
56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).
And yet.....
Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes
Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter
And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!
Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.
Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)
These are people that obviously get their information from the mainstream media, probably the three major TV networks. A fine example of the results we get from the extreme media bias apparent in this campaign. What's more, it will only get worse when the Democrat congress passes the "Fairness Doctrine".
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
The ignorant are easily duped. It took McCain a lot more work to get his votes. That should tell you something.
scottanhelen
Seasoned Expediter
Ok 512 is still not a large % of the people who voted for Obama. And it sure does not say that they Obama suporters are any less in formed. For this we would need a larger study and on both sides. That is if we we were trying to be fair.
No, all the voters on the other side couldn't pass the test either I'm sure but it would be a far far better score than the Obama voters.
The thing is, this poll does in fact meet the criteria for a push poll, not so much in the questions themselves, but the mere fact that only Obama voters were questioned. A theory about the knowledge of Obama voters, as well as a theory about the media bias, was formed, and the poll was designed from the ground up to gather data to support the theories. That doesn't mean the polling data was inaccurate, but is does mean the conclusions drawn from the data are highly suspect, specially if they are passed off as any kind of definitive conclusions, as John Ziegler is almost certain to do with his "documentary". Michael Moore made those kinds of leaps and bounds an art form in his documentaries.
The one question in the poll that was particularly striking is:
Which candidate said, "I can see Russia from my house"?
Considering that no candidate said that, and the only candidate who lives even remotely close to Russia is Palin, that question is a little like asking people when they stopped beating their wife. Stating that 25% would get that one correct by guessing is a misnomer, since 100% of the answers to that one would be incorrect, guessed or not.
The polling conclusions seem to hit hard on the fact that people know about Palin's pregnant teenage daughter, but then again she was the only candidate with a pregnant teenage daughter, and people knew about it. Ziegler is trying to make that out to be a media bias, but in order for that to be a media bias, Obama or Biden would have also had to have a pregnant teenage daughter that the press failed to report.
The biggest problem with the poll isn't that it's to gather data about the media bias, but it's to gather data to support the notion that Obama was elected solely as a result of the media bias. If the purpose of the poll was to actually reveal the media bias, then all voters would have been questioned, and not merely Obama voters.
Ziegler's defense of only questioning Obama voters is deeply flawed, ("I was not trying to prove that Obama voters are dumber or less informed than those who voted for McCain. I only polled Obama voters because I was trying to test the media's impact on the election. Since Obama won, it would be pointless (not to mention twice as expensive) to poll McCain voters.") as this only tests the media's impact on only one segment of voters.
The same questions asked of McCain voters would likely yield the same results in many cases. There's just an astounding percentage of people right across the board who are politically illiterate and get the bulk of their information from a slanted media. A more encompassing poll would have shown that, but then again, that wasn't the purpose of the poll, even though Ziegler has stated otherwise.
The studies have shown a particularly one-sided slant on this year's election. It used to be that while it was slanted, they at least made the cursory attempt at telling both sides. This year, they didn't even try. They went out of their way to slant the reporting and didn't try to hide it. Ziegler should have approached the polling for that reason, rather than concentrating on just the Obama voters. The end results would have been much more credible, just as accurate and, and much more resistant to the criticisms that it is getting.
The one question in the poll that was particularly striking is:
Which candidate said, "I can see Russia from my house"?
Considering that no candidate said that, and the only candidate who lives even remotely close to Russia is Palin, that question is a little like asking people when they stopped beating their wife. Stating that 25% would get that one correct by guessing is a misnomer, since 100% of the answers to that one would be incorrect, guessed or not.
The polling conclusions seem to hit hard on the fact that people know about Palin's pregnant teenage daughter, but then again she was the only candidate with a pregnant teenage daughter, and people knew about it. Ziegler is trying to make that out to be a media bias, but in order for that to be a media bias, Obama or Biden would have also had to have a pregnant teenage daughter that the press failed to report.
The biggest problem with the poll isn't that it's to gather data about the media bias, but it's to gather data to support the notion that Obama was elected solely as a result of the media bias. If the purpose of the poll was to actually reveal the media bias, then all voters would have been questioned, and not merely Obama voters.
Ziegler's defense of only questioning Obama voters is deeply flawed, ("I was not trying to prove that Obama voters are dumber or less informed than those who voted for McCain. I only polled Obama voters because I was trying to test the media's impact on the election. Since Obama won, it would be pointless (not to mention twice as expensive) to poll McCain voters.") as this only tests the media's impact on only one segment of voters.
The same questions asked of McCain voters would likely yield the same results in many cases. There's just an astounding percentage of people right across the board who are politically illiterate and get the bulk of their information from a slanted media. A more encompassing poll would have shown that, but then again, that wasn't the purpose of the poll, even though Ziegler has stated otherwise.
The studies have shown a particularly one-sided slant on this year's election. It used to be that while it was slanted, they at least made the cursory attempt at telling both sides. This year, they didn't even try. They went out of their way to slant the reporting and didn't try to hide it. Ziegler should have approached the polling for that reason, rather than concentrating on just the Obama voters. The end results would have been much more credible, just as accurate and, and much more resistant to the criticisms that it is getting.
Black Sheep
Expert Expediter
The size of the sampling is not as important as the percentages of the sampling. Given that the group was chosen at random, it's pretty safe to say that the percentages of Obama voters would be the same, even if you included all Obama voters. But I think the larger point here is that their ignorance is the result of media bias. Most of these people believe what they see on the network news, and most of them probably watch NBC, CBS or ABC. What they read in their newspapers is more than likely a story picked up from the Associated Press, whose liberal slant becomes more pronounced with each passing day. The picture of Obama seen by most Americans was one painted by the mainstream media; the flaws were obviously airbrushed out, and anything negative was ignored.
By contrast, consider the way Sarah Palin was trashed in spite of the fact that she had more executive experience than Obama and her approval rating as governor of Alaska was in the 90s. Every word she said was parsed, taken out of context or twisted to create a negative spin. Even the content of Sat. Night Live skits was taken to be factual. To add insult to injury, the media also jumped all over the cowardly leaks provided by McCain's lackeys trying to blame her for his poorly run campaign. In spite of all this, she is still very popular among conservative republicans and will continue to be a rising star in the party.
By contrast, consider the way Sarah Palin was trashed in spite of the fact that she had more executive experience than Obama and her approval rating as governor of Alaska was in the 90s. Every word she said was parsed, taken out of context or twisted to create a negative spin. Even the content of Sat. Night Live skits was taken to be factual. To add insult to injury, the media also jumped all over the cowardly leaks provided by McCain's lackeys trying to blame her for his poorly run campaign. In spite of all this, she is still very popular among conservative republicans and will continue to be a rising star in the party.
letzrockexpress
Veteran Expediter
Anyone who believes that there are any more dumb democrats than dumb republicans falls into one of those 2 catagories... stupidity is universal. I'd like to see this poll taken at a Flying J or Pilot...
Last edited:
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
The 'leak' you mention was not factual. The media who leaked it, gave a source who's name and organization didn't exist. So much for checking their sources, huh? We have a media that reports rumor and innuendo, rather than actually doing their jobs.
Can anyone say disgraced Dan Rather? letzrock, we know you are a staunch liberal and we also know there are a lot of dumb republicans. I'd love to see the poll done with many thousands of random voters. I'm sure the Obama side will win the dumb award, perhaps not by a landslide but by at least his margin of victory if not more.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Would you agree the worst schools are in the inner cities, along with the highest drop out rate? That being said, if education = knowledge = intelligence, you could deduce the most uneducated come from those areas, which are solidly Democrat. I would say there are fewer ppl who vote Republican 'just because', where there were shown to be MANY clueless followers of Obama this last election. Granted, the clueless could mostly be considered independent. But I would classify the sheep that cheered at Obama's every rock star chord as Democrats (mostly young and DUMB). Then there's the race issue, that I won't get into, because we all know that NOBODY voted for Obama cause he's black. That would be as stupid as ppl NOT voting for him cause he's black.
Now let's focus on ideology. It takes a lot more brains to be a conservative (and not just claim it, as so many do). It takes a lot of touchy-feely to be liberal, without much thought involved with the consequences that liberalism causes. Ppl are liberal, usually, because it feels good to be so. Ppl are conservative, mostly, because conservatism enhances the free market benefits of their hard work and/or the risk taken in their investments. In that aspect, I would conclude conservatives are more intelligent than liberals. Of course, there are exceptions. Lawyers and professors on the left, for example. I'm just talking generalities.
Ignorance starts in the Home, may very well continue on into the school system and back to the Home after school. I don't see how anyone can blame a TV news network for their ignorance.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Ignorant by choice, maybe. It is bliss, afterall.
blondechick
Seasoned Expediter
I don't believe the video is trying to insinuate that these people are "stupid", they are uninformed. Media bias and a lack of interest are major causes of ignorance. Most ladies will not buy a handbag without knowing the designer, current fashion, and color trends; yet they won't spend 5 minutes online researching a presidential candidate, Boring. Would any of you buy a truck sight unseen with no knowledge of horsepower, engine type, and manufacture? Without information, how can a person make an informed decision? I don't think most people realize how important their vote is. They put more thought into who to vote for on American Idol. It makes me sad. I have friends who voted for Obama and they are informed and chose him anyway, that their choice; but I am sickened by a few people who have told me they were voting for Obama "because he's smokin' hot".
Sometimes ignorance is OK I don't know how my micorwave works, but I can use it anyway. A person doesn't have to be a scientist or an engineer to understand the basic structure of our government.
Want to see "stupid" watch Jay Walking or Street Smarts. I am sure most of those people are registered voters too. Voter registration doesn't require an IQ test.
I have friends who voted for Obama and they are informed and chose him anyway, that their choice; but I am sickened by a few people who have told me they were voting for Obama "because he's smokin' hot".Sometimes ignorance is OK I don't know how my micorwave works, but I can use it anyway. A person doesn't have to be a scientist or an engineer to understand the basic structure of our government.
Want to see "stupid" watch Jay Walking or Street Smarts. I am sure most of those people are registered voters too. Voter registration doesn't require an IQ test.
dcalien
Seasoned Expediter
I believe we are about to get a 4 year or possibly 8 year study on the supporters on each side.
And I still wonder how half black and half white equals black.