!!!THE REAL REASON! Obama Is ACTUALLY Disliked!!! ITS NOT RACISM!!! | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1243759 United States 06/27/2012 05:46 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
SwampRatLost
(OP) User ID: 1409851 United States 06/27/2012 05:52 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 9322922 Australia 06/27/2012 05:56 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
theundead
User ID: 17973899 Germany 06/27/2012 05:57 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I would like to offer some statistics, that hopefully will give a little perspective to the coming 2012 Presidential Election. I had a theory pop into my head this morning, and once I looked up the data behind it, I was amazed at the outcome. Quoting: SwampRatLost Back during '07, when the campaigning for '08 was in full swing, it was an extremely difficult time for anyone opposed to Obama as President. I know this, because I watched and felt it first hand. Most of what any of us discovered about him was never brought to light in the Media. And if any was... It was immediately silenced by the accusations of racism. This is why the Birther debate continued, why the Muslim debate continued, why all of the debates concerning his history continued. Most of these issues were never publicly discussed, or fully explained prior to the election. Even those that were eventually put to rest, could have been silenced even sooner, if there had actually been some openess in the conversation. And more openess from Obama himself. Claims continue, that racial motivations are behind these attacks, or any negativity directed at the Pres. And I can only imagine what It will be like once campaigning for this election year really gears up. As I stated above I would like to address the claim that Obama is one of the most attacked Presidents in history, and why this might be, with some statistics that some might not be familiar. I had a theory that the increases in attacks, may be due to an increased number of American's having access to the net, and being able to do their own research on the candidates, and here is what I found... 1992 - Clinton/George H Bush/Perot 2% - Of American Households Had Internet 1996 - Clinton/Dole/Perot 26% 2000 - George W. Bush/Gore/Nader 44% 2004 - George W. Bush/Kerry 68% 2008 - Obama/McCain 72% If you notice prior to 2004, there was such a small percentage of Americans who were actually connected to the net. So you can imagine, at that time, any information that the Majority of American's received about the candidates, was fed to them by the media. It wasn't until 2004, that the percentages broke 50%, so there were alot of new net users out there. How many of those do you think had gotten over the shock and awe of email, net porn, chatrooms, and rotten.com, to actually use the net for research? Sure there were us conspiracy nuts, but we were few and far between, especially back then! And I'm not sure about you, but I skewered the hell out of Bush! So please step back this coming election year... And rethink labeling anyone opposed to Obama, as a racist. It might be that we are just more informed then we were in the past. To go from only 2% in the Clinton Era! To the almost 75% in Obama Era! I had the theory, but to actually see those numbers amazed me! Hugs The links to the statistical data used is here: if there was no Data for the actual election yr. I used the data from the closest yr. following. As to not skew the results in favor of my theory. [link to www.nsf.gov] [link to www.internetworldstats.com] WELL DONE SIR! you are on to something here! 5 stars. You can grow ideas, in the garden of your MIND. |
SwampRatLost
(OP) User ID: 1409851 United States 06/27/2012 06:00 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
SwampRatLost
(OP) User ID: 1409851 United States 06/27/2012 06:03 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I would like to offer some statistics, that hopefully will give a little perspective to the coming 2012 Presidential Election. I had a theory pop into my head this morning, and once I looked up the data behind it, I was amazed at the outcome. Quoting: SwampRatLost Back during '07, when the campaigning for '08 was in full swing, it was an extremely difficult time for anyone opposed to Obama as President. I know this, because I watched and felt it first hand. Most of what any of us discovered about him was never brought to light in the Media. And if any was... It was immediately silenced by the accusations of racism. This is why the Birther debate continued, why the Muslim debate continued, why all of the debates concerning his history continued. Most of these issues were never publicly discussed, or fully explained prior to the election. Even those that were eventually put to rest, could have been silenced even sooner, if there had actually been some openess in the conversation. And more openess from Obama himself. Claims continue, that racial motivations are behind these attacks, or any negativity directed at the Pres. And I can only imagine what It will be like once campaigning for this election year really gears up. As I stated above I would like to address the claim that Obama is one of the most attacked Presidents in history, and why this might be, with some statistics that some might not be familiar. I had a theory that the increases in attacks, may be due to an increased number of American's having access to the net, and being able to do their own research on the candidates, and here is what I found... 1992 - Clinton/George H Bush/Perot 2% - Of American Households Had Internet 1996 - Clinton/Dole/Perot 26% 2000 - George W. Bush/Gore/Nader 44% 2004 - George W. Bush/Kerry 68% 2008 - Obama/McCain 72% If you notice prior to 2004, there was such a small percentage of Americans who were actually connected to the net. So you can imagine, at that time, any information that the Majority of American's received about the candidates, was fed to them by the media. It wasn't until 2004, that the percentages broke 50%, so there were alot of new net users out there. How many of those do you think had gotten over the shock and awe of email, net porn, chatrooms, and rotten.com, to actually use the net for research? Sure there were us conspiracy nuts, but we were few and far between, especially back then! And I'm not sure about you, but I skewered the hell out of Bush! So please step back this coming election year... And rethink labeling anyone opposed to Obama, as a racist. It might be that we are just more informed then we were in the past. To go from only 2% in the Clinton Era! To the almost 75% in Obama Era! I had the theory, but to actually see those numbers amazed me! Hugs The links to the statistical data used is here: if there was no Data for the actual election yr. I used the data from the closest yr. following. As to not skew the results in favor of my theory. [link to www.nsf.gov] [link to www.internetworldstats.com] WELL DONE SIR! you are on to something here! 5 stars. Thank you! Suggest a pin. I cant believe that other thread is pinned. "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather EXPOSE them" - Eph. 5:11 |
milehighmike
User ID: 339344 United States 06/27/2012 06:07 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Certainly makes a LOT more sense than the "they don't like him because EVERYONE (who's white) is racist" bullshit that's spoon-fed to us on a daily basis. "Successful people are always looking for opportunities to help others. Unsuccessful people are always asking, 'What's in it for me?'" — Brian Tracy: Personal and business training author, speaker, and consultant "We are all, right now, living the life we choose." -- Peter McWilliams, Author "The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot." -- Michael Altshuler |
SwampRatLost
(OP) User ID: 1409851 United States 06/27/2012 06:28 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 18675481 United States 06/27/2012 06:32 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 16304833 Australia 06/27/2012 06:35 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 9107938 United States 06/27/2012 06:39 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
SwampRatLost
(OP) User ID: 1409851 United States 06/27/2012 06:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You sure about this? That other guy said I didnt like him cause I was a racist so now I'm confused. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9107938 Well are you racist? Do you dislike him because he's black? Its answers only you have. But it is not my place, or anyone elses to assign anything to it, other then your own reasons. "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather EXPOSE them" - Eph. 5:11 |
SwampRatLost
(OP) User ID: 1130109 United States 06/27/2012 07:49 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 18414782 United States 06/27/2012 07:58 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Interesting. I started using internet in 1996 in college. I used that slow ass modem during 1997-2000 years when I lived in an apartment when not using fast ones on campus. Amazing how much it had changed since then. Democrats for sure kept up with and first one to spread propaganda before conservatives realized what was going on. Conservatives prefer to live a quite life but they are being forced to give that up and fight liberal bullshit spewed everywhere on the internet. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 12177606 United States 06/27/2012 08:01 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Chas
User ID: 1376646 United States 06/27/2012 08:05 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1001426 United States 06/27/2012 08:14 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
SwampRatLost
(OP) User ID: 1130109 United States 06/27/2012 08:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 12064276 United States 06/27/2012 09:37 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
SwampRatLost
(OP) User ID: 1130109 United States 06/27/2012 10:01 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward 06/27/2012 10:02 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | cum hoc ergo propter hoc If Internet subscription status is your explanatory variable, and favorability status is your response variable, what have you done to eliminate the possibility of confounding variables within your analysis? Have you tested you hypothesis against other explanatory variables? If so, please post the scatter plot matrices and summary results of your analyses. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 15433861 United States 06/27/2012 10:04 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
User 78/68 nli User ID: 14594859 Canada 06/27/2012 10:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 7029153 United States 06/27/2012 10:30 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 9664906 United States 06/27/2012 11:05 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | But, moving along. It appears your original intent was to prove that you are not a racist. Generally, I find that people most set on proving they are not something they have not been accused of are guilty of what they were trying to disprove. No one is labeling people opposed to Obama as a racist. You are just trying to promote the narrative that people are labeling Obama as a racist because you want to avoid the real issues that face this country. The fact that we are run by a bunch of idiots who want to spend us into extinction on one side, and a bunch of idiots who want to sell us into corporate slavery to the highest bidders on the other, with both sides blaming the other side for the shit they caused. As far as your idiotic debates go... Well, the reason they are not continuing to be discussed is because any rational person moved on, including those on the right. No one in their right mind would leave America to have a baby in a mud hut in the middle of nowhere in Kenya shortly before childbirth. It is as simple as that. Why don't I believe the birther argument? Because if nothing else, even an idiot would be smart enough to say, "Hey, we can use this automatic citizenship and there is no reason to travel in this delicate condition to a third world shithole and have a child where mortality rates are so friggen high." |
Nine's
User ID: 17811173 United States 06/27/2012 11:08 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
SwampRatLost
(OP) User ID: 1335814 United States 06/27/2012 11:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
s. d. butler
User ID: 974819 United States 06/27/2012 11:18 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Perhaps I can offer you a counterpoint for consideration. Greater numbers of households having internet has just given people exposure to a larger amount of information, specifically information from media companies, where fewer and fewer groups are controlling more and more of the media we see. People have also been given the freedom to filter their own information, which causes greater incidents of people receiving information from only sources that they agree with politically, ideologically or otherwise, causing people to only receive information that a certain group deems important or that group has filtered to match their views. If anything, the rise of the internet has caused people to become less informed. The internet has also made it easier to spread falsehood and delude the masses, since, reputable media outlets cannot truly get away with blatantly lying to you or manipulating you (they have to be much more subtle), whereas on the internet, people can spread disinformation without having to tie it to a source. Furthermore, the number of people propagating this disinformation causes people to more easily believe it than if they heard it from one source, such as a journalist or a politician. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9664906 But, moving along. It appears your original intent was to prove that you are not a racist. Generally, I find that people most set on proving they are not something they have not been accused of are guilty of what they were trying to disprove. No one is labeling people opposed to Obama as a racist. You are just trying to promote the narrative that people are labeling Obama as a racist because you want to avoid the real issues that face this country. The fact that we are run by a bunch of idiots who want to spend us into extinction on one side, and a bunch of idiots who want to sell us into corporate slavery to the highest bidders on the other, with both sides blaming the other side for the shit they caused. As far as your idiotic debates go... Well, the reason they are not continuing to be discussed is because any rational person moved on, including those on the right. No one in their right mind would leave America to have a baby in a mud hut in the middle of nowhere in Kenya shortly before childbirth. It is as simple as that. Why don't I believe the birther argument? Because if nothing else, even an idiot would be smart enough to say, "Hey, we can use this automatic citizenship and there is no reason to travel in this delicate condition to a third world shithole and have a child where mortality rates are so friggen high." So you want the news to come from one source, like a journalist or government? You don't like the freedom of the internet? Yeah, that's a good idea. Let's just have a ministry of propaganda. That will work well for your purposes. Sounds to me like your ideological bent causes you to dislike the truth in the internet. That would be because the leftist ideas can't stand the light. And so you attack it bitterly. You sound like that obama creep who wanted to censor the internet and only give the goverernment version of the truth. Last Edited by s. d. butler on 06/27/2012 11:21 PM |
Nine's
User ID: 17811173 United States 06/27/2012 11:20 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 9664906 United States 06/27/2012 11:25 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Perhaps I can offer you a counterpoint for consideration. Greater numbers of households having internet has just given people exposure to a larger amount of information, specifically information from media companies, where fewer and fewer groups are controlling more and more of the media we see. People have also been given the freedom to filter their own information, which causes greater incidents of people receiving information from only sources that they agree with politically, ideologically or otherwise, causing people to only receive information that a certain group deems important or that group has filtered to match their views. If anything, the rise of the internet has caused people to become less informed. The internet has also made it easier to spread falsehood and delude the masses, since, reputable media outlets cannot truly get away with blatantly lying to you or manipulating you (they have to be much more subtle), whereas on the internet, people can spread disinformation without having to tie it to a source. Furthermore, the number of people propagating this disinformation causes people to more easily believe it than if they heard it from one source, such as a journalist or a politician. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9664906 But, moving along. It appears your original intent was to prove that you are not a racist. Generally, I find that people most set on proving they are not something they have not been accused of are guilty of what they were trying to disprove. No one is labeling people opposed to Obama as a racist. You are just trying to promote the narrative that people are labeling Obama as a racist because you want to avoid the real issues that face this country. The fact that we are run by a bunch of idiots who want to spend us into extinction on one side, and a bunch of idiots who want to sell us into corporate slavery to the highest bidders on the other, with both sides blaming the other side for the shit they caused. As far as your idiotic debates go... Well, the reason they are not continuing to be discussed is because any rational person moved on, including those on the right. No one in their right mind would leave America to have a baby in a mud hut in the middle of nowhere in Kenya shortly before childbirth. It is as simple as that. Why don't I believe the birther argument? Because if nothing else, even an idiot would be smart enough to say, "Hey, we can use this automatic citizenship and there is no reason to travel in this delicate condition to a third world shithole and have a child where mortality rates are so friggen high." Sounds to me like your ideological bent causes you to dislike the truth in the internet. That would be because the leftist ideas can't stand the light. And so you attack it bitterly. You sound like that obama creep who wanted to censor the internet and only give the goverernment version of the truth. Oh, so you are saying that MediaMatters and MoveOn.org are the truth, because as you know, a significant amount of the population chooses to only get those information from those types of sources, just the same as a significant amount of the population only chooses to get information from far right leaning sources. Perhaps the all the guys going on about Nibiru, chemtrails, alien abductions, etc are all the truth too? I point out the propagation of mass ignorance, and you say that I want to censor the truth? You accuse me of being a leftist because I am not a birthertard and believe that the left is trying to bankrupt us while the right wants to sell us into slavery? Interesting. Let me know how that all works out for you. Enjoy your ignorance and disinformation that you stubbornly cling to as "the truth". |