Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Democrats Swayed More By Muslim Misinfo

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店經紀, ...

2009-10-08T07:27:47.749-04:00

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、...

2009-09-11T02:19:34.400-04:00

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、酒店兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!

艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表

水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,...

2009-02-14T01:55:00.000-05:00

Obama's religion is Obamaism isn't it?

2008-07-17T07:09:00.000-04:00

Obama's religion is Obamaism isn't it?

HT,I don't know how you define a Christianity or t...

2008-07-16T15:44:00.000-04:00

HT,

I don't know how you define a Christianity or that it matters much. Other than Catholic, Baptist and Methodist, no Christian denomination currently makes up as much as 5% of the voting population so no group has a claim to value universalism.

For 538, the only significance of religion should be in how it influences voting behavior.

Thus, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and those with no religion continue to have a greater preference for the Democratic party. Evangelical or Born Again Christians and Mormons are the most apt to identify as Republicans. Buddhists tend to be independents and some denominations like the Jehovah's Witnesses disavow political involvement altogether. Catholics, once favored the Democratic Party, but now the largest single US religious group is split roughly 50/50 between the two parties.

And I should add... all of this in a nation founde...

2008-07-16T15:37:00.000-04:00

And I should add... all of this in a nation founded on and famous for its collective belief that you do not persecute people based on their religious beliefs.

Myself, I'm a militant Bokononist. All your belie...

2008-07-16T15:35:00.000-04:00

Myself, I'm a militant Bokononist. All your beliefs (or lack thereof) are nothing but foma.

When provided with the following two options:God e...

2008-07-16T15:28:00.000-04:00

When provided with the following two options:

God existed first and created man.

Man existed first and created God.

If I were then asked to asses the probability of each being true, I would break down the individual probability of each event happening.

What are the odds that God existed first vs. Man existing first. Well, we can say with 100% certainty that man exists, so no matter how low the probability that he existed first, you have to at least admit that it's more likely that man exists than God exists (since even the most devote person of faith cannot be 100% sure, while we're all 100% sure man exists).

Could God create man? Clearly. He's omnipotent (at least as most religions would describe him).

Could man create God? Easily. In fact, I can't think of a better way to rule your people than through creating some power that cannot be seen, heard, or questioned, who channels his authority through you.

I'm not saying I know the answer, but if you're honest and had to assign a probability to things, it is so much more likely that man created God. The only leap of faith required there, since man 100% exists and 100% is capable of coming up with the idea of God, is that it caught on and stuck for millenia (some did, some didn't, some are still trying to catch on).

Anyway, if you look at religion throughout history and the role it's played in the evolution of humans, you can see that there is no overarching theme to the God or gods of any given time. Religion has always existed to better people when human kind needed it. When people were recklessly killing each other, endlessly worshipping gold idols, and the population of tribes was small enough that failure for healthy reproducers to produce children could be catastrophic, of course the main message of religion at those points in time was stop killing each other, stop worshipping gold idols, and stop having sex with people that you can't make babies with.

Why are so many people's lives consumed with teachings intended for a people that we've evolved past being? If you do still believe that the Bible is intended to be interpreted literally word for word, then why are you voting anyway? It says God controls all political and religious leaders (conveniently, exacly what I would say if I were a religious leader making up what God says), so whoever wins is going to do God's will anyway.

The fact (and I hate to sound like Bill Maher here) that a person would base their vote on which made up stories you believe in is totally insane. Your set of stories used to explain life, the universe, and the whole thing is crazy. Mine are how it really is! Either way, can't we all agree it's a little pompous to say that you know for sure? Isn't it also a little ridiculous to base everything off that something we couldn't possibly know for sure? Someone agrees with your 1 in a million guess as to how the Universe came into existence and someone else might not (but says he does)? So you can't vote for him?

For the one that said it is infuriating that only ...

2008-07-16T14:37:00.000-04:00

For the one that said it is infuriating that only 57% know that he is a christian. I know the presidential race and his politics and views fairly well, I do not know he is a Christian, not the way I would define the word. You dont grow your faith in a trinity ucc and end up a Christian. But hey thats a religious qualm not a political one. Whether he is christian, muslim, jewish, or even athiest does not affect me voting for him, as others have said, there are plenty of other reasons.

Cugel,I beg your pardon. What was it that we wre ...

2008-07-16T14:23:00.000-04:00

Cugel,

I beg your pardon. What was it that we wre to infer from your discourse then?

Mason, Your comment was too obtuse for my numb skull!

PK Said:If Cugel had his way, African Americans wo...

2008-07-16T13:51:00.000-04:00

PK Said:
If Cugel had his way, African Americans would not even be allowed to vote in the South. These sort of intelligence tests were the very way in which Jim Crow kept blacks from voting. Whites would be asked easy questions like How many states there are in the Union. And blacks would be asked to explain the Establishment Clause.

It was much simpler than that, really, and can be summed up in three words: Seperate but Equal.

"If Cugel had his way, African Americans would not...

2008-07-16T13:48:00.000-04:00

"If Cugel had his way, African Americans would not even be allowed to vote in the South. These sort of intelligence tests were the very way in which Jim Crow kept blacks from voting. Whites would be asked easy questions like How many states there are in the Union. And blacks would be asked to explain the Establishment Clause."

What a fascinating bit of slander! Kudos for snide lying! Well done! You've really learned well at the Karl Rove school of mud-slinging innuendo!

Because you will search my posts in vain for any argument that voters ought to be blocked from voting because they are ignorant. But, you knew that anyway before you started putting words in my mouth! It was just a typical right-wing smear job.

Rove School of Politics Repeated Endlessly In The Right-Wing Echo Chamber and Then Spread Over the Internet By Wing-Nuts:

Step 1: Jump to a ridiculous conclusion about what an opponent has said. Insist that he actually said what he never said or implied what is a part of your own delusion.

Step 2: Denounce your opponent for saying what he never said and implying what he never implied.

Step 3: When challenged, reiterate the lies and escalate the innuendo. Violently insist that the ridiculous and never implied is true and denounce again, calling on others to also denounce the "statements made by. . . ."

Step 4: Repeat the entire smear job endlessly until people start to accept it through repetition in the good old Goebbels fashion.

Step 5: Rinse and Repeat starting from step 1 with a new lie. "Al Gore claimed he invented the Internet."

Another perfect example of this: the attacks on Gen. Clark for "impugning John McCain's honorable service" when he never stated or implied any such thing. Take things out of context.

I would ACTUALLY advocate using the power of the FCC licensing provisions to mandate a lot more community programming on our nationally owned airwaves to provide more civic education for voters. These would include FACT BASED newsprograms, not celebrity gossip and other trivia.

But, ultimately, YES the American people are to blame for allowing ourselves to be so ignorant. Being conservative used to involve some degree of personal responsibility -- no longer part of the conservative credo except in rhetoric these days.

So, no! Disenfranchising voters is not what I'm about.

That's the thing about reality. It doesn't care whether you like it or not. The American people are profoundly ignorant. That's a flat fact.

Is that why they believe lies about Obama being a Muslim or that he was raised in a Madrassa or that he wasn't born in America or isn't even an American citizen?

Is it the reason that more people these days believe the lie that "the surge is working" when the "benchmarks" that Bush announced as the REASON for the "surge" have been abandoned because they weren't being met, are still not met and show no signs of being met in the future?

That's an almost certain inference. They don't know much about politics or politicians and almost nothing about how our system of government is supposed to work. So, they believe the lies. Especially when said lies are repeated endlessly as part of a whisper campaign over the internet or blatantly trumpeted over endless TV news shows.

Pete Kent has (apparently) less excuse. With him it's just malicious.

If Cugel had his way, African Americans would not ...

2008-07-16T13:15:00.000-04:00

If Cugel had his way, African Americans would not even be allowed to vote in the South. These sort of intelligence tests were the very way in which Jim Crow kept blacks from voting. Whites would be asked easy questions like How many states there are in the Union. And blacks would be asked to explain the Establishment Clause.

As another poster noted, it it does not take a great technical mind (look at me!) to understand the broad sweep of issues and decide which candidate would lead in the right direction -- at least by your own lights.

It amazes me how the new Fascists (liberals) are so willing to chuck long standing democratic principles overboard so long as it accomplishes their goals. The Democratic party is the ultimate oxymoron!

It is all about impostion of their will on you and the nation.

Wake up, people!

@ Ben way back at 7:08 PM ... I'm a conservativ...

2008-07-16T12:42:00.000-04:00

@ Ben way back at 7:08 PM ...

I'm a conservative and hate John McCain because he's an idiot. Am I more susceptible to thinking McCain's an idiot because I'm conservative?

No, but your vote is more likely to be affected by your perception of his idiocy than that of a liberal who disagrees with him on everything anyway. Or, put differently, your more likely to care whether he's an idiot or not, and thus mention it to a pollster.

"None of this matters, though. OK, knowing the thr...

2008-07-16T12:12:00.000-04:00

"None of this matters, though. OK, knowing the three branches of government matters a little bit, sure. But politics isn't about trivia, it's about real-world issues. Who cares if there are 50 senators, or 100, or 300? What matters is whether people are able to make decisions about voting and other participation in politics, based on true information and related to issues that are important to them.

I have conversations every day with people about the political issues they care about, and many if not most of them display a remarkable level of subtlety on matters related to issues. Yes, it's true that the factual information to make good decisions is very often lacking, though. But the length of the term of a senator isn't important for any of that."

This is just profoundly wrong. Forget accurate information about candidates, most voters don't even know who their senators are or who their Representative in Congress is. If they don't know what the three branches of government are and have never learned that Congress was granted the exclusive power to declare wars under our constitution, is it any wonder that they aren't shocked and horrified by the usurpations of power by Bush?

They don't even know how Democracy is SUPPOSED to work, so how can they be surprised when it breaks down?

To pretend that because you talk to some infinitesimal percentage of the electorate that the average American voter knows much at all is just wrong. It's contradicted by scientific studies that show that 40% of the people know absolutely nothing, and a tiny percentage, less than 10% know a lot and the rest in the middle know just enough to be dangerous.

The internet is filled with information. It's never been easier to learn what's going on in the world, you can read the foreign press so we aren't limited to the propaganda of the MSM here in America, but most people just are taking advantage of it. They get most of what little news they receive from TV.

That means for instance, that back in 2006 most Americans could tell you roughly how many Americans had died in Iraq (although almost nobody then or now can tell you how many wounded or how many Iraqis have been killed because the government actively tries to cover-up those statistics).

Today far fewer Americans know that there have been 4,443 American deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003 and as a minimum of 23,000 and probably as many as 100,000 wounded (the Pentagon conceals the true numbers by "not including" many brain-trauma and other injuries that are only discovered after soldiers return home, etc., etc., lots of weasel wording and manipulating the statistics to hide the truth).

Why? Because the media have stopped covering the Iraq war -- the average MSM coverage is less than 10 minutes a month, or vastly less than the coverage given to Brittany Spear's sister's pregnancy.

So, Americans are ignorant and it "doesn't matter?" In what dream world are you living? It matters a lot. It impacts our lives every day.

There are other important points to be found in th...

2008-07-16T11:39:00.000-04:00

There are other important points to be found in this recent PEW poll. Independents are also influenced by the question of religion with an -8% among Independents who think Obama is a Muslim or hold a mixed viewpoint.

The issue of political information is very important here too since strong partisans of both parties are always the most knowledgeable on questions about current events, policies, candidates, civics, etc. and independents and weak partisans much less so.

If faulty information about Obama's faith is depressing his numbers now, the the general election campaign this the Fall is likely help the Democrat because the least informed voters will be increasingly exposed to more correct information.

In 1991, Americans were asked how long the term of...

2008-07-16T11:10:00.000-04:00

In 1991, Americans were asked how long the term of a United States senator is. Just 25% correctly answered six years. How many senators are there? A poll a few years ago found that only 20% know that there are 100 senators, though the number has remained constant for the last half century (and is easy to remember). Encouragingly, today the number of Americans who can correctly identify and name the three branches of government is up to 40%."

None of this matters, though. OK, knowing the three branches of government matters a little bit, sure. But politics isn't about trivia, it's about real-world issues. Who cares if there are 50 senators, or 100, or 300? What matters is whether people are able to make decisions about voting and other participation in politics, based on true information and related to issues that are important to them.

I have conversations every day with people about the political issues they care about, and many if not most of them display a remarkable level of subtlety on matters related to issues. Yes, it's true that the factual information to make good decisions is very often lacking, though. But the length of the term of a senator isn't important for any of that.

Ding! Smart vs. dumb. If the electorate is ignoran...

2008-07-16T11:09:00.000-04:00

Ding! Smart vs. dumb. If the electorate is ignorant, appealing to their ignorance is a great way to get elected. Fortunately, the center is more intelligent and moderate each day.

If you want to know why a large percentage of Amer...

2008-07-16T10:22:00.000-04:00

If you want to know why a large percentage of Americans believe incredibly stupid things like "I hear Obama is a muslim, and he's related to Osama" (actual no kidding quote to me from a dissatisfied Bush voter), it's because Americans are incredibly ignorant.

Too bad if that treads on sensitive toes, but it's just objectively true that we're dumb as rocks when it comes to politics:

"The most comprehensive surveys, the National Election Studies (NES), were carried out by the University of Michigan beginning in the late 1940s. What these studies showed was that Americans fall into three categories with regard to their political knowledge. A tiny percentage know a lot about politics, up to 50%-60% know enough to answer very simple questions, and the rest know next to nothing.

"Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About The American Voter: http://www.amazon.com/
dp/0465077714/ref=nosim/?tag=nationbooks08-20

"Contrary to expectations, by many measures the surveys showed the level of ignorance remaining constant over time. In the 1990s, political scientists Michael X. Delli Carpini and Scott Keeter concluded that there was statistically little difference between the knowledge of the parents of the Silent Generation of the 1950s, the parents of the Baby Boomers of the 1960s, and American parents today. (By some measures, Americans are dumber today than their parents of a generation ago.)"

". . . .Even if people do not closely follow the news, one would expect them to be able to answer basic civics questions, but only a small minority can.

In 1991, Americans were asked how long the term of a United States senator is. Just 25% correctly answered six years. How many senators are there? A poll a few years ago found that only 20% know that there are 100 senators, though the number has remained constant for the last half century (and is easy to remember). Encouragingly, today the number of Americans who can correctly identify and name the three branches of government is up to 40%."

In a nation where 60% can't name the three branches of government, it's no surprise that an amazing number of Americans think Obama is a Muslim or that he was educated in a Madrassa, or that he wasn't born in the U.S., or that he's not an American at all. They hear these rumors spread by hate-mongers and racists over the internet and believe them because they don't know anything.

As Phil Ochs sang 40 years ago:

"But ignorance is everywhere and people have their way. And success is an enemy to the losers of the day. In the shadows of the churches who knows what they pray? And blood is the language of the band."

I do not know how Sean can credibly claim that opp...

2008-07-16T09:13:00.000-04:00

I do not know how Sean can credibly claim that opposition to Obama is based on racial bias or belief in smears. His sentence is hard to parse: "if you oppose Obama, it becomes much more likely that you do so for reasons related to his race, or because you believe one of the smears about his character, if we also learn that you're a Democrat"

Much more likely than what? His liberal voting record? His defeatist position on Iraq? His flip flop on FISA, guns or the death penalty.

The PEW poll suggested that Republican opposition is based on more rational ground: "Republican voters in the survey overwhelmingly support McCain irrespective of their belief about Obama's religious faith."

These attempts to demonize and objectify those who would oppose Obama as racists and kooks mask the broader trends running through the electorate and return the debate squarely to where the Obama camp should not want it: His heritage and his race.

The NYTs poll today on race is very instructive. It shows how racially divided as a nation we remain and how there is yearning among whites for a post-racial consciousness that Senator Obama and his candidacy is not bringing to them.

All this constant race talk will take its toll on Obama and he will badly lose moderate/independent white voters of both genders if it keeps up.

It may be why he has clumsily tried to appeal to white sensibilities by pulling a Bill Cosby routine of late. It remains to be been seen how persuasive that appeal is to blacks or whites.

Jesse Jackson seems to represent one segment of the black community that rejects Obama's lecturing most likely b/c a half white boy from Kansas ultimately lacks street cred.

This is a developing theme in the campaign. It is not about racism but about a true desire to be a post-racial nation.

Obama tired to do that -- so he said --but all he has done is picked a scab and engendered a hyper racial sensitivity, that, if the NYTs poll is to be believed, has done little to heal our wounds.

Like Moses he may lead us to the promised land, but he will not cross the River Jordan.

JC Watts '16

Well a 10-minute search has not turned up much tha...

2008-07-16T07:55:00.000-04:00

Well a 10-minute search has not turned up much that would help me figure out what I'd like to know: how many Americans don't know any Muslims? (Or perhaps know them only as Osama bin Laden and "haji" that their family members are supposed to shoot at?)

I mean, I live in a prosperous suburb that (because of high-tech jobs?) is more diverse than the city. We have halal butchers, Russian delis, Korean and Vietnamese and Thai restaurants and markets. I look out my window and I see African American kids playing with white and Hispanic kids, and South Asian families. The proprietors of the Supercuts are Persian and run a Persian restaurant next door. How many people still live in entrenched enclaves of white people? (I'm assuming we don't have a lot of non-white people worrying about this Muslim thing, but maybe that's not right.) Odessa Texas maybe? Bay Ridge?

If anyone knows where this information could be found, I think it would be helpful. I can't be the only one who is scratching my head over this kerfluffle and wanting to better understand it.

This does raise a question. What is the breakdown ...

2008-07-16T06:16:00.000-04:00

This does raise a question.

What is the breakdown of Democrats who are not planning to vote for Obama?

The asumption has always been that they are white 60 year old females who realy realy wanted Hillary. The sort that think calling a woman "sweetie" is an offence against femanism.

This assumption may be wrong. Hillary "femanist" fanatics might just be a very vocal minority.

I have always discounted the idea that Racism is significant. Who hates Colin Powel?

My guess is that Obama has a culural problem. He is a city slicker, an open supporter of education, of change. He benifits the young, the tallented & the adaptable.

Those who lost out on education due to lack of oportunity or lack of interest or are to old to adapt see him as an enemy, and in some ways he is.

He might offer their children a better future, but only at the price of loosing respect for their parent's way of life.

So how to justify their choice?

Obama is pro education? (and say they are against)

Obama is Black? (and say they are racists)

Obama is pro change (and say that the county is doing ok the way it is?)

No wonder they are going for "Obama is a Muslim". It might not be true, and it might not even be fair to hate Muslims in general, but at least ther are some Muslims that it is socialy acceptable to hate.

Gee, I wonder why so many Democrats believe ridicu...

2008-07-16T04:58:00.000-04:00

Gee, I wonder why so many Democrats believe ridiculous rumors about Obama. Who could have been pumping them to Democrats? It's almost like he had a totally amoral adversary inside of his own party that was able to reach many overly credulous Democrats! I just keep wondering what Democrat would be low enough to do such a thing.

That makes no sense. People who "don't want to vot...

2008-07-16T04:29:00.000-04:00

That makes no sense. People who "don't want to vote for him" don't have to "look for reason", they already have plenty, and their belief that he's a Muslim is one of the bunch.

It's one of a bunch but it also is a good aspect in trying to convince other voters in their proximity if not only by spreading the rumor.

How do we know which way the arrows run in cause: ...

2008-07-16T02:38:00.000-04:00

How do we know which way the arrows run in cause: do people say he is a Muslim I won't vote for him, or that they don't want to vote for him, and look for reason and settle on the Muslim identification as a justification, as the reason they give to themselves as well as to pollsters. But is that reason independent of other variables that could influence their choice.

That makes no sense. People who "don't want to vote for him" don't have to "look for reason", they already have plenty, and their belief that he's a Muslim is one of the bunch.