• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    William on D-Day -1
    William on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    jmac on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    William on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on D-Day -1
    thewizardofroz on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    William on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    thewizardofroz on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Shiny Happy People
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Shiny Happy People
    riverdaughter on Shiny Happy People
    riverdaughter on Shiny Happy People
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Shiny Happy People
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Shiny Happy People
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Shiny Happy People
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    January 2011
    S M T W T F S
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

  • Top Posts

Poll vaulting

Spin Doctor

There is a new post at Salon by Justin Idiot that is spun so hard it will make you dizzy. Here’s the headline:

Poll: 35% blame Palin for Tucson shooting

This is how the article begins:

This new CNN poll on the Tucson mass shooting seems like bad news for Sarah Palin:

QUESTION: Overall, how much do you blame each of the following for the shooting in Arizona — a great deal, a moderate amount, not much, or not at all?

When you get to the third option you see this:

A map on Sarah Palin’s website that marked 20 congressional districts, including the district represented by the congresswoman who was shot, with an image that looked like the crosshairs of a gun

Great deal 19% … Moderate amount 16% … Not much 15% … Not at all 44%

According to my limited math skills, 35% blame Sarah Palin at least a moderate amount, but 59% blame her very little or not at all.

Not exactly what you would expect from the headline, is it?

But wait, there’s more! 48% of the respondents blamed political rhetoric, 52% blamed gun laws and 70% blamed mental health care resources.

So, less than half of the respondents blamed political rhetoric and only some of those people blamed Sarah Palin. Any bets on how party and ideological affiliation figures in the breakdown?  It’s just a hunch, but I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that all of the 35% that blamed Sarah Palin were never going to vote for her anyway.

Then, after all that spin, here is the closing sentence:

But there is simply no evidence that the Palin crosshairs map had anything to do with what Loughner did.

157 Responses

  1. Two thoughts.

    1. This is America, where guns are plentiful and shooting rampages are positively routine. There’s simply no reason see the Tucson rampage as anything out of the ordinary. Get over it already.

    2. This site should be renamed Clowns4Palin.

    • This is a warning. Your comment may be deleted for the off-topic insult.

    • yeah, being fair and hoping people will use their brain equals being part of Palin’s imaginary campaign.

      ps… shooting rampages are not routine.

      • ps… shooting rampages are not routine.

        Sadly, that’s not true. We have one every couple years. 2007 – Virginia Tech, 2010 – Fort Hood, 2011 – Tucson. The earliest one I’m aware of was Charles Whitman in 1966.

        There was Brenda Ann Spencer in 1979, the Luby’s Massacre in 1991 and Columbine in 1999. Those are just off the top of my head.


        Going postal, in American English slang, means becoming extremely and uncontrollably angry, often to the point of shooting people to death, usually in a workplace environment.

        The expression derives from a series of incidents from 1983 onward in which United States Postal Service (USPS) workers shot and killed managers, fellow workers, and members of the police or general public in acts of mass murder. Between 1986 and 1997, more than 40 people were gunned down by spree killers in at least 20 incidents of workplace rage.

        • One every couple of years? It’s rare that we have only one a year. The people who get injured the most are coworkers, students and family members. The last politician attacked before Giffords was Leo Ryan in 1978.

          The year 2010 was particularly bloody:

          January 7, 2010. 4 dead 5 wounded
          February 12 2010 3 dead 3 wounded
          March 31, 2010 4 dead 5 wounded
          August 3 2010, 9 dead
          October 5 2010 2 dead 5 wounded.

        • Charlie Manson’s crimes were politically motivated…his killer artwork sold for thousands.

          Here’s the bad news, there are many collectors who are waiting for Loughner to do artwork, and include Palin in his pictures. I’m sure someone will come up with Political Killer’s Art work, right along side the Serial Killer’s Art work.

          Gross, isn’t it?

    • I agree this site changed from holding Obama accountable for his corporate friendly/conservative policies (promoting Liberal Causes) to a Palin Promoter/DefenderSite …

      I say say if Feingold challenges Obama and wins the nomination in 2012 & so does Palin .. many here will support Palin over Feingold … the only person I know for sure you wouldn’t is Riverdaughter

      • We don’t support Republicans here. And we aren’t ever going to endorse Palin for anything.

        Riverdaughter also said today that she doesn’t intend to spend time defending against this attack. And I don’t either.

        Watch it. Because comments like this will send you to a visit with Spammy.

      • You nailed it. Count me in with Riverdaughter.

        • (curious) You we’re going to be supporting Palin as a Presidential candidate?

          • NO! Is that what I said??? Is that what “Proud Progressive said?” Boy, I must have read it wrong…I do not think she has the experience or ability to be President – at least not yet.

            Sorry Katiebird!

      • Anyone who thinks either Feingold or Palin would be allowed within a country mile of either corporate party’s nomination is smoking something I wish they’d share with me.

        • I only wish you posted this as a stand alone comment. The rest of this section sucks.

        • Can you tell me if it’s Feingold or Palin in 2012 .. who would you support??

          Feingold was one of the few people if congress who stood by his principles & didn’t sell out to corporate special interest … that’s why he was voted out by big money …

          Palin is no different than the Republicans in congress .. she just talks the good old populous rhetoric .. all Palin’s polices are corporate friendly .. she favors less regulation, bush tax cuts etc …

          The reason the GOP elite doesn’t want her win the nomination is because polls after polls have shown she cannot win the G.E …

          The only group that views Palin favorable is Republican .. she has a high unfavorable rating with independents & Dems (for obvious reasons).

          • Since I won’t be supporting Palin and Feingold won’t be on the ballot it’s a bogus question.

            But in the land of never-gonna-happen hypotheticals I would vote for Feingold.

            BTW – If you’re a Feingold supporter you might want to take a closer look at his record. He has a pattern of taking bold stands on lost causes but not much in terms of success.

          • What a load of crap. The GOP elite is pissing its pants about Palin, and not because she can’t win, but because she isn’t under their control. She’s the right wing’s Bill Clinton. She’s got populist appeal out the wazoo. And as to Palin’s policies being corporate friendly? She was called a socialist by the head of a Swear-to-God-real-life socialist organization for essentially making oil companies pay their taxes and using it to help average Alaskans. VERY corporate friendly, that. Look up her actual record before you speak, next time.

          • Russ Feingold “stood by his principles” and voted for the Republican/Heritage Foundation so-called Healthcare Reform Bill, just like all the other so-called Democrats/Progressives.

          • Sandress, I guess I can count you as a Palin supporter in 2012 .. nothing I said about Palin was nonfactual. Palin espouses all the GOP policies .. I’m am not going to judge her on what someone said about her in the past . .I’m going to judge her on what she supports/pushes for now.

            Palin doesn’t care about the Liberal Cause .. nor does she care about you. Defending/Supporting her does nothing to promote Liberal/Progressive Causes.

            p.s … Not every criticism of Palin is rooted in sexism . if anyone believes this they are no different than the Obama supporters who believe every criticism of him is rooted in Racism.

          • PP, You can count me as whatever the hell you like. And let me tell you, that’s a WINNING STRATEGY. Don’t judge her based on her past actions, judge her based on what she promises while campaigning. Now THERE’S an accurate barometer of a politician. Palin doesn’t care about the Liberal cause, no. Nor has she ever claimed to. And no, not every criticism of her is rooted in sexism. But left-winger who can’t find a legitimate policy criticism of Palin and instead resorts to holding her to standards that they never apply to her male peers and calling her names? Those people are stupid, sexist, or both. In the vast majority of cases, both.

          • ProudProgressive, Palin is a Republican, hence one would expect her to support Republican policies. What’s Obama’s excuse? Oh I forgot: Unity.

          • PP, going on ten years now, and we have learned our lessons about the COUNT.

            Certainly reminds me of Obama saying he could could win Clinton’s voters, but she couldn’t win his.
            He said in the end they would vote for “ME”.
            How many times did they count Hillary OUT, and told her to quit. Seems to me both sides hated on Hillary, it was more about the Clinton name than anything else. If that wasn’t the case please explain to me. Hillary never did anything to deserve that, she never harmed anyone. Let’s not bring up Whitewater either.

        • Bingo. It will be Jeb vs Obama.

      • Yeah. How dare some of us harbor the capacity for independent thought and long-term strategy! Especially when that goes against the petty tribalism that the corporate Dems so desperately want us to embrace?

        Defense of Palin against ridiculous attacks is standing up for women in leadership, PERIOD. The clown is a feminist and a better independent thinker than most around here.

      • Bullshit

        • Excuse me?

        • I meant my nasty remark to nest with this ridiculous statement from proud pogressive:
          “I agree this site changed from holding Obama accountable for his corporate friendly/conservative policies (promoting Liberal Causes) to a Palin Promoter/DefenderSite …”
          and I repeat-

  2. What’s wrong with supporting Palin when she’s being gang-attacked by nasty Bolshies?

    • To support, means you support her. As in, support her policies. You can defend her if you like. But she doesn’t need defending. She’s done pretty well for herself so far. Of course pointing out insanity or crazy lack of focus or purposeful distractions is a good idea though.

      • I’m sorry, but this “doesn’t need defending” bit is dumb, if you ask me. She is a public figure. Hillary is as tough as they come, and she still needed (and needs) people to stand up against disingenuous lying attacks. Not because she’s weak or stupid or a victim, but because she’s ONE WOMAN against the spin machines of both parties. Same goes for Palin. And I’m done explaining how I don’t care for conservative policy. I shouldn’t have to caveat my attempts to stand up for a woman who is being held to vicious double standards.

        Not you, obviously, DT, but people in general.

        • I agree. When I defend somebody like Palin, I’m defending myself and any other woman who decides to participate in the political process. One reason we have so few women in politics and positions of power is because they can’t deal with the death threats and attacks on their families. It’s a civil rights issue.

          This is the saddest MLK day I’ve ever experienced. Thousands of little girls have just watched what happened to Hillary, what happened to Gifford, what happened to Palin, and have been taught that politics is no place for women and girls.

        • Can’t say Honk! Honk!, how about Beep! Beep!

        • I agree.

        • I blogged for Hillary all over the country on websites and via paper letters to the editor. It turned into a part-time (volunteer) job. I did it because I had to stand up against the lying misogyny that was strewn at her from every corner. Because I wanted there to be at least one voice that stood for fairness on all those vitriolic comments threads that obots were pounding. So people would see that not everyone was for 0 or the corruption he came to stand for.

          • Erica said re Hillary: Because I wanted there to be at least one voice that stood for fairness on all those vitriolic comments threads that obots were pounding. So people would see that not everyone was for 0 or the corruption he came to stand for.

            Yes. Whether a ‘strong’ person needs defense depends on what kind of strength we’re talking about. A person may be personally strong, ie brave and calm, like HIllary, Palin, Gore, many others. But if they don’t have a strong message machine talking about them, then they still need defending in some venues. Really it’s quite different senses of ‘strong.’

            If Hillary (whose finances were strong) had hired people to defend her at Kos or Black Panther blogs, it wouldn’t have rung true. The only people who could effectively defend her there, would be forum regulars who sincerely believed in the basic ideals of the forum.

            When someone is being unfairly attacked (like the Clintons having their statements distorted into ‘racism’), then they do need to be defended by people of many different factions who can sincerely say “I disagree with X’s political opinions but she is not guilty of that particular charge.”

      • Every single damn day, just when you think we are focused, here comes the media with a distraction.
        And then the worst problems, like Tucson comes up, and we are so damn desensitized, not just to the pschchopatic killers, but the disasterous wars we are in, and you suddenly realize, distraction is a favorite ploy!

  3. If all Dem pundits are as stupid as this Justin loser, then the party is surely lost forever. How stupid can they be? Never mind, forget I said that. The pulled Obama over the finish line against the wishes of the party members.

    How about this Justin and other nitwits, focus on the problems of the day and solutions, forget Palin, get your own house in order. Here’s an idea, pretend Palin is not in your party, not currently holding office, and not your problem.

    • Agree if they would stop passing it on to Palin, because really they are the ones looking stupid.

  4. Poor former Governor Palin, she just can’t stop being the center of attention. Why would anyone think that she was contributing to a toxic environment?

    Now we have a guy who got shot during Gifford’s event and later made the comment “You’re dead.” while pointing with his cell phone at the town hall arrested for making a threat. I don’t really know the context in his mind for his statement, but I don’t know that it is much different from placing cross-hairs over “targets” in political races. I agree with RD’s statement that “the map was connected with her website as part of a campaign to “target” supporters of the health care reform bill is unbecoming and irresponsible for any politician on either side of the aisle. ” I also found this snippet in today’s Washington Post chilling.

    “After Jesse Kelly won the Republican primary in the 8th District, the tea party-backed candidate held a gun-shooting fundraiser. An ad promoting the event said: “Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly.”

    I hope that as the access to better and more powerful assault weapons continues, that voters will start to hold the republicans accountable. But at this point, I am wondering if people are getting too afraid to confront the gun issue and address the republican party bullying techniques. I know I am.

    • I hope that as the access to better and more powerful assault weapons continues, that voters will start to hold the republicans accountable.

      Pardon me for stepping on your meme but you do realize that Giffords is pro-gun, don’t you?

      • Myiq, why do you hate strong women like Pat,La,Madamb,Bostonboomer,wonkthevote,
        dakinikat,regency and little isis?

        Please stop disrespecting the OWNER’s view on this subject. You seem to like woman who are submissive and do not like real women.

        • I don’t hate any of them. One I don’t know and the other seven I considered to be my friends at one time.

          At least one of them still is.

          As for the OWNER’s views, she doesn’t OWN me. She has her opinions and I have mine. I respect her and she respects me.

        • More important to me than your lie that you do not know my log-in name: “Did you ever write a piece defending Giffords prior to this or even now after this? Have you done a piece on Loughner writing “Die Bitch”?

        • WTF? Gee, thanks, elected spokesperson for women.

          RD is not a dictator or tyrant. She can speak for herself, and frequently does. But to my knowledge, she’s not telling the FPers what they can and can’t say.

          • Myiq2xu is an excellent example of a strong guy able to deal with strong women. From what I have read, his writings respond to men and women with equal amounts of ascerbity, humor, and challenge to think/document.

        • You seem to like woman who are submissive and do not like real women.

          I would stop coming here if posters like myiq were not standing up for strong women. We have way too few voices in that regard on the web.

          Pat and Madamb left (as I did for a time) over the I/P debate. Dak and BB left because of a behind the scenes spat with RD. Wonk left because of Palin. Regency is conservative and a Palin supporter, she’s been busy with school. Isis still posts here. STFU with the innuendos.

      • Giffords owns a Glock.

        • And she (Giffords) said she wasn’t worried about attacks because she owns it and was “a pretty good shot.”

          She was also photographed shooting some big powerful rifle.

          She is (or was, hope she changes her mind) an opponent of gun control.

      • I did not know that Giffords was working with the republicans to improve access to better and more powerful assault weapons.

    • I saw Palin’s map – small point, but they are cross hairs on surveyor’s marks that they put to mark geographical locations on maps, you can ask any surveyor or civil engineer. Any media outlet could easily have published the map with a surveyor’s statement next to it if they were really interested in toning down some of the hateful rhetoric such as “sniper’s cross hairs”, etc. Of course that wouldn’t sell as many papers, would it?

      That being said, sounds from your post like the real violent imagery came from the local Tea Party candidate rather than anyone else. Probably explains why the local reactions to the Tea Party are really puzzling to people in other parts of the country.

      • I’ve seen a lot of surveyors’ maps. Those crosshairs, regardless of where the graphics person got them, are not used on that map as they are used on surveyors’ documents. The map is not a plat; there are no metes and bounds; there is nothing to indicate that they are intended as anything but means to mark targets. Claiming ex post facto that they’re “surveyors’ marks” is rankly dishonest.

        My guess is that the graphic artist was a city kid who mistook the surveyor’ sumbols for rifle sights and placed them on targets accordingly.

        • I work with engineers, two of them told me they are surveyor’s marks, and a guy I work with told me no cross hair on a gun could extend past the diameter of the barrel, which made sense to me.That being said, I am neither an engineer or a hunter, so I am only telling you what I have been told.

      • The map was irresponsible as are the other glorifications of guns and violence that are coming from all over the political map. Like it or not, Palin is one of the most high profile political figures who is glorifying guns and she needs to stop.

        • We live in a gun culture. It’s also a rape culture.

          Singling out Sarah Palin for blame is like blaming one tree for the forest.

          • Hell yea! Do you think if I moved to Richmond, that I wouldn’t have protection. Do you think if I moved to New York, I wouldn’t have protection?

            Last year a high school girl from Richmond, was ganged raped, and tortured with a bottle up her vagina. 20 people watched and did NOTHING to stop it.

            Then there is Kitty Genovese, in 1964, 38 people witnessed her rape and murder, and did NOTHING.

            It is important that girls and women know how to protect themselves.

            Let’s not forget when the Clinton’s were blamed for 9/11. It’s all misplaced blaming, what a waste.

          • I will happily include Sharron Angle. Glen Breck,, et al iin this call to reduce vioilence.

        • Easier to blame Palin than the NRA or Lockheed Martin, I guess. Pointless, but easier.

  5. I don’t see it as defending Palin as much as a continuation of the exposure of the vile, pathetic, narrative-of-the-week MSM. Their credibility began to seriously erode during the primaries with the attacks on Hillary, if you recall, and with the continuing attacks on Palin and the Tea Party, especially last week-end, there is simply no reason to not help them dig that hole a little deeper. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, at least until I get that enemy off the front page and on to selling cars somewhere.

    • They didn’t focus on Giffords’ opponent or Glenn Beck, did they?

      Within about 1 hour of the shooting it was Sarah, Sarah, Sarah!

      • I don’t understand what you mean. I was just trying to explain why I think any person accusing this blog of “supporting Republicans” should lighten up and look at it from a positive vein, even someone with a less than favorable Palin perspective. Sorry I didn’t do a very good job!

        I personally think the attacks on her are heinous, had a huge shout-out with a guy in the parking lot on Friday at work. He was slamming her for using “blood libel” in her speech, said it showed she is anti-semetic and showed great disrespect for the Jews, who are the only ones allowed to use the word because of the horrendous history of their people associated with it. So I said, “So tell me, Howard, does that mean the liberal police are running around screaming “anti-semite” to anyone who utters the word “ghetto”. Silence. The best moment of my day.

        • I believe the Clown’s comment was straight, no snark. It can throw you sometimes. 🙂

      • I concur!

    • Thank you. Glad some people were paying attention last weekend.

    • Yes. Olberman and crew are using the same techniques against Palin that they used against Hillary — and will use against anyone who follows in Hillary’s footsteps.

      Showing just how wrong and unfair this attack is — will help to discredit those techniques for future use against our own people. Some Independents disliked Hillary but like Palin; debunking the attack on Palin will make them doubt Olberman in future.

  6. The map read “20 House Democrats from districts we carried in 2008”. The Tea Party did not carry AZ District 8: Giffords has been the Rep here since 2006. Do yah think anyone in the Tea Party called Sarahpac to ask them to fix the “mistake”. Or goodness, gracious seems Sarahpac could have at least got their target districts right before sending out the map.

    • Oh my god, she deserves to be burned at the stake for that!

      Seriously, is that all you got?

    • Oh dear God, a typo! *faints*

    • Did McCain carry District 8 or Obama? That’s what the map referred to, for the politically challenged.

      • Arizona resident John McCain carried the district in 2008 with 52.37% of the vote, while Barack Obama received 46.43%.

      • “House” Democrats. What part of “House” do you not get?

        • You never answered my question.

          Who are you?

          • Someone who doesn’t understand what “we carried” means. On an earlier thread, la was talking about being on JWS blogtalk show.

          • She represents the UFSP- United Federation of Sock Puppets.

          • Don’t know, myiqxu, but la-t-da has been (in my opinion) bringing down the level of discourse over at johnwsmart’s place for a few weeks now.

        • What part of “districts we carried in 2008″ don’t you get?

        • It means Democratic Congresspersons from districts that voted for McCain in Nov 2008.

        • You’re apparently missing the fact that the passage refers to “House Democrats”–appropriately, here, since Giffords sits in the House of Representatives–not “House districts.” The districts are the same for all federal elections, including the general/Presidential. It seems that McCain did in fact carry District 8 in the presidential race but Giffords kept her Congressional seat. it’s not unreasonable for Republicans to hope they might pick up House seats in areas where their presidential candidate was successful.

          • In fact, you couldn’t pick Democrats in House districts won by Republican Congressmen in 2008 . If they won the district, it wouldn’t be a Democratic seat.

  7. The “logic” in that article you critique… I’d swear I’m using that same logic in trying to make some life decisions. X=y, except after C….
    Synapses (sp) are not firing correctly… Head to desk, or a shake to get the little balls into the holes, a smoothie and a walk… Maybe just try not to think atall?

  8. LandOLincoln, Looking back at Feingold’s tenure in the senate he has voted on principles more than anyone in the senate in recent History .. even more than Hillary.

    p.s I never claimed Feingold was perfect …

    • Am I missing something? Is Feingold even RUNNING for anything, or are you just getting your fanboy on?

      • Two can play that came … Is Sarah running for something based on your endless and might I say pathetic defense of her .. it seems so.

        I support Feingold and any other Liberal because they espouse Progressive/Liberal.

        What excuse do you havey for supporting Palin & spinning her GOP corporate friendly polices??? Are you one of the cons who post here RD was referring to .. ??

        • Even more disturbing than the people who equate “defending” with “supporting” are the people who confuse “opposing” with “hating.”

        • Fanboy all the way.

          • Yep, and I wish he’d quit bogarting that joint and hand it over to me…

          • Puff, puff, pass!

          • I’m a fanboy because I focus on pushing for Liberal/Progressive causes & supporting anyone who genuinely support them instead of wasting my time defending/supporting Palin and other folks you call me every other name in the book for my stance. (Anti-American, terrorist sympathizer, Socialist, Maoist, Communist, Marxist etc)

            If that’s what you mean I wear this “fanboy” badge proudly!

          • I like Feingold too. Would guess most at TC do.

          • How did you get from fanboy to anti-American….to ‘terrorist sympathizer’…to…ok….the whole damn list?

            I missed the memo where those are related on the list of minor insults and slams.

          • PP, I can’t speak for anyone else but what I call you is young, dumb, and full of cu…yourself..

          • Pusherman, what the hell has Obama brought us?
            Nothing. He flip flops, he gives us the same shit Bush did, illegal wiretapes, rendention, and body armor. Hell, his own party no longer trust him.
            And he isn’t bring jack to plate in 2012.

        • Yep. I’m such a republican ratfucker that I was asked to be a frontpager.

          Obviously Sarah is running for something. She just hasn’t announced yet. And you can defend anyone who mouths Progressive lines all you like. I’m going to hold out for defending my own goddamn values, one of which is Feminism- hence my defence of Palin. I don’t need an excuse for defending Palin, I have actual principles to stand behind.

    • I admire Feingold and, in a more perfect world, would hope that politicians like him held more sway in our current political environment. However, our current political environment just doesn’t permit such a politician to have any influence beyond a sweet headline and a fan club unless he has political experts willing to work for them, supporters with influence/dollars/supporters of their own, and media surrogates who can speak/deflect statements in national and regional markets. Just imagine, Hillary had virtually all of this, and yet still……

  9. Polls with results such as this one give me hope.

  10. Here’s a back story about me I used to post on “Hillbuzz” (don’t know if any of you know this site) back in the the 08 primaries .. when Hillary was robbed I took a long hiatus from blogging about Politics.

    When I finally went back to Hillbuzz I was surprised to see how much it changed … I swear say I was in the Redstate or some other right-wing blog .. Kevin went from a person supporting Liberal causes to a big right-winger ..

    Sadly This site is slowly turning into Hillbuzz …

    • We dropped Hillbuzz from our blogroll a long time ago because they went full-wingnut.

      We’re dropping you today because you’re an asshat. Buh-bye!

      Feingold 2012!

      • Ditto TC’s actions re dropping Hillbuzz. Hill buzz pre-election 2008 rhetoric struck me as GOP AstroTurf, even if in fact it wasn’t (who can tell anymore?) Nonetheless, I check it out for content and style…the effort to develop a following there seeks to be very engaging (like Fox shows with a hard political message early in the show and then a very entertaining and yet mid-America latter part.

        • No. Hillbuzz hosted the primary party for Hillary’s Indiana volunteers at a north side Chicago bar. In those days they were working for Hillary.

    • Step 1: Establish cred by vague reference to be on the right side of something once.

      Step 2: Concern troll.

      Step 3: Get moderated.

      Step 4: Goodbye Cruel Blog post eaten by Spammy.

    • HillBuzz wants Palin to be Pres. No one at TC has said such a thing.

      If you can’t tell the difference, reading comprehension might be a better pursuit for you.

    • Kevin is a Chicago activist who is very good at what he does. Few know the roots of Obama’s corrupt road to the presidency as well as he does. That said, he has in fact done a full reverse Charles Johnson. I am sad and disappointed that he went there. The Confluence is not such a place as RD makes clear. I don’t know one front pager here campaigning for Palin. That doesn’t mean imo we should shut down debate and let the site become just one more echo chamber on the web. We will learn more from debating (in a civil manner) than from simply repeating each other’s talking points.

  11. Via Uppity Woman:

  12. Good grief! What a thread.

  13. Please no more Palin. She’s had her 15 minutes of fame.

  14. Here’s Qunnipiac on their own poll.


    “Saturday’s shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, in which six people were killed, could not have been prevented, 40 percent of American voters say in a Quinnipiac University national poll released today. Another 23 percent blame the mental health system, while 15 percent say it was due to heated political rhetoric and 9 percent attribute the tragedy to lax gun control.

    American voters say 52 – 41 percent that “heated political rhetoric drives unstable people to commit violence,” the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds. Liberals rather than conservatives are more responsible for such rhetoric, voters say 36 – 32 percent.

    • Twice as many people say political rhetoric is responsible as blame lax gun control. That’s just sad. What are the obvious contributing factors? I’d say the inability of dealing with mental illness and the ability of same to get a gun. He didn’t talk those people to death.

      • I’m generally pretty favorably disposed toward the opinions of the American people. In the case of these polls, if the respondents aren’t being pushed in some way, they are a bunch of dopes.

        • I would have to see the questions to see if the poll is aimed to have a result.

          • 43. What do you think is the main reason for the Arizona shooting; failure of the mental health system, lax gun control laws, overheated political rhetoric, or do you think this is a situation that could not have been prevented?
            Tot Lib Mod Con

            Mental health system 23 13 20 31
            Gun control laws 9 13 11 6
            Political rhetoric 15 21 14 11
            Cld’nt have been
            prevented? 40 32 42 42

            DK/NA 14 20 14 10

            So here is the problem with that poll. Although the plurality may say that political rhetoric drives people to violence, in the AZ case only 15 percent said that “political rhetoric” was a factor.
            Quinnipiac: “Although a bare majority of voters say political rhetoric might drive unstable people to violence, less than one in seven blame it for the Arizona incident.”

            No matter how hard the media and Democrats tried, they were not able to convince 85 percent of the American people that the rhetoric was to blame.

          • I’d like to see a poll that gave more options or had open-ended questions.

            Like a question asking about violence in our culture rather than just political rhetoric.

          • Myiq, you are right.
            There are several very strong influential factors that were ignored in those questions. We know that people can be driven to violence when they are stressed due to money matters. One of the videos that Loughner posted, the last one that was recently made available, Loughner briefly mentions the low pay and the two wars that students endure. Economic stress is very influential if the person is on the edge, imo.

          • And of that 15% who believed that ‘rhetoric’ was responsible in Tucson, the other number suggests that they might be evenly split as to which side’s rhetoric was most to blame.

  15. That is a very nice looking spinning wheel. Just saying.

  16. Poll analysing often seems similar to the answers the couple in Woody Allen’s Annie Hall give their Therapist questioning them about how often they have sex:

    She, annoyed: “Constantly. I’d say three times a week.”
    He, regretful: “Hardly ever. Maybe three times a week”.

    The conclusion depends on the perspective.

    • There should be an “Annie Hall” quote award. 🙂

      • Yes right?

        And I’ll include “American Beauty” and “Casablanca” as co-contestants in that category. 🙂

    • Back during the Cold War there was a race between a Russian Zis and an American Chevy. The Chevy won easily.

      The headline about the race in Izvestia read “Soviet car finishes second, Americans come in next to last.”

      • Lol! Just like the media described the outcome of the primary race in Kentucky between Hillary and Obama. 🙂

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: