Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

kcbigpapa · 06-25-2010, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swarmyone

I guess I FARKED it up for everyone. I didn't see the poll the first time I read this post. My bad....although I swear it wasn't there...maybe I'm just losing my mind?

Swarmy, I think you're right. When I first saw the thread, I don't think there was a poll. Maybe it is because I always click on the latest post and it may not consider the poll a post.

dirty dog · 06-25-2010, 11:24 AM

No gentlemen, I fucked it up. Which is why I tried to cancel this post. Swarmy it is my fault not yours. I had never done a poll before (yeah rookie fuckup) and did not see it at the bottom. So its on me as they say.

Guest052813-01 · 06-25-2010, 11:31 AM

I don't mind telling who I voted for and why I voted the way I did. I cast my vote for McCain in 2008, but had to hold my nose doing so. IMHO, there wasn't much difference between the Bamster and McCain, but I thought McCain would do less damage than the Bamster. I didn't like the way McCain was anointed because it was "his turn" (the same way Bob Dull was nominated in 1996, and I used the same logic then as well), but McCain was the lesser of three evils.

The problem is that no one has emerged, IMHO, on the GOP side to seriously challenge the Bamster, even though a generic GOP candidate seems to do better in the tracking polls at the current time. I'm sure once 2011 rolls around the field will make itself known and we can see who may emerge.

I'm still betting that Hillary will challenge the Bamster in 2012 - 1968 all over again.

KCJoe · 06-25-2010, 01:50 PM

I am a fiscal conservative. I would vote for anyone who would balance the budget. I would vote republican if I believed they were serious about balancing the budget, but they are as fiscally irresponsible as the democrats only they are hypocrites about it.

My biggest fear for this country is the shrinking middle class. Without it, the country will turn into the haves and the have-nots and chaos will ensue. I feel the republican party policies will result in the concentration of wealth within the top 2% of the population and because of this, I don’t think I’ll ever vote republican again in my lifetime.

Back to topic.

Starry69 · 06-25-2010, 04:14 PM

I voted for Obama in the last election and I don't see anybody from the Republican side who I could vote for other than Ron Paul, and the Republicans will never have Ron Paul represent them in the Presidential race.

So yeah, I'd vote for Obama again because there's not likely to be anybody better to vote for.

dirty dog · 06-25-2010, 05:10 PM

Guys, there is a reason for the poll, to achieve an answer to a study in this case does not require to know who the candidate for the GOP will be. I know that the choice my change things, but it will not for the one answer i am looking for which I will tell you guys about once the poll has closed and I have reviewed the data. Okay, great!!!!

dirty dog · 06-25-2010, 05:12 PM

For the sake of the poll, lets assume that the GOP candidate is a qualified candidate, that you liked. Okay, this poll is not being put out there to show that the GOP will win. Okay this vote does not count for real guys okay, so assume the GOP candidate is qualified and you like him. Again, when the poll closes I will explain, you guys are making something very simple, very complex.

dirty dog · 06-25-2010, 05:26 PM

You know what screw it its seems to be to tough. So here are what the results tell me.

The so called angry American does not exist, not at least when it comes to Presidential elections. The purpose of the poll was to see if this anger that is being spoken about was real. If ths anger was real, then the number of people who voted Democrat in 2008 would have changed to republican in 2012, it would not matter who the candidate is. What the poll shows me is

That the vote basically breaks down along party lines. With the Independents making a difference and those seem to favor Obama. Only two people have changed their mind from Democrat to Republican based on Obama's performance alone. One person switch from Rep to Democrat based on Obama's performance. It also shows a split in the Republican party with 6 Republicans choosing to support a Tea party endorsed candidate. No democrats indicated they would vote for a tea party endorsed candidate. This poll shows a total of 7 lost Republican votes.

Of course this will change based on candidate choices, but it does indicate that this so called anger which would make a person vote for anyone but Obama is not as strong as many in the GOP expect. It also shows that the Tea Party weakens the GOP. If the election was held today Obama would be elected if the rest of American broke down along the lines of those that have taken the poll.

Cheaper2buyit · 06-25-2010, 05:57 PM

most important I got 5 votes Please send donations to my web site www.helpastripperbabymamaout.gov I can make things right in the white house.

john_galt · 06-26-2010, 01:46 AM

dirty, endorsements are not the same as being a member. Remember Rush endorsed Hillary as being a better choice than what we got but I don't think he...

Cheaper2buyit · 06-26-2010, 02:54 AM

john I can't believe you brought up the pill popper guy

dirty dog · 06-26-2010, 08:58 AM

John, object of the poll, was to guage if there was true "anger" out among the general public that was so intense that they would choose not to vote for Obama regardless of who he was running against. This is the anger the GOP is counting on, this is the anger the media reports is out there, but it does not seem to be that strong. This should tell the GOP if the want to win in 2012 they need to run someone of quality or they are going to lose.

john_galt · 06-26-2010, 10:09 AM

Does anyone realize how idiotic the question is (sorry)? The fact that you would know today how you would vote for someone in two years because they belong to a certain party. Many of you stated that you would vote for a democrat, what if the candidate was Hitler? Those tried and true GOP voters, what if the candidate was Hillary? I don't think anyone in their right mind can announce how they will vote in two years.

dirty dog · 06-26-2010, 11:02 AM

John, for an educated man you seem to be missing the point of the poll, I have tried to explain it several times, but I am going to spell it out for you REEEEAAAALLLLLL SLOW.

The object was not to see who the Repulicans would vote for. The media, you, fritz and many other ultra conservatives speak of this anger that is in the commuity towards the government, you speak about 2010 sweeps because the people are so mad. This anger that you speak of is so strong that people are voting against Obama rather than for someone. Well it does not exist, if it did the number of people who selected I voted Democrat but will vote republican would have been statistically higher. The other answers were insignificant.

If you cant understand that then, maybe you should retake reading comprehension. No one was asking who you would vote for that is why no republican candidate was listed. Obama is the Democrat choice so the purpose was to see if people were voting against Obama, there not and your anger must not be that strong either or you would not have to wait to see who the Republican candidate would be. So what your saying is there could be worse than Obama, which speaks against this so called anger of the people.

By the way, I actually have degrees, more than one, I know statistics are a requirment for most accredited degrees, you should understand about polling, data samples, sample pools etc.

lucky1313 · 06-26-2010, 11:48 AM

This poll has 33 voters minus the ones that voted for cheaper. Hardly an indication of where will we end up in 2 years?

I voted for a john kerry when bush was elected (mistake)
Didn't vote the second time because I felt it was a no win situation.
Voted for john Mccain but wasn't satisfied that it was a a good choice just better then obama.

I don't know who I will vote for in 2 years but i know it won't be for obama.