The Tea Party Republicans are Revolting

Sorry, still not seeing the relevance.

Yes we will, won't we.

If he should win reelection, would that indicate to you that the majority of Americans are socialist? It won't to me because Obama is actually supporting center-right policies.

Only left-wingers think Obama is center right. Voters who consider themselves center-right are not going to vote for him in 2012.

Only right-wingers think that only left-wingers think Obama is center right.

You really don't understand this perspective thing very well, do you.

Are you making this up, or do you have any poll data to support this? I am pretty sure there are crosstabs for this on some of the polls.

You make this claim with no factual support. I am not so sure it is true.

I started the google, but it is your claim, so it is your responsibility to find any facts there are to back it up.

You sound like Ralph Cramden: "Norton, you know that I know that you know...."

I've no sense of responsibility for proving what I have claimed on A2K. I'm sorry if that makes me a bad person, but I don't. This forum doesn't even remotely resemble a formal debating contest and so insisting on any imagined rules about one is sort of silly.

You can assume I am making it all up or seek to disprove it...as you see fit.

I will suggest this (and maybe I'm making it up) people who consider themselves center-right, don't consider Obama center-right, therefore they are not goig to vote for him.

If you think there is definitive polling data than can disprove my suggestion, you're welcome to search for it.

Just curious here...when was the last time someone in this forum proved to your satisfaction something that your previously thought was entirely incorrect? (You're free to make something up in response)

No problem Finn and I do assume you are making it all up, not that there is anything wrong with that.

I am just yanking your chain because of your apparently sincere belief that your spin doesn't count as spin. You can call anyone you want "socialist" or "liberal" or "center-right". These terms don't mean anything more coming from you then they do from me. Either way, it is just spin.

Forgive me, but you are fun to poke at.

Well obviously a proponent of righteous political narratives would never find anything wrong with making it all up.

I don't spin, I speak what I believe to be the truth.

It's your choice whether or not your agree with me.

You're forgiven, but I think you are mistaken as to who is the poker and who is the pokee.

Would the poker have written something to the effect of "I started to research your claim but then realize its yours and you have to prove it!"

Nice try though.

I don't believe that for a second.

Well, you can be as flip about it as you want, but failing to provide evidence for your argument when you could so easily do so makes your argument look foolish. But, as usual, you already knew that.

Cycloptichorn

I didn't expect that you would.

It's all good though, because we're not solivng the world's problems, we're just having discussions.

I don't think it's foolish to argue that right of center voters don't think Obama is right of center and will likely not be voting for him in 2012.

I don't know how I could prove this even if I wished to.

I just meant in general...

Cycloptichorn

It's not that difficult since you specified that the "right of center" voters were judged by how they identified themselves.

You simply ask two questions in your poll. "Where do you consider yourself in the political spectrum ?" (and you give a rotating list with "right of center" as one of the options". and "How likely are you to vote for Obama?"

You ask a few thousand people this question and see how these question correlate.

I bet we could find a poll such as this if either of us cared enough.

I'm not adverse to the notion of providing support for a position I take, and have done so in the past.

I don't, however, think it is necessary to footnote my every post.

First of all, I don't take polls.

Secondly, my take on this seems so obvious that I don't see any value in spending any time on Google trying to prove it is accurate.

The actual counter-intuitive position is that right of center Americans see Obama as a right of center leader and plan on voting for him.

That you may not see this as counter-intutive speaks to your perspective, but if any position requires proof, it's yours.

There is a difference between factual statements and opinion statements.

Obama is a socialist is an opinion statement. The word "socialist" isn't defined (and under the academic definition he clearly isn't).

My statement that many Tea Party members are bigots is also an opinion statement. I don't define what is a "bigot" and there is really no way to prove it either way. I am expressing how I feel about the Tea Party.

These types of emotionally laden, political charged and unprovable statements are all spin. They can't be proved because the words you are using don't even have a strict definition.

You make a lot of statements that are clearly completely spin. So do I.

It is difficult for me to believe that you really don't know the difference between reality and spin.

Just because you are comfortable with stating things you know to be hyperbole because you believe it advances some noble point, you need not insist that I do so as well and be surprised when I contend I do not.

When I use hyperbole it is not dones in some sort of stealth mode where I'm happy if some people believe I'm accurate.

I use it to make a point through exaggeration or to attempt to be humerous.

Obama is a socialist (or socialistic if your prefer) is not hyperbole.

All (your argument had nothing to do with "many") Tea Party members are bigots is hyperbole.

What you do not get finn, is that what will occur when it occurs will be a re-redistribution of wealth... This is a commonwealth... The people are the source of all the wealth not directly the result of nature... And even the natural wealth is theirs... The rich are rich because they have figured out how to cut off, and corral part of the commonwealth, and that is fine, for now; as long as they understand that the word of the people is law... When the people have had enough, I would not give you a nickle for the rights of the rich to their wealth, or even their lives... If even a fraction of us turned on the rich and killed them on sight they would be finished because they are so few in number... They cannot defend our wealth from us except with disinformation... If the are to defend our wealth from us, they would have to hire us to do the dirt...I do not doubt their ability to find slave to do their killing... I doubt their ability to hold the affections of slaves who are forced to kill too many women and children on their behalf... You will find, that when the women are willing to risk their lives for change, that there will be change... Only watching their children starve is enough to radicalize women...