Most Republicans Are Birthers?

[Dr Adequate]

OK, my headline is somewhat sensationalist, for two reasons.

First, that's counting 30% "don't knows". The breakdown of the results (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/31/760087/-Birthers-are-mostly-Republican-and-Southern) amongst Republicans is as follows:

Yes: 42
No: 28
Not sure: 30

Second, the question asked was not: "Is Obama eligible to be President?" but "Do you believe that Barack Obama was born in the United States of America or not?". Now it is conceivable that there are some people, especially amongst the "don't knows", who have never heard of Birthism but have a vague idea that Obama might have been born in Indonesia or something.

If this was so, however, why would the results for Republicans be so different from results amongst Democrats and Independents? And is there really anyone left who hasn't heard of Birthism? I should still like to see the poll done again with a better question, and preferably not for the Daily Kos.

Still, it appears that this is the biggest conspiracy theory today. The Truthers must be so jealous.

Some demographics:

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/7614/whoarethebirthers.png

Golly, they're keen on this stuff in the South, aren't they? I wonder why.

[LightinDarkness]

You really can't put the "don't know" responses in the yes column. This poll was done pretty horribly with that sort of question wording, and usually when poll questions are THAT poorly done the "don't knows" include a lot of people who just didn't understand the question. Also, although usually you don't have to worry about sampling methodology with polling firms, any firm that let that sort of question get through would make me immediately suspicious of their other methodologies.

They should have cut off the "believe" part and the "or not" part, as including negative clauses in survey questions causes massive confusion. Best question would have been either "Where was Barack Obama born?" and code it for USA responses and all others.

Just as major parts of 9/11 conspiracy lunacy were born from Bush hatred, large parts of birtherism will be from Obama hatred. If McCain had won we'd be doing this all over again but the results would be reversed because democrats would become birthers claiming that McCain wasn't eligible since he was born in the Panama Canal zone.

[Dr Adequate]

You really can't put the "don't know" responses in the yes column. As I pointed out.

This poll was done pretty horribly with that sort of question wording, and usually when poll questions are THAT poorly done the "don't knows" include a lot of people who just didn't understand the question. But as I pointed out, this wouldn't explain the discrepancy between Republicans and others. "Not sure" got 3% amongst Democrats. Should my headline have been: "Republicans are ten times more likely than Democrats to be too dumb to understand a simple question"?

Just as major parts of 9/11 conspiracy lunacy were born from Bush hatred, large parts of birtherism will be from Obama hatred. If McCain had won we'd be doing this all over again but the results would be reversed because democrats would become birthers claiming that McCain wasn't eligible since he was born in the Panama Canal zone. An ... interesting ... conjecture, but it wouldn't explain why one CT got so much more play than the other before the election. Where were the McCain birthers then?

[arthwollipot]

The poll shows that a minority of respondents believe that Obama was born in the USA. The rest either believe he wasn't or aren't sure. That's pretty disappointing on its own.

[Travis]

The poll shows that a minority of respondents believe that Obama was born in the USA. The rest either believe he wasn't or aren't sure. That's pretty disappointing on its own.

"Depressing" is the term I would have used. Strangely I have many Republican friends and not one of them believe the Birther crap. Of course they're all Californian Republicans which is kind of different.

[Kritikos]

Dr. A., how did you derive the figures for the pie charts? The report at the Daily Kos says what percentage in the South or among Republicans answered "no," but not what percentage of those who answered "no" are in the South or are Republicans. --EDITED YET AGAIN to remove stupid question that you answered in your first paragraph.

I have to agree with LightinDarkness that it was an amazingly dumb move to formulate the question as "Do you believe . . . or not?" When I first read of the survey, I assumed that the answer option "not sure" meant "I am not sure whether (or whether I believe that) Obama was born in the US," but I see now that it could also be chosen by those who are unsure how the options "yes" and "no" are supposed to relate to a question that is not, in all strictness, of such a form as to admit of a yes or a no answer.

On second thought, I doubt that many people are sensitive enough to grammar to hesitate in construing "yes" to mean "Yes, I believe that Obama was born in the US" and "no" to mean "No, I do not believe that Obama was born in the US."

[Kritikos]

The poll shows that a minority of respondents believe that Obama was born in the USA. The rest either believe he wasn't or aren't sure. That's pretty disappointing on its own.
No. You are looking only at the results for Republicans. The responses overall were 77% "yes," 11% "no," 12% "not sure." Information here (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320).

[LightinDarkness]

But as I pointed out, this wouldn't explain the discrepancy between Republicans and others. "Not sure" got 3% amongst Democrats. Should my headline have been: "Republicans are ten times more likely than Democrats to be too dumb to understand a simple question"?

It think it explains quite a bit. The "don't know/no response" for survey questions is only that high if the question is confusing as this one is. If we assume 25%, if they understood the question, would say yes - it would put it at about 65/35 yes, and given the amount of partisan hatred that this CT fuels I think such a ratio would be pretty normal.

I don't think birtherism measures lunacy based on party affiliation so much as it measures how many republicans are willing to believe anything because they want to hate Obama. We reversed this several years ago with the 9/11 conspiracies when, if I remember the survey correctly, a notably larger number of Democrats believed George Bush caused it than Republicans.


An ... interesting ... conjecture, but it wouldn't explain why one CT got so much more play than the other before the election. Where were the McCain birthers then?

All over the internet. But the DNC's strategy was to emphasize Republican birthers to make them look like lunatics. RNC is not as smart on the political strategy side in elections, as you can see from the election results.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=apbg9.XKhWbs&refer=us
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread337922/pg1

Now, I don't understand why the regional breakdown went like that - that is highly unusual. That might be capturing birtherism fueled by racism.

[thaiboxerken]

Southerners are generally stupid. I know this because I've lived there and visited ther many times. It's not to say that there aren't smart people there, however, this is an area of the country where the majority of people still believe that skin color plays a factor in competency and intelligence. I don't know why, but the southern culture is one that promotes ignorance and superstition.

[Kritikos]

Southerners are generally stupid.
Oh, this is going to be fun. :catfight:

[LightinDarkness]

Southerners are generally stupid. I know this because I've lived there and visited ther many times. It's not to say that there aren't smart people there, however, this is an area of the country where the majority of people still believe that skin color plays a factor in competency and intelligence. I don't know why, but the southern culture is one that promotes ignorance and superstition.

Holy hasty generalization batman!

[SezMe]

RNC is not as smart on the political strategy side in elections, as you can see from the election results.
I disagree. I find RNC electoral politics to be superior to the DNC, hands down. Losing 2008 is just one single data point - it does not make your case.

[LightinDarkness]

I disagree. I find RNC electoral politics to be superior to the DNC, hands down. Losing 2008 is just one single data point - it does not make your case.

Well, you are free to disagree. As someone who has consulted for both the RNC and DNC I know how they both operate, and the RNC has failed to catch up on how to properly spin and propagandize internet rumors since 2004.

[Dr Adequate]

Dr. A., how did you derive the figures for the pie charts? I didn't, I took them off the Daily Kos website.

What the heck is a kos, anyway?

[Dr Adequate]

It think it explains quite a bit. The "don't know/no response" for survey questions is only that high if the question is confusing as this one is. But that doesn't answer my point --- we don't see this supposed confusion amongst Democrats. Now either there are really ten times more easily confused people amongst Republicans than Democrats, or the disparity is explained by the fact that there are that many more Republicans than Democrats who really do suppose the evidence to be inconclusive.

[thaiboxerken]

Holy hasty generalization batman!

Is it really hasty? Just look at the polls.

[BenBurch]

I think this is just great news.

GO LEMMINGS! GO!

The more the GOP wraps themselves in this issue, the more certain they are of defeat in 2012 and any election thereafter.

[Piggy]

Golly, they're keen on this stuff in the South, aren't they? I wonder why.

Because, my friend -- and I say this as an impeccably pedigreed Southerner -- we're a bunch of ******* hicks.

I wish it boiled down to something other than that, but it doesn't.

The South, on the whole, is undereducated, superstitious, steeped in fundamentalist religion, short on critical thinking skills, and in the case of working class whites also highly suspicious of blacks, "liberals", and "elites" (that's 3 strikes for Obama), and therefore easily swayed by the likes of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.

I have a good friend who teaches high school science in a relatively well-to-do district in the neighboring county, and every year he has to deal with students who insist the moon landing was faked.

Plain and simple, we're gullible rednecks.

[Piggy]

What the heck is a kos, anyway?

It comes from "Daily KOs", or "Daily Knock-Outs" -- the site was intended to deliver knock-out punches to the conservatives.

[Piggy]

I think this is just great news.

GO LEMMINGS! GO!

The more the GOP wraps themselves in this issue, the more certain they are of defeat in 2012 and any election thereafter.

A failed Republican Party will inevitably result in worse government from the ruling Democrats for two reasons.

First, it will increase the incidence of group-think, scandal, and corruption among the power party. (As it always does.)

Second, with the Democrats divided as they are, and will continue to be, among liberals, moderates, and blue dogs, coalitions will have to be made with Republican senators and congressmen -- and the more extreme and fringe-based those folks are, the worse those compromises will be.

Democrats should not applaud the implosion of the GOP.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Was this a random sample? Sure doesn't look like it.

[Grizzly Bear]

I've been hearing off and on about the whole "is Obama a natural born citizen" thing...though I hadn't followed the 'birther' tag attached to it. I'm also curious and doubtful about the poll results... my father's a much bigger conservative than I am, and much more against Obama's policies but he hasn't uttered a word about his citizenship to me, nor have any of my relatives or friends. Just like the truther conspiracies... I've yet to hear the "birther" thing thrown around outside of the internet, and this is my first time encountering that whole debate in this context...

Hopefully it's an affliction to the radical nut bars... because I sure as hell don't want that label. IMO if his natural born stature were a problem it should have been sorted before he became a presidential candidate, not after he was elected into office. I personally don't care about the rest.

[Eyeron]

Personally I've seen so much partisan politics that when I hear "Obama is a citizen" I tend to think liberals while "No he isn't" tends to be conservatives. I wonder if it's just not more partisan tit for tat thing, trying to get back at Obama for the liberals who refuse to believe Bush won the election fair and square against Bush.

People need to grow up.

[Dr Adequate]

Was this a random sample? Sure doesn't look like it. Details of the methodology are here (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320).

Methodology

DKOS WEEKLY NATIONAL POLL 2009

The Daily Kos weekly National Poll was conducted by Research 2000 July 27 through July 30, 2009. A total of 2400 adults nationally were interviewed by telephone. A cross-section of calls was made into each state in the country in order to reflect the adult population nationally.

The margin for error, according to standards customarily used by statisticians, is no more than plus or minus 2% percentage points. This means that there is a 95 percent probability that the "true" figure would fall within that range if the entire adult population were sampled. The margin for error is higher for any demographic subgroup, such as gender, race, or region.

Are Research 2000 notoriously unreliable?

[SmartyPants]

Southerners are generally stupid. I know this because I've lived there and visited ther many times. It's not to say that there aren't smart people there, however, this is an area of the country where the majority of people still believe that skin color plays a factor in competency and intelligence. I don't know why, but the southern culture is one that promotes ignorance and superstition.

Oh, but what they've done for literature!

[SezMe]

It comes from "Daily KOs", or "Daily Knock-Outs" -- the site was intended to deliver knock-out punches to the conservatives.
I don't think so. Linky. (http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/DailyKos_FAQ)

"Kos" is the US-Army/screen nickname of the founder of Daily Kos, Markos Alberto Moulitsas Zúniga. (See also the in-progress dkospedia entry Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, and the Wikipedia pages Kos and Markos Moulitsas Zúniga.)

Original bold.

[SezMe]

A failed Republican Party will inevitably result in worse government from the ruling Democrats for two reasons.

First, it will increase the incidence of group-think, scandal, and corruption among the power party. (As it always does.)

Second, with the Democrats divided as they are, and will continue to be, among liberals, moderates, and blue dogs, coalitions will have to be made with Republican senators and congressmen -- and the more extreme and fringe-based those folks are, the worse those compromises will be.

Democrats should not applaud the implosion of the GOP.
I agree. Unchecked power inexorably leads to corruption. The Dems and the USA needs a reasonable, issue-based GOP. The birthers, deathers and similar utter cow patties ultimately harm us all.

[Dr Adequate]

An ... interesting ... conjecture, but it wouldn't explain why one CT got so much more play than the other before the election. Where were the McCain birthers then?All over the internet. OK, let's have a look at Google Trends.

http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/2290/mccainobama.png

The red line is for the words "Obama" and "certificate", the blue line for "McCain" and "Panama".

[MattusMaximus]

I'd be careful about reading too much into these results without more independent polling. I seem to recall seeing another poll on this issue in which only 28% of Republicans bought the birther nonsense.

I'll do some digging.

ETA: Never mind, we were both talking about the same poll, apparently. When taking into account the Republicans "not sure" about Obama's citizenship, the numbers come out to 58%

That's pretty damn spooky.

But I'd still like to see some other independent polling on this before I continue work on my bomb shelter.

[Dr Adequate]

But I'd still like to see some other independent polling on this before I continue work on my bomb shelter. I read that the Kos poll has spurred other pollsters into asking similar questions. I can't remember where I read this, sorry. But if it's true, we should see some answers next week.

[MattusMaximus]

I read that the Kos poll has spurred other pollsters into asking similar questions. I can't remember where I read this, sorry. But if it's true, we should see some answers next week.

Good, because I am loathe to trust one poll. Thanks for the heads up.

[MattusMaximus]

Slight derail...

More trouble ahead for the GOP. It seems that during the August recess the birthers are planning on, as I predicted, going after Republican Congress-critters when they appear in public forums...

GOP headache: The birther issue (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25444.html)
As GOP Rep. Mike Castle learned the hard way back home in Delaware this month, there’s no easy way to deal with the small but vocal crowd of right-wing activists who refuse to believe that President Barack Obama was born in the United States.

At a town hall meeting in Georgetown, a woman demanded to know why Castle and his colleagues were “ignoring” questions about Obama’s birth certificate — questions that have been put to rest repeatedly by state officials in Hawaii, where the birth certificate and all other credible evidence show that Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961.

When Castle countered that Obama is, in fact, “a citizen of the United States,” the crowd erupted in boos, the woman seized control of the gathering and led a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. The video went viral; by Sunday, it had been viewed on YouTube more than half a million times.

And birthers say members should expect more of the same in the coming weeks.

“Absolutely,” says California resident Orly Taitz, the Russian-born attorney/dentist who has become a kind of ringleader for the movement. “It is a very important issue, one that politicians should have taken up a long time ago.”

Moments after speaking with POLITICO Saturday, Taitz posted a call to arms on her blog:

“I believe it is a serious concern and I hope that each and every decent American comes to town hall meetings with a video camera and demands action,” she wrote.

Wow, this is going to be interesting. Like watching a train wreck in slow motion...

[stilicho]

Second, the question asked was not: "Is Obama eligible to be President?" but "Do you believe that Barack Obama was born in the United States of America or not?".

That's the big issue I've seen regarding the whole 'birther' nonsense. People who ought to know better are saying "I dis/believe X..." as if it isn't a question of fact but of opinion.

I can see why you offered that up here in Conspiracy Theories because that's exactly what CT'rs do. Either UBL and al-Qaeda staged the 9/11 attacks or they didn't. Either the Nazi regime engaged in genocide against the Jews or it didn't. Either the Apollo programme put people on the moon in 1969 or it didn't.

I suppose the media would have to report on real stories if they dropped this one.

[Caustic Logic]

Wow. Dang.

This issue at this time is well-worthy of good study and I think it will get that. My guess is this poll, being run by Dem politico activits types, is spun a bit towards the upside. But I suspect when closer study is done, we'll see something disturbingly close to these numbers- say 66-90%. OOMA. It's a big enough phenom I think it'll go in the history books when they talk about the first black president.

Two things are disturbing - the number of no votes, tgose who flat believe he was born outside the U.S., and the number of unsures. Considering there's no actual evidence for something that's convinced something like one quarter of GoP voters... One must wonder what is going trough the minds of the not sures.

If you haven't heard of the controversy and had a basic education about presidential requirements, you'd most wisely presume no problem since he's president.

Presuming you're aware of the issue a concerned citizen would want to know yes or no. There are two ways to decide this - to do some research and some thinking and then to decide, or to decide without the above. They've had time to figure it out... some concerned citizens.

It's almost as if they're waiting to decide to see how things pan out first. Will the South finally rise again against the Kenyan imposter? If so then some of that app. 30% will suddenly decide on no. Major hyperbole I know, but still...

Anyway, Dr. A, a well-put observation. I think we need to look at the scale of this and that middle category is indeed suspect. The question mark in the title is the only thing you needed to be spot-on here.
:wave1

[Klimax]

Originally intended for other thread,but better for this:

I've started a thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4961778#post4961778) on this.

The methodology is given here (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320):

Methodology

DKOS WEEKLY NATIONAL POLL 2009

The Daily Kos weekly National Poll was conducted by Research 2000 July 27 through July 30, 2009. A total of 2400 adults nationally were interviewed by telephone. A cross-section of calls was made into each state in the country in order to reflect the adult population nationally.

The margin for error, according to standards customarily used by statisticians, is no more than plus or minus 2% percentage points. This means that there is a 95 percent probability that the "true" figure would fall within that range if the entire adult population were sampled. The margin for error is higher for any demographic subgroup, such as gender, race, or region.

Quite well writen methodology.Only few more things were missing,but otherwise sufficent. (I am missing how the called got on list-registration or other means ; the distribution of education)

Second thought: I would set aside "not sure",because it could be suprise for asked.(Don't know how spread is knowledge about "issue")

Third:Are there any other polls about this?
Fourth: Why I have such questions? I have seen polls in my country to vary greatly only by selection of people... So I doubt nobody does it in USA as well.

Some of this has been answered,but nothing definite yet...

[Kritikos]

Dr. A., how did you derive the figures for the pie charts?
I didn't, I took them off the Daily Kos website.
Where, please? They are not on the first page that you cite (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/31/760087/-Birthers-are-mostly-Republican-and-Southern), or on the other page (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320) with the detailed information. As I said, the Kos pages say what percentage in the South or among Republicans answered "no," but not what percentage of those who answered "no" are in the South or are Republicans, which are what your pie charts concern.
Golly, they're keen on this stuff in the South, aren't they? I wonder why.
Because, my friend -- and I say this as an impeccably pedigreed Southerner -- we're a bunch of ******* hicks.

I wish it boiled down to something other than that, but it doesn't.

The South, on the whole, is undereducated, superstitious, steeped in fundamentalist religion, short on critical thinking skills, and in the case of working class whites also highly suspicious of blacks, "liberals", and "elites" (that's 3 strikes for Obama), and therefore easily swayed by the likes of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.

I have a good friend who teaches high school science in a relatively well-to-do district in the neighboring county, and every year he has to deal with students who insist the moon landing was faked.

Plain and simple, we're gullible rednecks.
That sounds more plausible to me than just saying that they're "stupid," though the effects of having too little education and too much religion look a lot like stupidity.

[gtc]

Are there corresponding polls from the Bush era about the number of people who thought he stole the election? I would be interested to know whether the Birthers have eclipsed that CT.

[Dr Adequate]

Where, please? They are not on the first page that you cite (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/31/760087/-Birthers-are-mostly-Republican-and-Southern), or on the other page (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320) with the detailed information. As I said, the Kos pages say what percentage in the South or among Republicans answered "no," but not what percentage of those who answered "no" are in the South or are Republicans, which are what your pie charts concern. Linky (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/31/760258/-The-birth-of-a-regional-rump-party).

[Dr Adequate]

Are there corresponding polls from the Bush era about the number of people who thought he stole the election? I would be interested to know whether the Birthers have eclipsed that CT. I don't know about the population at large, but asked whether there was a cloud over the legitimacy of the election, 44% of Supreme Court Judges said "yes" (http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Bush_v._Gore/Certiorari/Dissent&oldid=1055472).

Let us know if you find any further data.

[Walter Ego]

Southerners are generally stupid. I know this because I've lived there and visited ther many times. It's not to say that there aren't smart people there, however, this is an area of the country where the majority of people still believe that skin color plays a factor in competency and intelligence. I don't know why, but the southern culture is one that promotes ignorance and superstition.

I demand an immediate apology for that cowardly slur, sir, or there shall be consequences. :duel:

Edit:

-_E3uL1m7Ys

dTKsXCHKffw

[Kritikos]

Linky (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/31/760258/-The-birth-of-a-regional-rump-party).
Thanky.

[Piggy]

I don't think so. Linky. (http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/DailyKos_FAQ)

Another urban myth debunked!

Thanks! :)

[Piggy]

It's funny to read the posts from those who suspect that the poll numbers may be overblown.

They might, of course.

But where I live, birtherism is about as common as crabgrass.

I know many people (and overhear even more) who believe much worse about Obama.

And in fact, these pre-existing beliefs make fertile soil for birtherism, since people are much more prone to agree uncritically with new information that supports what they already believe than we are to disagree with it or to agree with new information that challenges what we already believe.

There's an all-too-popular view in my neck of the woods that Obama is a secret Muslim groomed for life to infiltrate the US political system.

Trained in Indonesian madrasas, he was carefully prepped by his handlers and brought, step by step, into the halls of power by their allies inside the American power system.

Once they had gotten him into the Senate via the corrupt Chicago power machine, he was unleashed at the Democratic convention in a nationally televised speech. Fellow travelers within the mainstream media talked him up, and gullible liberal journalists followed their lead, transforming this one-man sleeper cell into an instant political celebrity.

With massive funding from George Soros and illegal campaign contributions orginating in rogue states, communist nations, and jihadist organizations, the Obama machine took advantage of child-minded, ivory-tower liberals, inexperienced college kids, and angry, power-hungry, ignorant blacks to sweep their illegal candidate into the White House.

Now he is acting to destroy America from within. He plans to disarm the citizenry, nationalize our industry, and align the US with Venezuela, Iran, and other outlaw states.

He may even be the Antichrist who is prophecied to appear in these Last Days.

That, of course, is the most extreme view. There are less extreme views that incorporate only parts of that scenario.

But you can see how these various dust-ups -- over Obama's education in Indonesia, alleged overseas campaign contributions, "palling around with terrorists", corruption within ACORN (which Glenn Beck still covers), accusations of being a Socialist, fears of looming restrictions on firearms (there's actually a bullet shortage around here b/c so many people are hording ammunition), the "friendly" photographs with Chavez, and the birth certificate hysteria -- fit into a larger picture, and why these particular theories have gained such traction.

From the outside, it may seem curious that such a fuss is being made over the birth certificate issue. But from inside that world-view, a failure to recognize the true significance of Obama's birth is a sign of gullibility at best, and complicity in the destruction of America at worst.

Then there are the bigots who just hope he's not a citizen so they can get that **** ****** out of the White House.

[rwguinn]

Well, you are free to disagree. As someone who has consulted for both the RNC and DNC I know how they both operate, and the RNC has failed to catch up on how to properly spin and propagandize internet rumors since 2004.
Ah.
So what you are saying is that Democratic Party is prone to lying, cheating, and whatever it takes to win.
Next thing you know, they'll deny eating babies and being under control of the NWO

[elbe]

I wonder how many of the don't knows are people who really don't know any more about the topic than that certain news personalities say there are "questions".

[Monketey Ghost]

How much is this like the "Bush never properly served" in the Guard thing?

I recall being sort of interested in anything that could prove W did the time he was supposed to... does that make me a CT nut as well, by the same brush so to speak? I wonder. Maybe we all get our time at the plate with a CT bat.

[Bob Klase]

OK, let's have a look at Google Trends.

http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/2290/mccainobama.png

The red line is for the words "Obama" and "certificate", the blue line for "McCain" and "Panama".

Doesn't really mean much. If you check "McCain" and "citizen", or "McCain" and "born", or "McCain" and "certificate" you'll get a result similar to "Obama" and "certificate".

[zaphod2016]

Southerners are generally stupid.

My credentials: born & raised in Chicago, educated in NY, now living in Florida in a "red" district.

Are Floridians dumb compared to New Yorkers? It depends on the subject. If we're talking about finance, or history, or science, usually the native Floridian is at a disadvantage. But if talking about sports, or fish or "how-to" (i.e. how to do an oil change, install a door, clean a pool) native Floridians are quite intelligent, and surprisingly good teachers.

How does this relate to "birther" statistics?

1. Most people here in Florida treat politics more like a religion than an opinion. We have many "identity Republicans" here, people who describe themselves as pro-GOP, but rarely vote. Not unlike the numerous "Christians" around me who rarely go to church.

2. Racism is definitely more prevalent down here; the N-bomb is dropped often, and without a stigma. Up north, I never heard the N-word unless it was uttered by a black person. In the defense of my redneck friends, I think they are "Identity whites" moreso than genuine racists. For example, whenever I ask: "why do you hate 'those ni**ers'?" I usually get vague rants about crime and welfare. When I remind them that whites use more welfare in our county than blacks, it is not uncommon to hear: "well, they is ni**ers too!" In other words, it is a socio-economic prejudice, more so than a genuine racism.

3. Up north in NY, I almost NEVER heard anyone use the N-word, or speak specifically against blacks. However, segregation was the norm- blacks and browns had "their" neighborhoods, and whites had "our" neighborhoods. There is a certain degree of hypocrisy in regards to race in NY- most whites "love the blacks"; they just don't to live near them.

4. Down in Florida, the neighborhood is much more integrated, which was a shock to me. If you checkout any of the parks along the beach today, you will see a variety of people all sharing the barbecue pits and volleyball courts. And after a few beers, they will all start ranting about politics. What I prefer about the south is, they tell you to your face, not your back, what they really think- and the opinions are not always what you would assume. Most blacks are still very pro-Obama, but more and more are becoming vocally critical. The latinos tend to be very anti-immigration, very pro-GOP. The Jews are divided about 50/50, with half being hardcore conservative, and the other half, bleeding-heart liberal. The young whites (under 25) are still pro-Obama, the old whites (65+) are very, very, very anti-Obama (and a few "Birthers" are among them). Just some unscientific observations from my own neighborhood walks.**

A final point on our local Birthers: I often say to them something along the lines of- "Look, I hate Obama too. I'm totally in favor of being anti-Obama. I just think you need to hate him for better reasons."

This grabs their attention. And after rattling off a laundry list of my own anti-Obama grudges, the listener will usually nod and concede that his color, and nation of origin, are really not the issue at all. My theory is that a lot of non-Birthers accept it, or at least go along with it, simply because the anti-Obamas have been a small minority for the past 6 months, and they are eager to make any allies they can (they have been very lonely).

Try it yourself: the next time you encounter a Birther, say something like: "Well, I concede he was born in Hawaii, but I still oppose the 8% penalty against uninsured small business with payroll over $400k. I think this Obama guy is overrated." If they continue on about the "negro muslim antichrist", you are wasting your time. But most *rational* or *semi-rational* people are quick to admit that these are not the best arguments against our new President.

** EDIT- I don't live in a multiracial utopia. 90% of the town is white, or at least, looks white to me. However, the difference between here and NY is that the houses are much more affordable, so the 10% non-white population lives right here with the rest of us, whereas in NY, my non-white friends usually lived in another neighborhood. I consider myself a "mutt" so I tend to get along with everybody. Plus, I'm a crazy magnet.

[LightinDarkness]

OK, let's have a look at Google Trends.

The red line is for the words "Obama" and "certificate", the blue line for "McCain" and "Panama".

Google trends actually proves my point, particularly since as both lines show Obama's only spiked toward the end of 2008 - when he had won the election. If McCain had won the election, hate inspired Democrats would be fueling McCain birtherism. As he lost, it didn't occur.

[elbe]

Doesn't really mean much. If you check "McCain" and "citizen", or "McCain" and "born", or "McCain" and "certificate" you'll get a result similar to "Obama" and "certificate".

How about "mccain panama" versus "obama kenya" to try to minimize pages about Obama's "illegitimacy" that mention McCain.

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/4596/obamamccain.png

ETA: I didn't even notice that line going back to 2004.

[LightinDarkness]

How about "mccain panama" versus "obama kenya" to try to minimize pages about Obama's "illegitimacy" that mention McCain.
.

Those terms don't work quite as well because it could easily include pages about Obama's trips to Kenya. However, the same rough pattern still emerges - although Obama's birtherism was slightly higher both of them were very similar until late in 2008 when he won the election. Obamas goes back to 2004 because that was when he was first mentioned as a possible candidate due to his popular DNC convention speech.

Google searches are not a good measure of of this to begin with, since most CTs don't google search for this stuff but find it on their own sites like ATS on the front page. Google searching alone is only a proxy for web based infamy and not popularity nor belief.

[elbe]

Those terms don't work quite as well because it could easily include pages about Obama's trips to Kenya. However, the same rough pattern still emerges - although Obama's birtherism was slightly higher both of them were very similar until late in 2008 when he won the election. Obamas goes back to 2004 because that was when he was first mentioned as a possible candidate due to his popular DNC convention speech.

Google searches are not a good measure of of this to begin with, since most CTs don't google search for this stuff but find it on their own sites like ATS on the front page. Google searching alone is only a proxy for web based infamy and not popularity nor belief.

The idea was that a birther page about either politician would, likely, mention the place where it is claimed they are from (or why it was "illegal" for them to be president). I think "obama kenya" is similar enough to "obama certificate" to guess that most of those are probably birther pages.

While I agree google trends only gives you a surface level interest, I think, in this case, it is more, I don't know, useful than the CT sites. There will always be the crazy people who relegate themselves to some odd corner of the interweb, I think the birther craze is more likely to get followers who may not already be a part of a CTer community. But that's just my guess.

ETA:
both of them were very similar until late in 2008
Both Obama and McCain? Where do you see them being similar in those searches?

[Brainster]

Does anybody else find the other question asked in the poll (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320) very curious?

QUESTION: Do you believe that America and Africa were once part of the same continent?

Apparently 58% of Americans are Pangaea deniers. Any possibility that by throwing a question about Africa in there that Kos was trying to seed the issue of where Obama was born?

[LightinDarkness]

Does anybody else find the other question asked in the poll (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320) very curious?



Apparently 58% of Americans are Pangaea deniers. Any possibility that by throwing a question about Africa in there that Kos was trying to seed the issue of where Obama was born?

I did not notice this - great find! Again, I can't believe a professional polling firm would allow questions like this - especially one after another. This is definitely question seeding.

Oh, and elbe: Im think you can see both of these items generated few google searches until late 2008, when the diverge was - again - when Obama won. Google analysitcs doesn't do correlation coefficients, so I am just looking at the lines. When you use similar terms, as was mentioned before, like Mccain certificate and Obama certificate, it gets even closer.

[elbe]

That is an odd question, it makes me wonder if they were going for some sort of education level of the pollee. Did they ask the questions in the order presented on the Daily Kos site?

[GreyICE]

Are there corresponding polls from the Bush era about the number of people who thought he stole the election? I would be interested to know whether the Birthers have eclipsed that CT.

So being queasy about a 5-4 decision is the same as having doubts about a case that has either been thrown out of court or unanimously decided against the defendant. Hey, any Republicans have a problem with Roe vs. Wade? That's the same thing as being a birther by gtc logic (actually RvW was 7-2, making them much crazier).

[Walter Ego]

My credentials: born & raised in Chicago, educated in NY, now living in Florida in a "red" district.

Are Floridians dumb compared to New Yorkers? It depends on the subject. If we're talking about finance, or history, or science, usually the native Floridian is at a disadvantage. But if talking about sports, or fish or "how-to" (i.e. how to do an oil change, install a door, clean a pool) native Floridians are quite intelligent, and surprisingly good teachers.

How does this relate to "birther" statistics?

1. Most people here in Florida treat politics more like a religion than an opinion. We have many "identity Republicans" here, people who describe themselves as pro-GOP, but rarely vote. Not unlike the numerous "Christians" around me who rarely go to church.

2. Racism is definitely more prevalent down here; the N-bomb is dropped often, and without a stigma. Up north, I never heard the N-word unless it was uttered by a black person. In the defense of my redneck friends, I think they are "Identity whites" moreso than genuine racists. For example, whenever I ask: "why do you hate 'those ni**ers'?" I usually get vague rants about crime and welfare. When I remind them that whites use more welfare in our county than blacks, it is not uncommon to hear: "well, they is ni**ers too!" In other words, it is a socio-economic prejudice, more so than a genuine racism.

3. Up north in NY, I almost NEVER heard anyone use the N-word, or speak specifically against blacks. However, segregation was the norm- blacks and browns had "their" neighborhoods, and whites had "our" neighborhoods. There is a certain degree of hypocrisy in regards to race in NY- most whites "love the blacks"; they just don't to live near them.

4. Down in Florida, the neighborhood is much more integrated, which was a shock to me. If you checkout any of the parks along the beach today, you will see a variety of people all sharing the barbecue pits and volleyball courts. And after a few beers, they will all start ranting about politics. What I prefer about the south is, they tell you to your face, not your back, what they really think- and the opinions are not always what you would assume. Most blacks are still very pro-Obama, but more and more are becoming vocally critical. The latinos tend to be very anti-immigration, very pro-GOP. The Jews are divided about 50/50, with half being hardcore conservative, and the other half, bleeding-heart liberal. The young whites (under 25) are still pro-Obama, the old whites (65+) are very, very, very anti-Obama (and a few "Birthers" are among them). Just some unscientific observations from my own neighborhood walks.**

A final point on our local Birthers: I often say to them something along the lines of- "Look, I hate Obama too. I'm totally in favor of being anti-Obama. I just think you need to hate him for better reasons."

This grabs their attention. And after rattling off a laundry list of my own anti-Obama grudges, the listener will usually nod and concede that his color, and nation of origin, are really not the issue at all. My theory is that a lot of non-Birthers accept it, or at least go along with it, simply because the anti-Obamas have been a small minority for the past 6 months, and they are eager to make any allies they can (they have been very lonely).

Try it yourself: the next time you encounter a Birther, say something like: "Well, I concede he was born in Hawaii, but I still oppose the 8% penalty against uninsured small business with payroll over $400k. I think this Obama guy is overrated." If they continue on about the "negro muslim antichrist", you are wasting your time. But most *rational* or *semi-rational* people are quick to admit that these are not the best arguments against our new President.

** EDIT- I don't live in a multiracial utopia. 90% of the town is white, or at least, looks white to me. However, the difference between here and NY is that the houses are much more affordable, so the 10% non-white population lives right here with the rest of us, whereas in NY, my non-white friends usually lived in another neighborhood. I consider myself a "mutt" so I tend to get along with everybody. Plus, I'm a crazy magnet.

The bottom line is that a lot of people, North, South, East and West and cannot accept the legitimacy of a black man being the President of the United States. It's a simple as that.

[Thunder]

The bottom line is that a lot of people, North, South, East and West and cannot accept the legitimacy of a black man being the President of the United States. It's a simple as that.

Was Hawaii a state in 1961?????

Hmmmmm....
:confused:

[Dr Adequate]

Google trends actually proves my point, particularly since as both lines show Obama's only spiked toward the end of 2008 - when he had won the election. Oh, and elbe: Im think you can see both of these items generated few google searches until late 2008, when the diverge was - again - when Obama won. And there was I thinking the election was in November.

Look at the charts. The big spike is before the election. Indeed, on elbe's chart, the point marked "A" is November 5th, as you can see by using google trends yourself for the same terms. Birthism increased before the election, reached its fever pitch immediately before the election, and dropped off precipitously after the election when smearing Obama became kinda pointless.

Meanwhile you maintain that the supposed vast crowd of potential McCain Birthers wouldn't have become really active 'til after the election, though you do not explain why.

Is there anything else you'd like to be wrong about?

[Dr Adequate]

Does anybody else find the other question asked in the poll (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320) very curious?

Apparently 58% of Americans are Pangaea deniers. Any possibility that by throwing a question about Africa in there that Kos was trying to seed the issue of where Obama was born? I don't think they're that clever. But it might have had an "anchoring effect".

As I say, there should be more polls soon on Birthism, which I presume will not also address the great controversy over whether Jesus hates plate tectonics.

[stilicho]

Apparently 58% of Americans are Pangaea deniers. Any possibility that by throwing a question about Africa in there that Kos was trying to seed the issue of where Obama was born?

That question is like a Brandon League sinker. Africa is clearly now a continent but America is not clearly a continent. If they had asked if "the Americas" and Africa were once a part of the same continent then the intent would have been much clearer. As it was, I had to think twice about how I'd answer it. I would definitely wonder whether they were implying that the nation--the USA--had once been located near or perhaps inside the continent of Africa.

[stilicho]

The big spike is before the election.

The spike coincides with the allegations levelled by Jerome Corsi. Isn't that right when the MSM started running stories on it?

[gtc]

That is an odd question, it makes me wonder if they were going for some sort of education level of the pollee. Did they ask the questions in the order presented on the Daily Kos site?

Is Eurasia considered to be a continent?

We were taught (and Wikipedia uses the same terminology) that Pangaea was a supercontinent like Eurasia is today.

I assume the correct answer is 'yes, they were once part of the same continent,' but if I saw that question on an exam then I would not be surprised if it was a trick question.

I would also be interested to know when Plate Tectonics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics)started to be taught in schools as the theory seems to only have been developed in the 1960s as a way to explain Continental Drift (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_drift).

So being queasy about a 5-4 decision is the same as having doubts about a case that has either been thrown out of court or unanimously decided against the defendant.

Believing that Bush stole the election is different to being queasy about a 5-4 decision.

Hey, any Republicans have a problem with Roe vs. Wade? That's the same thing as being a birther by gtc logic (actually RvW was 7-2, making them much crazier).

If you believe Bush stole the election then you believe a conspiracy theory as hard as it may be for some to accept that.

[dudalb]

Ah.
So what you are saying is that Democratic Party is prone to lying, cheating, and whatever it takes to win.


In other words,just like the GOP.
What has happened since 2004 is that the Dems have become better at it, and the GOP a lot worse.

[Brainster]

Believing that Bush stole the election is different to being queasy about a 5-4 decision.

Not to mention that the actual decision in Bush v. Gore was 7-2 on the merits of the case; two of the assenting justices thought the case could be sent back to Florida to try to fix the equal protection problems.

[dudalb]

Was Hawaii a state in 1961?????

Hmmmmm....
:confused:


Yes it was.

[dudalb]

Frankly, I would want to see poll results from a more neutral source then The Daily Kos before getting all upset.
A Democratic, Lefty blog produces a poll that shows that The GOP is filled with idiots. Big Surprise.
Confirmation bias much?

[Brainster]

Yes it was.

Not to mention that the issue of whether one could be born in a territory that later became a state and still run for president was resolved in 1964, with Barry Goldwater (born in the Arizona Territory).

[dudalb]

Not to mention that the issue of whether one could be born in a territory that later became a state and still run for president was resolved in 1964, with Barry Goldwater (born in the Arizona Territory).

Thanks, I should have mentioned that.

[Kritikos]

Frankly, I would want to see poll results from a more neutral source then The Daily Kos before getting all upset.
A Democratic, Lefty blog produces a poll that shows that The GOP is filled with idiots. Big Surprise.
Confirmation bias much?
If you are going to raise suspicions of bias, it is irrelevant who commissioned the poll and published the results. What matters is who carried out the poll. In this case, that was Research 2000 (http://research2000.us/). Daily Kos described the organization as non-partisan. If you are going to raise doubts about that, you had better furnish some evidence.

[Klimax]

If you are going to raise suspicions of bias, it is irrelevant who commissioned the poll and published the results. What matters is who carried out the poll. In this case, that was Research 2000 (http://research2000.us/). Daily Kos described the organization as non-partisan. If you are going to raise doubts about that, you had better furnish some evidence.

Described by Daily Kos. Sure,that is enough...

[Kritikos]

Described by Daily Kos. Sure,that is enough...
You offer mere suspicion as if it were proof of something. I named the organization and provided a link to its Web site. If it's partisan, it should not be hard to find evidence of the fact -- I mean, other evidence than the fact that you don't like its findings.

[Alt+F4]

Happy Birthday President Obama!

For your 48th birthday, The New York Times has featured a story about the deranged racists on page 1 while the Republicans discuss damage control.

Before House Republicans left Washington for their August break, party strategists offered advice for how to handle the situation if it arises during town meetings with constituents. Don’t agree with the conspiracy theory, but show respect and try to broaden the conversation to specific policy disagreements with the Obama administration on health care, taxes or the deficit.

Linky:


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/us/politics/05zeleny.html

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I think this is just great news.

GO LEMMINGS! GO!

The more the GOP wraps themselves in this issue, the more certain they are of defeat in 2012 and any election thereafter.

As recently as October 2006, I thought the same of those who believe that the 2000 and/or 2004 elections were "stolen".

I have since had to revise that opinion.

[I Ratant]

Why would the Republican Party with all its resources have NOT pointed out the non-citizenship of the Democratic candidate, were it real, before the conventions even?

[Dr Adequate]

If you believe Bush stole the election then you believe a conspiracy theory as hard as it may be for some to accept that. Where's the conspiracy? Surely some element of secrecy is implied by the word?

Bush, quite openly, went to the Supreme Court and demanded that they stop the votes from being counted. Do you deny it? They, non-secretly, acceded to his demand by a one vote margin. Do you deny it?

No? Then we are agreed on the facts. The issue which apparently separates us is the question of whether this was a good thing or a bad thing. If I think that this was a bad thing, that does not make me a conspiracy theorist. It just makes me in agreement with one fewer Supreme Court Judge than you.

It amuses me to see conservatives still whining on about this after all these years. I've heard of sore losers, but ... you guys got exactly what you wanted. You didn't want the votes to be counted, and, oh look! --- they weren't counted. You wanted Bush for President, and that's just what you got. Er ... congratulations? I never hear my liberal friends griping about this any more, but nine years later conservatives still have a deep sense of grievance, because they got everything they wanted but some people complained.

Get over it. Move on.

[MattusMaximus]

Frankly, I would want to see poll results from a more neutral source then The Daily Kos before getting all upset.
A Democratic, Lefty blog produces a poll that shows that The GOP is filled with idiots. Big Surprise.
Confirmation bias much?

Exactly. As Dr. A has said, perhaps the best thing that can come out of this is that more independent polling is done in an attempt to get a clearer picture on the issue. Personally, I'm still holding out hope that the majority of Republicans haven't gone too far down the crazy hole...

[Caustic Logic]

Where's the conspiracy? Surely some element of secrecy is implied by the word.

Bush, quite openly, went to the Supreme Court and demanded that they stop the votes from being counted. Do you deny it? They, non-secretly, acceded to his demand by a one vote margin. Do you deny it?

Umm, Dr. A, ... there is some serious doubt about whether the re-count would've made a difference. But considering this again, either way, Bush's itention to stop the recount is indicative of a desire to NOT get a clearer picture, clearly because he was ahead which is the time to quit. That's cynical, but nothing like paying plenty money for curiously faulty voter rolls... Got a thread about it. Would you care to comment?

No? Then we are agreed on the facts. The issue which apparently separates us is the question of whether this was a good thing or a bad thing. If I think that this was a bad thing, that does not make me a conspiracy theorist. It just makes me in agreement with one fewer Supreme Court Judge than you.

I like it :thumbsup: Agreed either way bad thing. "If you can't just let me win I'll sue you and we'll tke it all the way to the Supreme Court where My Daddy gave me a 5-4 lean, so nyah nyah nyah." (shaking fists)

It amuses me to see conservatives still whining on about this after all these years. I've heard of sore losers, but ... you guys got exactly what you wanted. You didn't want the votes to be counted, and, oh look! --- they weren't counted. You wanted Bush for President, and that's just what you got. Er ... congratulations? I never hear my liberal friends griping about this any more, but nine years later conservatives still have a grievance, because they got everything they wanted but some people complained. Get over it. Move on.

Never thought about it quite like that, but now that I have you've caused me to become angry. It's true that the only whining I hear anymore about the 2000 election IS about how stupid Liberals "keep complaining" even though they don't much.

Then again, I didn't hear THAT whining much either UNTIL Obama's election, so I think we're seeing some projection from the right side of the aisle.

[Dr Adequate]

Umm, Dr. A, ... there is some serious doubt about whether the re-count would've made a difference. Sure. My opinion was well-expressed by those placards saying: "THIS IS AMERICA. COUNT EVERY VOTE". It might have made no difference, but they could have found out, especially since the Constitution leaves a gap of a couple of months between the election and the inauguration.

Never thought about it quite like that, but now that I have you've caused me to become angry. It's true that the only whining I hear anymore about the 2000 election IS about how stupid Liberals "keep complaining" even though they don't much. Yes. Don't get angry though. Laugh.

If you don't find right-wing paranoia funny it'll drive you as nuts as it's driven them.

[Minadin]

Wow. Some people on the left are certainly trying to get as much mileage out of this as possible. And, some people on the right are deserving of this ridicule.

The best thing that the Republicans could do, as a whole, is to make some effort to debunk these ideas - make a statement about exactly how they are loony, and disavow any connection to these myths. You might alienate some of your base, but who are they gonna vote for, Ron Paul?

[Caustic Logic]

Don't get angry though. Laugh.

If you don't find right-wing paranoia funny it'll drive you as nuts as it's driven them.

Oh don't worry, I'm usually too mellow, so a little anger is good for me.

[Klimax]

You offer mere suspicion as if it were proof of something. I named the organization and provided a link to its Web site. If it's partisan, it should not be hard to find evidence of the fact -- I mean, other evidence than the fact that you don't like its findings.

I tried to view website of the agency,but it is so bad,that it is unusable.

I don't know then,I cannot get their page to display proprely to see history and since I saw how our poll companies work,I don't trust the results,yet.

Results are from collected numbers one thing,but to see if they are representative,we need to have some more ,from different companies and ordered by different enitites.

We have three major poll-ag. and their findings are often a lot varying depending on who conducted them/who wanted them and who presents(spin) them. I strongly doubt that it is different in USA or any other country(be it democracy or totalitarian regime).

BTW from their website-About us:
http://research2000.us/about/

What separates us from other firms is that we “LISTEN” to our clients. By listening, and consulting with our clients we develop and design the most effective research strategy that will accurately define and measure what our clients need to know. When we speak, we tell you what you need to know, not what you want to hear. See our Services Page for more information on what we do.

I think that it is same as here.And we consider those various polls usually as worthless...

And second BTW:You have missread me.I didn't say partisan.I say they tailor them to client.See bolded...
And their refferencies are unkown to me.(I know CNN but don't watch it.)

NOTE:When I say "here" or "we" I reffer to Czech Republic!

To finish. Everybody should wait for more polls as this one can be wrong.
(One poll doesn't spell toll ;) )

[Piggy]

Yes. Don't get angry though. Laugh.

If you don't find right-wing paranoia funny it'll drive you as nuts as it's driven them.

Sorry, my friend. I can't laugh anymore.

When a Congressman's town hall meeting is hijacked by shouting wingnuts and the leaders can't stop it, when a senator and a cabinet secretary are shouted down at a public meeting in Philadelphia, the situation has stopped being funny.

Somehow, it's become acceptable for adults to behave like unruly schoolchildren. Perhaps that's because it's how grown ups on the news and opinion shows behave these days. Maybe that's just how most folks act when the economy's bad and the air is full of lies, I don't know.

But it's bad times.

If it were just a few fringers standing up at meetings and being escorted out, a handful of Truthers and Holocaust deniers on the streetcorners, I wouldn't be worried. But when there are enough people on the right and left who feel that shouting and refusing to listen and disrupting public meetings is a good thing, then the clouds are dark indeed. Especially now, when our challenges are great, and we need cool heads, compromise, and communication to solve them.

Governments are like economies -- they can be killed by a lack of confidence, regardless of the reality.

[Hokulele]

Was Hawaii a state in 1961?????

Hmmmmm....
:confused:


Yes. The state is celebrating the 50th anniversary of Admissions Day a little later this month.

http://www.hawaiistatehoodconference.com/

[Dr Adequate]

The best thing that the Republicans could do, as a whole, is to make some effort to debunk these ideas - make a statement about exactly how they are loony, and disavow any connection to these myths. You might alienate some of your base, but who are they gonna vote for, Ron Paul? Er ... yes. Yes, they will.

[Caustic Logic]

Yes. The state is celebrating the 50th anniversary of Admissions Day a little later this month.

http://www.hawaiistatehoodconference.com/

Even at the mighty JREF, it takes an actual Hawaii resident to be able to answer a mid-basic geogaphy/civics question.

Just a reminder for when we get too heady. hey, I didn't know either, I thought it was like 62, and Elvis was like the state bird or something, for the first year or two? Maybe that's mixed up. :)

[Hokulele]

Even at the mighty JREF, it takes an actual Hawaii resident to be able to answer a mid-basic geogaphy/civics question.


To be fair, we have heard about it endlessly since the beginning of the year. Pretty much every local news source has had a story on it, and it will be getting worse as the anniversary gets closer.

At least we get the day off from work! :D

Just a reminder for when we get too heady. hey, I didn't know either, I thought it was like 62, and Elvis was like the state bird or something, for the first year or two? Maybe that's mixed up. :)


Nah, the state bird is the Boeing 767. Gotta get those tourist dollars!

[Dr Adequate]

And Hawai'i's state fish is the humuhumunukunukuapua'a.

I get a little warm in my heart every time I think of that.

[Hokulele]

And a little warm in the uvula.

[Grizzly Bear]

The best thing that the Republicans could do, as a whole, is to make some effort to debunk these ideas - make a statement about exactly how they are loony, and disavow any connection to these myths. You might alienate some of your base, but who are they gonna vote for, Ron Paul?

As a conservative the birther issue is no different than the spew of bull, the wacks in the far right have been spewing out the mouth about Obama being a closet muslim. The same immaturity is what causes the political mud slinging both via the politicians themselves and the media here. To be honest, I'm tired of this kind of crap boiling in politics, it seems all of the conspiracies over Obama's nationality and the fuel it adds to the wacko left's rantings have taken precedent over real debates concerning policy, where it belongs.

On the side, if those whacks hate Obama so much and they hate how the more moderate conservative base receives them, you're right... perhaps they should go third party. ;)

[Piggy]

On the side, if those whacks hate Obama so much and they hate how the more moderate conservative base receives them, you're right... perhaps they should go third party.

Yeah, but what would that leave us? Couldn't muster up enough votes to buy a cheese pizza after that.

[Myron Proudfoot]

When a Congressman's town hall meeting is hijacked by shouting wingnuts and the leaders can't stop it, when a senator and a cabinet secretary are shouted down at a public meeting in Philadelphia, the situation has stopped being funny.

Somehow, it's become acceptable for adults to behave like unruly schoolchildren. Perhaps that's because it's how grown ups on the news and opinion shows behave these days. Maybe that's just how most folks act when the economy's bad and the air is full of lies, I don't know.

It's thugs trying to win by force and intimidation what they have been unable to win at the ballot box. And yet they cry "freedom" while trying to force their will on the rest of us.

The "other interests" board of a hobby site I read frequently has been taken over by the birthers. Since I've been in this club for some years now I know them. Funny how the birthers are the same crowd of uber-right-wingers* that are also open bigots known for their frequent use of n****r and other racist terms...


*note that I did not say conservatives. some of my best buddies in this club are conservatives. We know each other's politics, agree to disagree, and since we enjoy collecting as a means to get away from things like politics, we simply don't discuss it.

[Dr Adequate]

To be honest, I'm tired of this kind of crap boiling in politics, it seems all of the conspiracies over Obama's nationality and the fuel it adds to the wacko left's rantings have taken precedent over real debates concerning policy, where it belongs. Ah yes, of course. With your customary acumen, you have put your finger on the crux of the problem: the "wacko left's rantings". We were almost beginning to lose sight of the real issue here.

[I Ratant]

This week's "Newsweek" has a full page with what appears to be an official Hawaiian birth certificate of the lad.
No doubt "photoshopped". :)

[brodski]

This week's "Newsweek" has a full page with what appears to be an official Hawaiian birth certificate of the lad.
No doubt "photo-shopped". :)

Of course the "birth" certificate is photo-shopped, Obama himself is just a hologram.

[thaiboxerken]

The blonde, russian woman lawyer has a copy of the "real" birth certificate. Anyone seen it?

Is the Birther conspiracy really just a veiled racist movement?

[I Ratant]

Of course the "birth" certificate is photo-shopped, Obama himself is just a hologram.
.
Or...
...
I just got a buncha this type of thing from the conservative branch of the family.

[I Ratant]

The blonde, russian woman lawyer has a copy of the "real" birth certificate. Anyone seen it?

Is the Birther conspiracy really just a veiled racist movement?
.
Yes.
Color and religion trump the lack of political experience and the trip through the corrupt Illinois political system.

[Grizzly Bear]

Yeah, but what would that leave us? Couldn't muster up enough votes to buy a cheese pizza after that.

would there even be enough for that? :confused:

[gtc]

Where's the conspiracy? Surely some element of secrecy is implied by the word?

Bush, quite openly, went to the Supreme Court and demanded that they stop the votes from being counted. Do you deny it? They, non-secretly, acceded to his demand by a one vote margin. Do you deny it?

That wasn't the only allegation made by people who claimed he stole the election. The conspiracy was bigger that that.

It amuses me to see conservatives still whining on about this after all these years. I've heard of sore losers, but ... you guys got exactly what you wanted. You didn't want the votes to be counted, and, oh look! --- they weren't counted. You wanted Bush for President, and that's just what you got. Er ... congratulations? I never hear my liberal friends griping about this any more, but nine years later conservatives still have a deep sense of grievance, because they got everything they wanted but some people complained.

Get over it. Move on.

It amuses me to see people like you making a fool of yourself like this.

I brought up the conspiracy allegations from then to ask how the number of people who bought into that conspiracy compared to the number of people who bought into this conspiracy. You going off on a tangent to beat up on the strawman conservative you so obviously hate is just funny.

[Brainster]

Just for grins, I looked up "Taitz" from "CA" at Opensecrets (http://www.opensecrets.org). Turns out her political contributions are almost as hard to understand as her claims:

2008: $500 to the RNC, $2,000 to the California Republican Party.
2006: $500 to John Campbell (R), $500 to Joe Lieberman (I) and $1,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Committee.
2004: $300 to George W. Bush (R).

I'm trying to draw a line through those contributions, but I confess I'm completely baffled by the $1,000 to the DSC in 2006. Does that make any sense to anybody?

[Hokulele]

She likes to buy high and sell low.

[Dr Adequate]

That wasn't the only allegation made by people who claimed he stole the election. The conspiracy was bigger that that.



It amuses me to see people like you making a fool of yourself like this.

I brought up the conspiracy allegations from then to ask how the number of people who bought into that conspiracy compared to the number of people who bought into this conspiracy. You going off on a tangent to beat up on the strawman conservative you so obviously hate is just funny. My, someone's grumpy today.

Please explain this conspiracy to us. Remember that it has to consist of people secretly doing something illegal, otherwise it isn't so much a conspiracy as it is a bunch of folks doing stuff.

[Grizzly Bear]

Ah yes, of course. With your customary acumen, you have put your finger on the crux of the problem: the "wacko left's rantings".

I think the birther movement is essentially a complete trolling of Obama's entire presidency (the real-life troll if you will), and I wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of racist element in it. And the liberal media is eating this crap up like candy and milking it for everything it's worth, in some cases sweeping it as a reflection of the entire conservative base. That point was obviously lost to you before you ever laid eyes on my post...

I think the problem lies in the "belief;" in many respects the same reason why polls on American stances on evolution aren't very good either. Some idiots take on on a literalist view of poll questions in much the same manner the 9/11truth movement treats literalism like a godsend for their controlled demolition fantasies.

[GreyICE]

It amuses me to see people like you making a fool of yourself like this.

I brought up the conspiracy allegations from then to ask how the number of people who bought into that conspiracy compared to the number of people who bought into this conspiracy. You going off on a tangent to beat up on the strawman conservative you so obviously hate is just funny.

This amuses me, because you brought up one thing that wasn't a conspiracy theory, tried to turn it into a conspiracy theory, then whined when Dr. A called you on the fact that this was obvious nonsense. And then called it a derail.

Really, he's said everything he needs to about the issue, but honestly, I feel like reiterating that thinking that Bush tried to avoid getting votes recounted is hardly a conspiracy theory, given he had lawyers file injunctions to stop the votes from being recounted. That's not so much a conspiracy theory, as a keen grasp of the basic facts.

You've just claimed that discussion of your BS was off-topic, then restated the same BS. Care to explain yourself?

[GreyICE]

I think the birther movement is essentially a complete trolling of Obama's entire presidency (the real-life troll if you will), and I wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of racist element in it. And the liberal media is eating this crap up like candy and milking it for everything it's worth, in some cases sweeping it as a reflection of the entire conservative base. That point was obviously lost to you before you ever laid eyes on my post...

I think the problem lies in the "belief;" in many respects the same reason why polls on American stances on evolution aren't very good either. Some idiots take on on a literalist view of poll questions in much the same manner the 9/11truth movement treats literalism like a godsend for their controlled demolition fantasies.
You know, this is the second attempt in this thread to tie people who believe that the birfers are full of crap to the 9/11 truth movement.

I'm starting to think that we need a new Godwin's law for this forum - anyone who wants to run around yelling "you don't want to be seen as maybe saying this because that would make you like those horrible troofers (cut troofer, insert Nazis for full effect)" when the discussion has nothing at all to do with that stupid movement clearly are trying to shut someone up. I don't really think you can compare taking a poll question to mean, well, the question written in the poll is quite the same as thinking the government planned 9/11, but apparently some people 'think' in different ways.

[Grizzly Bear]

You know, this is the second attempt in this thread to tie people who believe that the birfers are full of crap to the 9/11 truth movement.

I'm starting to think that we need a new Godwin's law for this forum - anyone who wants to run around yelling "you don't want to be seen as maybe saying this because that would make you like those horrible troofers (cut troofer, insert Nazis for full effect)" when the discussion has nothing at all to do with that stupid movement clearly are trying to shut someone up. I don't really think you can compare taking a poll question to mean, well, the question written in the poll is quite the same as thinking the government planned 9/11, but apparently some people 'think' in different ways.
Aside from the literal interpretation of poll results I fail to see where I said anything about them being exactly like the truth movement. Perhaps you should read my post more carefully, because outside of that, the 911 truth movement is in a totally different league of stupid. I thought most people who don't follow it could tell the difference... That doesn't absolve the birther movement from how dumb it already is.

[GreyICE]

Aside from the literal interpretation of poll results I fail to see where I said anything about them being exactly like the truth movement. Perhaps you should read my post more carefully, because outside of that, the 911 truth movement is in a totally different league of stupid. I thought most people who don't follow it could tell the difference... That doesn't absolve the birther movement from how dumb it already is.

It's funny because there was absolutely no reason to bring up the truth movement unless you were doing exactly what I said, because the concept of 'flawed polling procedure' is well established. The surprise plot twist is that if you claim flawed polling procedure, you might have to demonstrate flawed polling procedure.

This way you can just write 'oh, you're just acting like a troofer hur hur hur' and hope it flies.

It doesn't fly. What, exactly, was so horrible about this poll?

[Dr Adequate]

Perhaps you should read my post more carefully, because outside of that, the 911 truth movement is in a totally different league of stupid. No, not really. Any day now people are going to tell me that Obama's grandmother said "pull" and that fire can't melt birth certificates ... and the wheel will have come full circle ...

[Grizzly Bear]

because the concept of 'flawed polling procedure' is well established.
Not simply a flawed polling procedure; I was talking about some of the poll participants answering that they don't believe in Obama's citizenship standing anyway because they just want any excuse they can get the troll over Obama's presidency. I don't expect that every conservative answering yes to theat poll actually believes it. In either case it's a foolish stance for the conservative base to take on, I don't expect to align with that crap if it actually does spread beyond the 30% that poll supposedly depicts as answering "yes".

This way you can just write 'oh, you're just acting like a troofer hur hur hur' and hope it flies.
If you think I'm labeling liberals with the "twoofer" label by pointing out how some people answer to poll questions then feel free to make use of the ignore function. Maybe then I won't have you people slamming that down my throat. It really urks me when people put words in my mouth.

No, not really. Any day now people are going to tell me that Obama's grandmother said "pull" and that fire can't melt birth certificates ... and the wheel will have come full circle ...

Yeah, I guess you're right... when it comes to stupidity it comes in so many flavors it's hard to tell which is worse.

[GreyICE]

Not simply a flawed polling procedure; I was talking about some of the poll participants answering that they don't believe in Obama's citizenship standing anyway because they just want any excuse they can get the troll over Obama's presidency. I don't expect that every conservative answering yes to theat poll actually believes it. In either case it's a foolish stance for the conservative base to take on, I don't expect to align with that crap if it actually does spread beyond the 30% that poll supposedly depicts as answering "yes". Okay, yeah, so your argument is that people who answer 'yes' aren't actually answering yes, they're just so crazy they think that answering yes will hurt Obama, rather than the Republican party?

Congratulations, you've come up with the only thing that would be worse than them being birfers - them thinking it's a good thing that people think of them as birfers.

I'm going out on a limb and calling that crazy talk.

[Grizzly Bear]

I'm going out on a limb and calling that crazy talk.

I don't think it matters either way... unfortunately I got a little stubborn in the confusion of our little argument and bloated this much more than I needed to without making any real point.*

The point that would've probably been better made was made in the parallel thread by Good lt (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4992842&postcount=2). And what probably urked me when I first read this thread was the loose definition of the answers represented by the poll Dr. Adequate posted, that he broadened the criteria to include "unsure" answers into the "yes" category. "Unsure" tells me that the respondents probably didn't care enough to seriously demonstrate or yell out the point, and my opinion which you've already seen is that if his place of birth were such an issue it would have been dealt with... he isn't exactly immune to the prerequisites of presidential candidacy. I don't foresee the birther idiocy going any farther than a cult movement, and most times they may be focused in a particular political philosphy but they aren't grounded to a select political party.

*Hindsight and thinking back really stings