2008: John McCain VS. Hillary Clinton

[financeguy]

There have been multiple polls done in here on who would vote for Bush or Kerry in the election. Bush was defeated by an average of 3 to 1 in most of the polls.

Not even in the most liberal state in the United States was Bush defeated by a margin that large against Kerry.

So the members of FYM have consistently voted in a way that is more liberal than the most liberal states in the United States. So that easily would place this forum as being far to the left, and most people here have agreed with that it is when the question has come up before.

I didn't see those polls, but I will take your word for it.

However I feel that your reasoning is defective.

All that those polls proved is that (at the times they were taken) most posters who voted had a preference for Kerry. Kerry was not a far out leftist candidate. There were other Democrats far to the left of him. Kerry was, and is, a MODERATE LIBERAL.

If there were polls that showed that a true leftist like Dennis Kucinch (for example) was heavily favoured over Bush here then you might have a point.

In addition to that, not for the first time, you are assuming that the rest of the world has the same political complexion as the US.

Many mainstream Democratic politicians, in the context of European politics (for example), would be considered CONSERVATIVES.

Basically, you should bear in mind that 'www' stands for 'World Wide Web', not 'USA Web'.

And I'd respectfully suggest you read up on some political theory to determine what is meant by 'far left'.

 

[STING2]

Are you serious? You really think that voting for Kerry over Bush makes one "far to the left"?!

Not individually. In respect to the way the 50 states of the Union voted though, yes. Bush has far more friends in Massachusetts than he does in FYM.

 

[financeguy]

But there is a place where Bush is even more unpopular than Massachusetts, and its called FYM.

....and practically every country in the world. You truly need to stop assuming that only US citizens post here.


I suggest you read my post above, and that of Joyful Girl's.

 

[STING2]

I didn't see those polls, but I will take your word for it.

However I feel that your reasoning is defective.

All that those polls proved is that (at the times they were taken) most posters who voted had a preference for Kerry. Kerry was not a far out leftist candidate. There were other Democrats far to the left of him. Kerry was, and is, a MODERATE LIBERAL.

If there were polls that showed that a true leftist like Dennis Kucinch (for example) was heavily favoured over Bush here then you might have a point.

In addition to that, not for the first time, you are assuming that the rest of the world has the same political complexion as the US.

Many mainstream Democratic politicians, in the context of European politics (for example), would be considered CONSERVATIVES.

Basically, you should bear in mind that 'www' stands for 'World Wide Web', not 'USA Web'.

And I'd respectfully suggest you read up on some political theory to determine what is meant by 'far left'.

My definition of "far left" was only in reference to US politics and US elections. If one were to map out the results of the 2004 US election and show which states were far to the right and which states were more in the middle and then which states were far to the left based on the results of the election, you would have a state like Massachusetts far to the left, a state like Ohio Wisconsin in the middle, and a state like Wyoming far to the right.

I was not referencing general political theory when I used the words "far left" or what such a term may mean in Europe.

 

[STING2]

....and practically every country in the world. You truly need to stop assuming that only US citizens post here.


I suggest you read my post above, and that of Joyful Girl's.

You need to remember that this is a THREAD with the title John McCain VS. Hillery Clinton. This is a thread that involves US domestic politics, NOT European or world politics. Were talking about a US election and the possibilities in the next US election, not an election taking place outside of the United States.

 

[financeguy]

You need to remember that this is a THREAD with the title John McCain VS. Hillery Clinton. This is a thread that involves US domestic politics, NOT European or world politics. Were talking about a US election and the possibilities in the next US election, not an election taking place outside of the United States.

Except none of this is relevant to what we are currently debating. You said this place had a far left bias. I disputed that assertion.

 

[STING2]

Except none of this is relevant to what we are currently debating. You said this place had a far left bias. I disputed that assertion.

Well, I just explained what I meant by "far left" but I suppose you neglected to read that. I'm still on the topic of this thread which is John McCain VS. Hillery Clinton. I think FYM is very far to the left in respect to the poll numbers in here for BUSH vs. how Bush did in the 50 states around the Union. Under my definition of "far left" for the purposes of this thread, I find it amazing that John McCain is leading by a margin of 2 to 1 over Clinton in a place that leans further to the left than the State of Massachusetts!

The fact that people voted in here against Bush by margins that were further to the left than how Massachusetts voted is indisputable. The North Eastern United States especially the state of Massachusetts has had a far left bias for several decades now when it comes to US Presidential politics. FYM though, is further to the left of Massachusetts in this regard.

 

[financeguy]

Well, I just explained what I meant by "far left" but I suppose you neglected to read that. I'm still on the topic of this thread which is John McCain VS. Hillery Clinton. I think FYM is very far to the left in respect to the poll numbers in here for BUSH vs. how Bush did in the 50 states around the Union. Under my definition of "far left" for the purposes of this thread, I find it amazing that John McCain is leading by a margin of 2 to 1 over Clinton in a place that leans further to the left than the State of Massachusetts!

The fact that people voted in here against Bush by margins that were further to the left than how Massachusetts voted is indisputable. The North Eastern United States especially the state of Massachusetts has had a far left bias for several decades now when it comes to US Presidential politics. FYM though, is further to the left of Massachusetts in this regard.

'I suppose you neglected to read that' - no, I certainly did read it, but as I said I find your logic faulty for the reasons I already stated.

'The North Eastern United States.....has had a far left bias for several decades now.....' - you're doing it again. You're assuming that a region that tends to vote heavily Democrat is 'far left'. That's an entirely spurious argument as most mainstream Democrats, even North Eastern ones, are not far leftists. They just aren't.

So if 70% in Massachusetts vote for the Democrat candidate and 30% vote for the Republican, it is not a logical conclusion to make the jump and say that Massachusetts has a far left bias. One would have to do a much much more detailed analysis of the political preferences of Massachusetts voters to make such an assertion.

We're arguing in circles at this stage.

 

[BVS]

Numbers and population = where on the political spectrum?

Yeah 2+2=5

 

[VertigoGal]

Okay, I think Sting2 has cleared up anything that may have been unclear before. This forum seems to lean further left than the US as a whole when it comes to US politics. Why are we playing semantics with this?

 

[financeguy]

Why are we playing semantics with this?

Cos that's what FYM is all about.

 

[VertigoGal]

^

 

[Diane L]

Hillary. Definitely Hillary.

 

[STING2]

'I suppose you neglected to read that' - no, I certainly did read it, but as I said I find your logic faulty for the reasons I already stated.

'The North Eastern United States.....has had a far left bias for several decades now.....' - you're doing it again. You're assuming that a region that tends to vote heavily Democrat is 'far left'. That's an entirely spurious argument as most mainstream Democrats, even North Eastern ones, are not far leftists. They just aren't.

So if 70% in Massachusetts vote for the Democrat candidate and 30% vote for the Republican, it is not a logical conclusion to make the jump and say that Massachusetts has a far left bias. One would have to do a much much more detailed analysis of the political preferences of Massachusetts voters to make such an assertion.

We're arguing in circles at this stage.

No, your just refusing to see or understand the way I defined the term "Far Left" in this particular context! A state like Massachusetts is "Far Left" compared to a state like Wyoming. Does that mean people in Massachusetts are Communist or want to give 80% of their income to the government, NO. But for the purposes of how the state populations have VOTED in US PRESIDENTIAL POLITICS, Massachusetts is at the far left of the political spectrum compared to the other states in the Union.

 

[Tarvark]

I am afriad for ever dollar pouring for Clinton, there will be 10 for the "IamnotClinton" option. Still she is one of the smartest, most sincere, and moral people I have ever meet.

 

[phanan]

Well, I just explained what I meant by "far left" but I suppose you neglected to read that. I'm still on the topic of this thread which is John McCain VS. Hillery Clinton. I think FYM is very far to the left in respect to the poll numbers in here for BUSH vs. how Bush did in the 50 states around the Union. Under my definition of "far left" for the purposes of this thread, I find it amazing that John McCain is leading by a margin of 2 to 1 over Clinton in a place that leans further to the left than the State of Massachusetts!

The fact that people voted in here against Bush by margins that were further to the left than how Massachusetts voted is indisputable. The North Eastern United States especially the state of Massachusetts has had a far left bias for several decades now when it comes to US Presidential politics. FYM though, is further to the left of Massachusetts in this regard.

I understand your reasoning, but I think its flawed based on the amount of sheer numbers we are talking about. I don't think you can really compare FYM as being more liberal than Massachusetts when we are talking about perhaps 50 people in FYM vs. several million.

And it's just an unscientific polling of members here, which as you have stated many times, going by polls is not the same as official election results.

 

[VertigoGal]

I understand your reasoning, but I think its flawed based on the amount of sheer numbers we are talking about. I don't think you can really compare FYM as being more liberal than Massachusetts when we are talking about perhaps 50 people in FYM vs. several million.

I don't see why that's relevant.

 

[yolland]

Why are we playing semantics with this?

I can think of 2 good reasons.

1) If the designations "far left" and "far right" are based on nothing more than presidential election voting behavior, than they are nothing more than redundant synonyms for "Democrat" and "Republican," and ought to be retired.

2) We all know perfectly well that labelling someone "far to the left" or "far to the right" is a loaded act in American public discourse, and highly likely to be interpreted as provocation. "Far to the left" can be and is used as a euphemism for "deviant elitists out to destroy religion, family, enterprise and everything else that is good and noble in society," while "far to the right" can be and is used as a euphemism for "bigoted zealots out to destroy equal opportunity, personal liberty, the politics of compromise and everything else noble about democracy."

A person who sincerely seeks mutually respectful dialogue with people of opposing views will avoid such loaded terms (just as they will also avoid making veiled insults, or mockery posing as innocent observation).

On the other hand, sometimes provocation is exactly what is desired--in which case, flame away. Just don't expect to then get away with disingenuously retreating to phony claims of innocence: "Well I of COURSE meant that only in this totally obscure and idiosyncratic sense that I conveniently just invented..." etc.

Oh yeah, almost forgot...McCain.

 

[phanan]

I don't see why that's relevant.

I think it's very relevant. Polling a small number of people and then using those results to say they are more liberal than an entire state doesn't work. What if next week, 10 people here changed their minds? The percentage would be significantly altered. But if 10 people in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts had a change of heart, there wouldn't be any difference.

Perhaps I'm not saying it well enough.

 

[anitram]

I don't see why that's relevant.

Ever take a statistics class?

 

[VertigoGal]

I understand your first point. "Far left" implies pinko commie fag. A better term would have been "left-leaning."

I don't understand your second point though. We're talking about which percentage of the FYM leans left, in comparison with the percentage of the American public that leans left (guaged by the election). If a higher percentage of FYMers consider themselves Democrats, vote against Bush, etc, isn't it logical to say that FYM is general more left-leaning than the American population taken as a whole?

 

[VertigoGal]

Ever take a statistics class?

No.

 

[anitram]

I don't understand your second point though. We're talking about which percentage of the FYM leans left, in comparison with the percentage of the American public that leans left (guaged by the election). If a higher percentage of FYMers consider themselves Democrats, vote against Bush, etc, isn't it logical to say that FYM is general more left-leaning than the American population taken as a whole?

But in terms of statistics, this is where something called "sample size" becomes important.

In the simplest terms, if you sample (ie. ask) 10 people a question vs. asking 9000 people, chances are that in the sample size of 9000, you would have covered a more broad cross-section of opinions. In a sample size of very few people, chances are that answers are skewed one way or another simply because the population is too small, and if it is too small, it is not an accurate representation of the population as a whole.

 

[financeguy]

Ever take a statistics class?

Exactly.

 

[VertigoGal]

I understand that. But we're not trying to say that FYM accurately represents the country, just FYM itself. FYM doesn't maybe sample as broad or accurate a cross-section, but that's almost the point. FYM is a small population of U2 fans who like to use the internet and enjoy debating politics, and does not necessarily represent the country accurately. Sorry if I'm being difficult.

 

[80sU2isBest]

deleted post

 

[phanan]

FYM is a small population of U2 fans who like to use the internet and enjoy debating politics, and does not necessarily represent the country accurately.

That's right, but trying to compare it to an entire state is, in my mind, not a very good comparison.

anitram explained it better than me

 

[financeguy]

FYM is a small population of U2 fans who like to use the internet and enjoy debating politics, and does not necessarily represent the country accurately. Sorry if I'm being difficult.

WWW stands for WORLD WIDE WEB.

 

[XHendrix24]

OH GOD IN HEAVEN.

Can't we all just get along?

 

[STING2]

I understand your reasoning, but I think its flawed based on the amount of sheer numbers we are talking about. I don't think you can really compare FYM as being more liberal than Massachusetts when we are talking about perhaps 50 people in FYM vs. several million.

And it's just an unscientific polling of members here, which as you have stated many times, going by polls is not the same as official election results.

Because the polling that is done here is unscientific, it is true that the comparison is flawed. But if a scientific poll of FYM posters was done, I think it would have similar results as the unscientific ones, and it would substantiate my conclusion.