B******i.....Gowdy is a clown!
Oct 26, 2015 00:53:42 #
lol...
Blurryeyed wrote:
Really? Politicususa? I would sooner believe Doonesbury.
Oct 26, 2015 10:14:19 #
ArtzDarkroom wrote:
That looks like a great chart. If only it were BIGGER.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Try "CTRL+"
"CTRL 0" resets
Oct 26, 2015 10:23:19 #
McKinneyMike wrote:
Wouldn't the center be the average for a starting ... (show quote)
The graph is marked with a zero in the center and -10 to the Left and a +10 to the right. If you read the small print the audience is measured via left/right of center. The "news stations" are measured liberal above the line and conservative below the line.
As to your average respondent, clearly more Liberals responded. Conservatives have jobs and are not home during polling hours.
Oct 26, 2015 10:30:07 #
ArtzDarkroom wrote:
Say it ain't so!! br br "Hillary Clinton wo... (show quote)
Hilary got bagged lying (shocking!) about what she knew and when she knew it. That means the same is true for Obama and it means that they consciously altered the narrative for e******n purposes.
She got bagged lying about Blumenthal. She most definitely solicited his counsel on how to control the media response.
She released the name of an active CIA agent.
I'm sorry that you cannot see that.
Oct 26, 2015 10:31:25 #
hondo812 wrote:
The graph is marked with a zero in the center and -10 to the Left and a +10 to the right. If you read the small print the audience is measured via left/right of center. The "news stations" are measured liberal above the line and conservative below the line.
As to your average respondent, clearly more Liberals responded. Conservatives have jobs and are not home during polling hours.
As to your average respondent, clearly more Liberals responded. Conservatives have jobs and are not home during polling hours.
It says "average respondents" and this is marked left of center. Unless bell curves have changed recently, the average would be center or "0" on any normal chart. I guess you have a new way of reading data and charts than most people.
How would you know if more Liberals responded or if there are simply more Liberals in total? Was this fact stated anywhere in this graph?
Oct 26, 2015 10:36:43 #
hondo812 wrote:
Hilary got bagged lying (shocking!) about what she knew and when she knew it. That means the same is true for Obama and it means that they consciously altered the narrative for e******n purposes.
She got bagged lying about Blumenthal. She most definitely solicited his counsel on how to control the media response.
She released the name of an active CIA agent.
I'm sorry that you cannot see that.
She got bagged lying about Blumenthal. She most definitely solicited his counsel on how to control the media response.
She released the name of an active CIA agent.
I'm sorry that you cannot see that.
Hillary did not release the CIA operative's name publically......that was Gowdy's gaff.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/trey-gowdy-release-cia-source-name-b******i-committee-214919
As to your other allegations, they hold no water at all other than with wingnuts and tin foil hat wearing zombies.
Oh and then it was determined to not be an issue at all by the CIA.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/20/us-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0SE01O20151020
NEXT!
Oct 26, 2015 15:40:00 #
McKinneyMike wrote:
It says "average respondents" and this is marked left of center. Unless bell curves have changed recently, the average would be center or "0" on any normal chart. I guess you have a new way of reading data and charts than most people.
How would you know if more Liberals responded or if there are simply more Liberals in total? Was this fact stated anywhere in this graph?
How would you know if more Liberals responded or if there are simply more Liberals in total? Was this fact stated anywhere in this graph?
You should look at your graph again. The spot you discuss, the "average respondent" is clearly left of center defined as zero (0) aka the target. Now then, without knowing the number of respondents or their political inclinations, the fact that the "average" is left of center suggests the data is skewed and "not normal". Is this an accurate representation? Since the poll was based on 10 questions to determine the respondents ideological tendencies and we do not know anything about the questions, values assigned, or relevance what do we really have to talk about?
Furthermore, each dot represents only the news source and not the quantity of people that selected it. About the most one can glean from this is that there are decidedly more liberal media outlets than conservative outlets, and that is all based on questions that we know nothing about. Perhaps the only thing we can find from this graph is that the Wall St Journal comes closest to center of all outlets listed. Perhaps it's because both Conservatives and Liberals are interested in money?
In other words, the graph is more or less useless. Thanks for sharing.
Oct 26, 2015 15:58:51 #
hondo812 wrote:
You should look at your graph again. The spot you ... (show quote)
I didn't share the graph, but your welcome :)
Oct 27, 2015 04:15:35 #
Rongnongno wrote:
And here we go the McCarthy era rears its ugly head.
Funny that this comes in this particular thread since this is about witch hunting....
Funny that this comes in this particular thread since this is about witch hunting....
artsy never said that he is a c*******t due to McCarthy.
In fact he refused to tell us why he is a c*******t.
So, all together now..artsy why are you a c*******t?
Oct 27, 2015 10:31:01 #
McKinneyMike wrote:
I didn't share the graph, but your welcome :)
My bad.
Thanks for nothing then.
Oct 27, 2015 12:58:42 #
hondo812 wrote:
My bad.
Thanks for nothing then.
Thanks for nothing then.
:)
Oct 27, 2015 17:45:32 #
I am done with this thread, I will unWatch it now.
Oct 28, 2015 02:42:19 #
ArtzDarkroom wrote:
I am done with this thread, I will unWatch it now.
Oh no, artsy is not going to tell us why he is a c*******t. Not now, but later?
Oct 29, 2015 19:02:32 #
Jackinthebox wrote:
wait right here... I'm sure he'll be back tomorrow to tell you all about it! :)Oh no, artsy is not going to tell us why he is a c*******t. Not now, but later?
Oct 30, 2015 17:35:10 #
green wrote:
wait right here... I'm sure he'll be back tomorrow to tell you all about it! :)
You think artsy is a c*******t but he isn't able to tell us why? Shut up and let him babble.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.