70% of Americans support Obama's carbon plan

Polls are mostly worthless, they can be worded for the required results.


Here it is, here's the question that was asked by the Washington Post/ABC News pollsters - in what way do you think it was "worded for the required results." -pewsh!-

“Do you think the federal government should or should not limit the release of greenhouse gases from existing power plants in an effort to reduce global warming?”

And the result...
"Overall, 70% support federal limits."
.
 
The rising cost of all OF OBAMA's visions of transforming us I hope it HURTS THE WORST

is you sheep who just follows every disgusting thing he does to us and the op especially

Gas BACK up to nearly four dollars a gallon, ANYONE been grocery shopping lately? dear gawd can hardly afford Hamburger and Milk, $5 a gallon and now this war on our electricity and heating our homes

Just what do you think causes inflation & all those prices to rise?
 
70% of Americans believe solar works at night.. And that wind and solar are alternatives to what we have now.. Really doesn't matter what people think NOW -- just wait for the coal plants to start shuttting down and ask them if brownouts and blackouts are saving the planet..
 
70% of Americans believe solar works at night.. And that wind and solar are alternatives to what we have now.. Really doesn't matter what people think NOW -- just wait for the coal plants to start shuttting down and ask them if brownouts and blackouts are saving the planet..

yep, but they'll find someone else to blame that on too
 
Polls are mostly worthless, they can be worded for the required results.


Here it is, here's the question that was asked by the Washington Post/ABC News pollsters - in what way do you think it was "worded for the required results." -pewsh!-

“Do you think the federal government should or should not limit the release of greenhouse gases from existing power plants in an effort to reduce global warming?”

And the result...
"Overall, 70% support federal limits."
.

Everyone wants to reduce pollution. The problem I see is they didnt ask how much they'd be willing to pay to do it.
 
Polls are mostly worthless, they can be worded for the required results.


Here it is, here's the question that was asked by the Washington Post/ABC News pollsters - in what way do you think it was "worded for the required results." -pewsh!-

“Do you think the federal government should or should not limit the release of greenhouse gases from existing power plants in an effort to reduce global warming?”

And the result...
"Overall, 70% support federal limits."
.

Everyone wants to reduce pollution. The problem I see is they didnt ask how much they'd be willing to pay to do it.

1) The question did not use the term "pollution".

2) The question didn't ask how much they'd be willing to pay but it certainly made no effort to make them think it would cost nothing. Besides, that's a different question. Even idiots know better than to ask complex questions in a survey if they actually want meaningful results.

3) Neither did the question spell out the cost of NOT remedying the situation.
 
Last edited:
Besides, particularly at this point in the process, no one has the slightest idea what this will cost the average household. The surveyed would be completely unable to give meaningful or consistent answers.
 
70% of Americans believe solar works at night.. And that wind and solar are alternatives to what we have now.. Really doesn't matter what people think NOW -- just wait for the coal plants to start shuttting down and ask them if brownouts and blackouts are saving the planet..

yep, but they'll find someone else to blame that on too

That's exactly why Repubs should give them EVERYTHING they are asking for.. Don't vote for it, but STFU and let them pull the trigger.. Don't obstruct.. We will see dead bodies before the 2016 election...
 
70% of Americans believe solar works at night.. And that wind and solar are alternatives to what we have now.. Really doesn't matter what people think NOW -- just wait for the coal plants to start shuttting down and ask them if brownouts and blackouts are saving the planet..

yep, but they'll find someone else to blame that on too

That's exactly why Repubs should give them EVERYTHING they are asking for.. Don't vote for it, but STFU and let them pull the trigger.. Don't obstruct.. We will see dead bodies before the 2016 election...

I think that's an EXCELLENT idea. I think that would be a really, really good strategy for republicans to employ on ALL legislative questions from this point on.
 
Besides, particularly at this point in the process, no one has the slightest idea what this will cost the average household. The surveyed would be completely unable to give meaningful or consistent answers.
Fair enough.

In that case it is safe to say that the 70% number, referenced in the OP, is in error, if not a purposeful lie.
 
yep, but they'll find someone else to blame that on too

That's exactly why Repubs should give them EVERYTHING they are asking for.. Don't vote for it, but STFU and let them pull the trigger.. Don't obstruct.. We will see dead bodies before the 2016 election...

I think that's an EXCELLENT idea. I think that would be a really, really good strategy for republicans to employ on ALL legislative questions from this point on.

The country would never recover from it.........
 
That's exactly why Repubs should give them EVERYTHING they are asking for.. Don't vote for it, but STFU and let them pull the trigger.. Don't obstruct.. We will see dead bodies before the 2016 election...

I think that's an EXCELLENT idea. I think that would be a really, really good strategy for republicans to employ on ALL legislative questions from this point on.

The country would never recover from it.........

Sure it would.. We could use 100 new nuclear plants anyway.. And a waste depository like the Feds promised 40 years ago.. 60 new ones to replace the antique plants -- and 40 new ones. Let the coal plants fire back up for 4 years while a REAL plan takes shape..

All doable in 3 to 4 years if folks are tired of living in the dark and being unemployed.. Fixes the CO2 issue at the same time.. NOW -- dynamite 1/2 the nations' coal plants when you are done. Compare the difference in political direction..
 
Here it is, here's the question that was asked by the Washington Post/ABC News pollsters - in what way do you think it was "worded for the required results." -pewsh!-

“Do you think the federal government should or should not limit the release of greenhouse gases from existing power plants in an effort to reduce global warming?”

And the result...
"Overall, 70% support federal limits."
.

Everyone wants to reduce pollution. The problem I see is they didnt ask how much they'd be willing to pay to do it.

1) The question did not use the term "pollution".

2) The question didn't ask how much they'd be willing to pay but it certainly made no effort to make them think it would cost nothing. Besides, that's a different question. Even idiots know better than to ask complex questions in a survey if they actually want meaningful results.

3) Neither did the question spell out the cost of NOT remedying the situation.

Dance,Dance,Dance....I promise you if you told people their electric bill would go up 30 to 40 percent the results would be way different.
 

Forum List

Back
Top