85% Say Economy Over Global Warming

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Sinatra, Dec 17, 2009.

  1. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005
  2. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,502
    Thanks Received:
    19,877
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,517
    Protecting the environment is not something you can turn off and on based on some whim. It is always cheaper to dump your crap than it is to responsibly dispose of it. We heard the same thing in the 60s and 70s when companies could dump untreated waste into the air and waterways.
    To say "we will worry about global warming when we can aford it" is irresponsible. We wasted eight years while George Bush practiced denial. Its time to pay the piper
     
  3. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005
    ____

    It appears you and the other 15% of Americans agree.

    ...Cap n Trade/Copenhagen is not about the environment.

    ...and humankind does not control the thermostat. We are simply not that important.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. theDoctorisIn
    Offline

    theDoctorisIn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    30,045
    Thanks Received:
    5,800
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    East, but still West
    Ratings:
    +11,984
  5. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005

    Ah, but therein lies the point. We have a poll indicating Americans want the economy to be the priority over global warming by 7 to 1. That is a HUGE difference - and yet the mainstream media spin titles it as "support" for a climate pact. The support is generalized do goodism, but the reality is that Americans don't really give a shit - they want their president to do something about this economy.

    The news article is what we call "headline manipulation". It's been around for ages, and dupes the intellectually lazy - such as yourself?
     
  6. theDoctorisIn
    Offline

    theDoctorisIn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    30,045
    Thanks Received:
    5,800
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    East, but still West
    Ratings:
    +11,984
    The poll clearly states that 55% of Americans believe that something needs to be done about climate change. Is that "headline manipulation", or acurate answers to a polling question?

    One could just as easily say that by leaving out the other poll question, you are "spinning" the data to reflect what you want it to, specifically that Americans hate Obama because he's going to Copenhaagen. There's no data that says that Americans don't support Obama doing something about climate change - in fact, there is data that says exactly the opposite.

    So, to sum up:
    Your attempt to paint the President in a bad light fails. He's not doing something wrong here - in fact, according to your own sources, he's doing something that 55% of people agree with him on.
     
  7. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005


    Sorry - but 85% is a far more significant number than 55%. The media in this case made the larger number the backdrop story, and headlined the lesser poll. That's headline manipulation. I know it well - I do it all the time...:eusa_angel:
     
  8. theDoctorisIn
    Offline

    theDoctorisIn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    30,045
    Thanks Received:
    5,800
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    East, but still West
    Ratings:
    +11,984
    But what you're missing is that the second number doesn't matter, without knowlege of what the White House is actually making a prioriety. A trip to Copenhaagen doesn't mean that the White House isn't putting enough effort into the economy.

    Now, if you had a poll that asked if people approved of the President's trip, then we'd actually have some relevant data. But without that, your point is lost.
     
  9. keee keee
    Offline

    keee keee Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,330
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +142
    Global warming and cap and trade are both just another money tax grabbing scheem to fleece us citizens out of more of our money. remember Y2k scam this is just a new version the Dems are trying to spin!!!!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    I wonder if the poll added this question " Define Climate Change" How many different answers you would get. Even though I'm somewhat of a skeptic of the conslusions of the IPCC if the generic question of " Should something be done about climate change?" be presented to me, my answer would be of course it should. However, I suspect that if you were to present the question in a manner such as in the form of energy needs and as a by-product of that being good stewards of the envornment you would get many people to be very supportive of that. If however you were to present it as it is being proposed where legislation will have no impact on the environment because of the non participation of nations such China and India and would eventually make this nation economically bankrupt , you might not have so many that would agree with that. The best approach is rather than to spend 100 billion dollars a year to help other nations conform to a singular set of conclusions, if we plan on spending that kind of money to invest it in our own energy future. The thread authors point is correct Americas have little interest in "Global Warming" as a national priority and I dare say you might have many Americans agree with the President on his stance on the BCC , however that does not mean it is a national priority.
     

Share This Page