Lucky... 0 #1 September 25, 2010 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100925/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_poll A new AP poll finds that Americans who think the law should have done more outnumber those who think the government should stay out of health care by 2-to-1. As I thought it would be and will become even more as time goes on. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #2 September 25, 2010 regardless of the costs, most Americans are fed up with not having 'health care' and/or not being able to afford it. Of course the government, rather than go far enough, makes concessions and passes laws to make everyone buy 'health insurance' - two different things. They should have gone the whole way - Medicare for all at the minimum. In two year, we w would all be used to it and we would be all paying for it and all getting better 'health care' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #3 September 25, 2010 Quoteregardless of the costs, most Americans are fed up with not having 'health care' and/or not being able to afford it. Of course the government, rather than go far enough, makes concessions and passes laws to make everyone buy 'health insurance' - two different things. They should have gone the whole way - Medicare for all at the minimum. In two year, we w would all be used to it and we would be all paying for it and all getting better 'health care' Totally agree. There is one main reason why that didn't happen and it starts with an R. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #4 September 25, 2010 Quote regardless of the costs, most Americans are fed up with not having 'health care' and/or not being able to afford it. Of course the government, rather than go far enough, makes concessions and passes laws to make everyone buy 'health insurance' - two different things. They should have gone the whole way - Medicare for all at the minimum. In two year, we w would all be used to it and we would be all paying for it and all getting better 'health care' See the problem is way too many of the rubes still think their helath care is going to cover them if something happens.... the REALITY is going to hop up and smack em up side the head.. when they actually try to use it. IMHO.. after my personal experiences with "health care" as provided by United Health Care and Aetna thru the companies I have worked for over the last 5 years is the only solution to the problem is to SHOOT all the fucking insurance people and start over with a plan that actually works when you need it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #5 September 25, 2010 QuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #6 September 25, 2010 Quote Quote The AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. Wow! Doesn't matter if you're for it or against it, that whole article is a study in spin, gobbledygook and fun with numbers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scruffy 0 #7 September 25, 2010 QuoteTotally agree. There is one main reason why that didn't happen and it starts with an R. Democrats start with R now? Or are you saying the Democrats didn't just cut medicare by 500 billion over the next 10 years? Hmm...Peace, love and hoppiness Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #8 September 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #9 September 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteTotally agree. There is one main reason why that didn't happen and it starts with an R. Democrats start with R now? Or are you saying the Democrats didn't just cut medicare by 500 billion over the next 10 years? Hmm... Did they cut it or redirect it to others? And aren't you for these cuts, I mean all those lazy old people getting free HC is a travesty, right? Or are you being selective? I've heard the 500B number, never have seen it proven or the entire story behind it. Maybe Obamacare did strip it of 500B to help pay for everyone elses HC, then knowing the gov would be required to pay elder HC as needed and replace teh 500B. I dunno, make an argument, I'd love to read it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scruffy 0 #10 September 25, 2010 The cuts are actually in an area that I have no problem supporting with Medicare. The cuts are against the program medicare advantage which subsidizes seniors with private health insurance to get additional benefits. there's an interesting WSJ oped on it you can sheg out that makes the argument against the cuts better than I could. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575505804034634066.htmlPeace, love and hoppiness Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #11 September 25, 2010 Quotehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100925/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_poll A new AP poll finds that Americans who think the law should have done more outnumber those who think the government should stay out of health care by 2-to-1. As I thought it would be and will become even more as time goes on. You are correct, but not in the way you think. There are a multitude of problems that needed covering that were not covered by the health care bill that the Republicans wanted in but the democrats shut out, like tort reform, portability across state lines and what not. What obamacare did was cater to the pharmaceutical companies, health care HMO's, mandated that everyone buy it, and gave the IRS the ability to enforce it. So in a way, ya, it didn't go far enough to fix the problems. I would have to see how the poll was worded. No one is denying it needs fixed."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #12 September 25, 2010 QuoteQuotehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100925/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_poll A new AP poll finds that Americans who think the law should have done more outnumber those who think the government should stay out of health care by 2-to-1. As I thought it would be and will become even more as time goes on. QuoteYou are correct, but not in the way you think. There are a multitude of problems that needed covering that were not covered by the health care bill that the Republicans wanted in but the democrats shut out, like tort reform, portability across state lines and what not. Portability is addressed isn't it? If we have descent coverage then it isn't a huge issue, is it? Tort reform = civil immunity, I don't want that either. QuoteWhat obamacare did was cater to the pharmaceutical companies, health care HMO's, mandated that everyone buy it, and gave the IRS the ability to enforce it. It also created the preexisting conds clause; the real only important aspect of it to me. I'm not crazy about what was passed either, the HC Bill was a product of both sides (and some within each side) pulling crap off of it until it was bearable. I don;t think it's real reform, but it's a start and the preexisters is a good clause as well as the ins cos not cancelling you ar setting ceilings on coverage. It's a real good start, not nearly done. QuoteSo in a way, ya, it didn't go far enough to fix the problems. I would have to see how the poll was worded. No one is denying it needs fixed. I agree, I would liek to see it too. I do think that as times get tougher and tougher, peopel will become more fond of it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #13 September 25, 2010 QuoteThe cuts are actually in an area that I have no problem supporting with Medicare. The cuts are against the program medicare advantage which subsidizes seniors with private health insurance to get additional benefits. there's an interesting WSJ oped on it you can sheg out that makes the argument against the cuts better than I could. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575505804034634066.html 1) WSJ? Come on, was Hannity's site down? 2) This is it? Today marks the six-month anniversary of the enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, widely known as ObamaCare. It is a day when the first significant round of benefits kicks in, and the Obama administration is taking every opportunity to tout them to the American public. Insurers, we are being told, will no longer be able to impose annual limits or lifetime caps on benefits, and they will face a higher standard before than can drop anyone's coverage. Children will be guaranteed access to insurance, regardless of health condition. And there is more to come in the future. What does it tell us? It's a nasty anti-Obaam op ed, hardly empirical or otherwise meaningful. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,106 #14 September 25, 2010 >Or are you saying the Democrats didn't just cut medicare by 500 billion >over the next 10 years? So the Democrats are both spending too much on health coverage and cutting too much from health coverage? Sounds like a perfect example of the original post. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pirana 0 #15 September 26, 2010 Quote IMHO.. after my personal experiences with "health care" as provided by United Health Care and Aetna thru the companies I have worked for over the last 5 years is the only solution to the problem is to SHOOT all the fucking insurance people and start over with a plan that actually works when you need it. Before you shoot anybody, make sure you get the responsible parties. The bigger the company, the more likely it was the employer was calling the shots; to the nth detail. Almost every company of 500 or more employees is self-insured these days, and that number has been coming down steadily. By self-insuring they get around a lot of the rules, and can pretty much cover or not cover whatever they want. Large employers usually don't disclose that dirty little secret, it's better for them if the employees aim their angst at the plan administrator." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skipbelt 0 #16 September 26, 2010 yes the cut 500b from medicare , claimed it as a savings then used it as an offset for costs legislated by obumacare. all the while obuma claimed his health care plan would save taxpayers money . recently he has been asserting that everyone knew all along health care costs would rise with his plan , but not as much as without it. a perfect example of how libs aren't dishonest , the truth just changes ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdvr 210 #17 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jgoose71 0 #18 September 26, 2010 Quote I agree, I would liek to see it too. I do think that as times get tougher and tougher, peopel will become more fond of it. I disagree. I think as more of the 2,000+ page bureaucracy kicks in and the hidden costs come out, people are going to line up to lynch their congressmen."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #19 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%. It's not my assertion, it's the AP and yet another conspiracy according to you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #20 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuote I agree, I would liek to see it too. I do think that as times get tougher and tougher, peopel will become more fond of it. I disagree. I think as more of the 2,000+ page bureaucracy kicks in and the hidden costs come out, people are going to line up to lynch their congressmen. To give him/her hugs/kisses. Only RW logic can place profit above health. You and yours had 8 years, 6 of which you controlled the whole game and the best you could do is shoot down children's HC, which Obama and friends undid 2 weeks into his term. Really, this law might suck, but it's a start over Nazified HC ala GWB andd friends. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdvr 210 #21 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%. It's not my assertion, it's the AP and yet another conspiracy according to you. I'm certin you linked to the article because you vehemently disagreed with it's assertions. You need a beeper your backing up so fast.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites doughboyshred 0 #22 September 26, 2010 Not far enough. And, in some ways too far. Some aspects of the bill leave a bad taste in my mouth. (requirement to purchase health coverage, 1099 reporting, etc.) Most of those could have been avoided by going to a single payer system, though. They also could have been avoided if the repubes had been willing to come to the table and discuss real reform, instead of simply screaming NO and using everything they could to their political advantage. Nobody should have to worry about losing everything they and their family have worked for due to an illness or injury. This is a real concern with our current system, which before the various reforms come in to play still allows insurance companies to rescind coverage after an occurrence with no cause. Simple question: If a stranger was injured in front of your house would you help them? I believe any decent person would answer yes. Health care reform is simply taking this scenario to a national level. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #23 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%. It's not my assertion, it's the AP and yet another conspiracy according to you. I'm certin you linked to the article because you vehemently disagreed with it's assertions. You need a beeper your backing up so fast. There you go, oh purveyor of the ad hominem, if you can't refute the article or its substance, attack the O. Poster. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #24 September 26, 2010 QuoteNot far enough. And, in some ways too far. Some aspects of the bill leave a bad taste in my mouth. (requirement to purchase health coverage, 1099 reporting, etc.) Most of those could have been avoided by going to a single payer system, though. They also could have been avoided if the repubes had been willing to come to the table and discuss real reform, instead of simply screaming NO and using everything they could to their political advantage. Nobody should have to worry about losing everything they and their family have worked for due to an illness or injury. This is a real concern with our current system, which before the various reforms come in to play still allows insurance companies to rescind coverage after an occurrence with no cause. Simple question: If a stranger was injured in front of your house would you help them? I believe any decent person would answer yes. Health care reform is simply taking this scenario to a national level. Brilliant post; totally agree. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdvr 210 #25 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%. It's not my assertion, it's the AP and yet another conspiracy according to you. I'm certin you linked to the article because you vehemently disagreed with it's assertions. You need a beeper your backing up so fast. There you go, oh purveyor of the ad hominem, if you can't refute the article or its substance, attack the O. Poster. Few on here would bother refuting the basic failings of the math. What else is there to talk about when the premise of the article is 30% approval = 2 to 1 approval? And where do you get the conspiracy thing from? You've been hanging with Rhys too long> Once again you found an article you couldn't wait to get posted in here without reading the whole thing. Are you still asserting that the 2-1 number is valid?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 1 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Lucky... 0 #13 September 25, 2010 QuoteThe cuts are actually in an area that I have no problem supporting with Medicare. The cuts are against the program medicare advantage which subsidizes seniors with private health insurance to get additional benefits. there's an interesting WSJ oped on it you can sheg out that makes the argument against the cuts better than I could. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575505804034634066.html 1) WSJ? Come on, was Hannity's site down? 2) This is it? Today marks the six-month anniversary of the enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, widely known as ObamaCare. It is a day when the first significant round of benefits kicks in, and the Obama administration is taking every opportunity to tout them to the American public. Insurers, we are being told, will no longer be able to impose annual limits or lifetime caps on benefits, and they will face a higher standard before than can drop anyone's coverage. Children will be guaranteed access to insurance, regardless of health condition. And there is more to come in the future. What does it tell us? It's a nasty anti-Obaam op ed, hardly empirical or otherwise meaningful. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,106 #14 September 25, 2010 >Or are you saying the Democrats didn't just cut medicare by 500 billion >over the next 10 years? So the Democrats are both spending too much on health coverage and cutting too much from health coverage? Sounds like a perfect example of the original post. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #15 September 26, 2010 Quote IMHO.. after my personal experiences with "health care" as provided by United Health Care and Aetna thru the companies I have worked for over the last 5 years is the only solution to the problem is to SHOOT all the fucking insurance people and start over with a plan that actually works when you need it. Before you shoot anybody, make sure you get the responsible parties. The bigger the company, the more likely it was the employer was calling the shots; to the nth detail. Almost every company of 500 or more employees is self-insured these days, and that number has been coming down steadily. By self-insuring they get around a lot of the rules, and can pretty much cover or not cover whatever they want. Large employers usually don't disclose that dirty little secret, it's better for them if the employees aim their angst at the plan administrator." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #16 September 26, 2010 yes the cut 500b from medicare , claimed it as a savings then used it as an offset for costs legislated by obumacare. all the while obuma claimed his health care plan would save taxpayers money . recently he has been asserting that everyone knew all along health care costs would rise with his plan , but not as much as without it. a perfect example of how libs aren't dishonest , the truth just changes ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #17 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #18 September 26, 2010 Quote I agree, I would liek to see it too. I do think that as times get tougher and tougher, peopel will become more fond of it. I disagree. I think as more of the 2,000+ page bureaucracy kicks in and the hidden costs come out, people are going to line up to lynch their congressmen."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #19 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%. It's not my assertion, it's the AP and yet another conspiracy according to you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #20 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuote I agree, I would liek to see it too. I do think that as times get tougher and tougher, peopel will become more fond of it. I disagree. I think as more of the 2,000+ page bureaucracy kicks in and the hidden costs come out, people are going to line up to lynch their congressmen. To give him/her hugs/kisses. Only RW logic can place profit above health. You and yours had 8 years, 6 of which you controlled the whole game and the best you could do is shoot down children's HC, which Obama and friends undid 2 weeks into his term. Really, this law might suck, but it's a start over Nazified HC ala GWB andd friends. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #21 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%. It's not my assertion, it's the AP and yet another conspiracy according to you. I'm certin you linked to the article because you vehemently disagreed with it's assertions. You need a beeper your backing up so fast.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
doughboyshred 0 #22 September 26, 2010 Not far enough. And, in some ways too far. Some aspects of the bill leave a bad taste in my mouth. (requirement to purchase health coverage, 1099 reporting, etc.) Most of those could have been avoided by going to a single payer system, though. They also could have been avoided if the repubes had been willing to come to the table and discuss real reform, instead of simply screaming NO and using everything they could to their political advantage. Nobody should have to worry about losing everything they and their family have worked for due to an illness or injury. This is a real concern with our current system, which before the various reforms come in to play still allows insurance companies to rescind coverage after an occurrence with no cause. Simple question: If a stranger was injured in front of your house would you help them? I believe any decent person would answer yes. Health care reform is simply taking this scenario to a national level. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #23 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%. It's not my assertion, it's the AP and yet another conspiracy according to you. I'm certin you linked to the article because you vehemently disagreed with it's assertions. You need a beeper your backing up so fast. There you go, oh purveyor of the ad hominem, if you can't refute the article or its substance, attack the O. Poster. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #24 September 26, 2010 QuoteNot far enough. And, in some ways too far. Some aspects of the bill leave a bad taste in my mouth. (requirement to purchase health coverage, 1099 reporting, etc.) Most of those could have been avoided by going to a single payer system, though. They also could have been avoided if the repubes had been willing to come to the table and discuss real reform, instead of simply screaming NO and using everything they could to their political advantage. Nobody should have to worry about losing everything they and their family have worked for due to an illness or injury. This is a real concern with our current system, which before the various reforms come in to play still allows insurance companies to rescind coverage after an occurrence with no cause. Simple question: If a stranger was injured in front of your house would you help them? I believe any decent person would answer yes. Health care reform is simply taking this scenario to a national level. Brilliant post; totally agree. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #25 September 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral. That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast. I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW. I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%. It's not my assertion, it's the AP and yet another conspiracy according to you. I'm certin you linked to the article because you vehemently disagreed with it's assertions. You need a beeper your backing up so fast. There you go, oh purveyor of the ad hominem, if you can't refute the article or its substance, attack the O. Poster. Few on here would bother refuting the basic failings of the math. What else is there to talk about when the premise of the article is 30% approval = 2 to 1 approval? And where do you get the conspiracy thing from? You've been hanging with Rhys too long> Once again you found an article you couldn't wait to get posted in here without reading the whole thing. Are you still asserting that the 2-1 number is valid?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
