Why FReep Polls?

Vanity ^ | 10-1-2004 | outlawcam

[Brilliant]

Hmmm... not very convincing. What if I don't mind the website getting money? "Real results"? What are you talking about? It's meaningless, particularly when you are freeping a poll that the opposition has already freeped.

[Protagoras]

Polls are a waste of time. They are rarely accurate. The pollers get the results they want by asking the group they know will give the answers they want. Rarely do you see an honest poll.

I agree, and those are the SCIENTIFIC polls, these childish popularity polls are for the same kind of people who watch day time TV.

I guess they give some people the false feeling that they are doing something useful, oh well.

[Twinkie]

The libs load on the polls and vote heavily.
The lamestream media latches onto any poll that's heavily
loaded with Bush haters and libs. (sorry, redundant)
They then report this dismal news the next day in the news in order to sway public opinion of people who want to be a part of the crowd.
So, we have to insure there's as little of that unchallenged as possible.

[Izzy Dunne]

What if I don't mind the website getting money?

That's your business.

"Real results"? What are you talking about?

There's an election on Nov. 2.

[Poohbah]

Why FReep polls? Because I love pi$$ing on liberal fire hydrants, that's why!

[sanjogirl]

I agree with you; I've been thinking the same thing. It makes it seem like we can't prevail on ideas (which we certainly can) and so have to stuff the ballot boxes.

[outlawcam]

I did. You said you posted it properly, which I pointed out you didn't.

You pointed out something I already knew: that I selected subjects that I thought this fell under, as well as vanity. You didn't say how this was improper; you only left the impression that it was without an explanation. I responded with my reasoning for why it was proper.

And you got off topic from any debate with your comment "Take the mote out of your own eye".

You accused me of being condescending after you just were. Then you dismissed me entirely and seemed to be leaving. I wasn't debating, just pointing out the truth that you had just been what you accused me of being.

That's debating?

I suppose it's proper to point out hypocricy when it is evident in a debate, but it is off topic. Had I thought you were interested in a debate about the topic, I would have been glad to engage in one with you. You seemed to be offended that I would even broach the subject in a vanity post. You never addressed the topic in any one of your posts in any rational way.

No wonder you support some of the people you do. I can see how you agree with his style. LOL

And I'm the condescending one? Okay.

[outlawcam]

I agree with you; I've been thinking the same thing. It makes it seem like we can't prevail on ideas (which we certainly can) and so have to stuff the ballot boxes.

This is interesting in several respects. First, why do you equate FReeping a poll with stuffing a ballot box? Second, if we don't FReep polls, what is likely to happen in the election?

[El Gran Salseron]

Online polls are 100% fallacy precisely because they can be "FReeped" or "DUed," ( or whatever those knuckleheads call it, ) or "Whatevered" by whatever-special-interest group. Most of those online polls let you vote multiple times if you know how to manipulate the "cookies" on your computer.....BUT they are SO much FUN! It's like having an FR meeting at vote.com. :-)

[outlawcam]

Okay. We've got a couple "entertainment purposes only" responses. So you don't think doing it has any practical effect in elections?

[outlawcam]

put on your flame proof pajamas.

"I'm a pretty calm guy."
--George W. Bush

;)

[Atlantic Friend]

At first I was puzzled by the "Freeping Polls" policy, as you were. Now I think it's only the Freepers' way to show they're not swayed easily but shoggy statistics news media tend to throw in our face in every Western democracy as if it was hard facts and not wild-ass guesses.

I don't think people would SERIOUSLY envision and condone some kind of political manipulation through freeping - if only because people here tend to believe in democracy and be wary of any attempt at mind control.

[bmwcyle]

To show the power of the FreeRepublic.

[outlawcam]

��5{�������� statistics news media tend to throw in our face in every Western democracy as if it was hard facts and not wild-ass guesses.

Great point. In fact, that is at the heart of my objections with polls. It is not so much the polls themselves, because as I stated, they can be useful. They are misused, IMO, by the media, and THAT can be manipulative. Would you agree?

[outlawcam]

To show the power of the FreeRepublic.

Maybe. Rathergate was a great example of that power, IMO, and that was done through examination and reason--not polls.

[bmwcyle]

And you only show force in that realm. Polls take minutes to show it almost everyday.

[MplsSteve]

I agree.

Freeping is essential.

[outlawcam]

And you only show force in that realm. Polls take minutes to show it almost everyday.

Do you think they do or could influence elections significantly?

[bmwcyle]

No it takes the tool (the pool) out of the liberals hand if the poll does not go their way. The more you deny your enemy. The easier they are to defeat.

[Atlantic Friend]

Absolutely. Polls can be used to manipulate people's perception of reality, because the pollster chooses the question and can add a lot of bias.

For example, I could lead a poll in any street asking "Do you agree with the way the current administration handles the chaotic situation in Iraq ?". Even if a large majority of the people would say "heck, you bet I do !", the poll in and by itself suggests that 100% of the polled people agree Iraq is in a chaotic situation, something the Democratic Party could use to its advantage.

Polls can be very useful thing - as a decision-making tool, for example, or to feel the pulse of the nation. But feeding polls to the public is usually a flawed alternatives to real political proposals, real analysis, and real personal values.