• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Did this get missed? Anti-Palin Rally in Alaska

I didn't post it for the math, I posted it because it seems like the media in general ignored this protest. Also because I think it shows the republican effort to keep it quiet, which also got ignored by the media.

Without having even paid attention to the math I thought they were comparing the number of people that attended the rally against the number of protesters. I'll have to reread that part.
 
RightinNYC said:
Do you not understand that protesters by their very nature are far more vocal than supporters? Do you really think that's anything remotely close to a sensible way to calculate things?
Click to expand...

There is only one way to have an acurate account of the percent of who is against or in favor of Palin, and it is by comparing the number of participants in both groups.

The suggested comparison of counting protesters against the total population of Alaska is peanuts, I challenge that suggestion asking to count the number of people who went to the Alaska airport to show their support for Palin, and use this number against the total polulation of Alaska, the result is less than 0.1% :lol:

This remind me when long ago in the news said that the Pope's popularity was increasing, and nobody noticed what was going on until a weird priest -who is more a comedian- in the Leno show asked : "more popular against whom?"

Just accept that not many people is that happy with Palin in Alaska to the point of showing their support. Of course it is expected that votes will favor Palin as VP in Alaska, but not because they are happy with her but by inertia of pride of having such a representation in the White House.
 
After rereading it I think they were trying to equate the number of supporters who showed up compared to the number of protesters. Which isn't fair or accurate either. The only way to get a semi-factual equation would be to hold a rally FOR Palin and then compare the number of protesters who show up at that rally.
 
Slippery Slope said:
After rereading it I think they were trying to equate the number of supporters who showed up compared to the number of protesters. Which isn't fair or accurate either. The only way to get a semi-factual equation would be to hold a rally FOR Palin and then compare the number of protesters who show up at that rally.
Click to expand...

Even two separate rallies doesn't tell you anything. Obama could draw 50,000 to a rally in Dallas, McCain could draw 8,000 - that doesn't equate to Obama taking Texas or being more popular in TX.

The best way to find out whether someone approves of Gov. Palin's performance is to ask them. That's what polling does. If you want more accuracy, you need to ask more people - not count political rally attendance.
 
Panther said:
Even two separate rallies doesn't tell you anything. Obama could draw 50,000 to a rally in Dallas, McCain could draw 8,000 - that doesn't equate to Obama taking Texas or being more popular in TX.

The best way to find out whether someone approves of Gov. Palin's performance is to ask them. That's what polling does. If you want more accuracy, you need to ask more people - not count political rally attendance.
Click to expand...

I understand that, I'm just staying on the topic of math and rally numbers. You seemed to misunderstand what I said anyway.

Not to mention that, I think you could get an indication if you compare the number of supporters to the number of protesters AT THE SAME RALLY. Rallies generally draw interested parties so you would figure the people attending are strong supporters. If that's 10,000 people who show up but 2000 protesters you can get a pretty good idea from that.
 
Harshaw said:
No, I think that when you insult instead of answering substantively, that's a personal attack.

You mean, if someone doesn't agree with you "substantially" and posts a different opinion, THAT you consider a "personal attack". Give me a break. ;)

So there are 1400 people in Alaska who don't approve of her. So what?
Click to expand...

There were almost 1500 people in that demonstration. Almost ALL were women. And they weren't spread all over Alaska, they were in one city, Anchorage. That was a large group and is reflective of just how popular she really is or is NOT!
 
The rally got missed by the MSM because they won't get any viewers.

I watched both videos and it's filled with lesbians, pro abortion activists, and women who don't believe in shaving. Not exactly the type of crowd companies want to spend their adverstising dollars on.

The rally and this thread are: EPIC FAIL.
 
GottaHurt said:
The rally got missed by the MSM because they won't get any viewers.

I watched both videos and it's filled with lesbians, pro abortion activists, and women who don't believe in shaving. Not exactly the type of crowd companies want to spend their adverstising dollars on.

The rally and this thread are: EPIC FAIL.
Click to expand...
 
GottaHurt said:
I watched both videos and it's filled with lesbians, pro abortion activists, and women who don't believe in shaving. Not exactly the type of crowd companies want to spend their adverstising dollars on.
Click to expand...

Not everything discussed on this forum may be found interesting to someone who labels himself as a "sexual deviant". :roll:

Your posts are offensive to many of us.
 
Slippery Slope said:
I understand that, I'm just staying on the topic of math and rally numbers. You seemed to misunderstand what I said anyway.

Not to mention that, I think you could get an indication if you compare the number of supporters to the number of protesters AT THE SAME RALLY. Rallies generally draw interested parties so you would figure the people attending are strong supporters. If that's 10,000 people who show up but 2000 protesters you can get a pretty good idea from that.
Click to expand...


I understand but disagree. Why would a representative number of pro-Palin people attend an anti-Palin rally? That's like taking demographics from Rush Limbaugh's audience and extrapolating the number of liberals and conservatives in the country.
 
ADK_Forever said:
You mean, if someone doesn't agree with you "substantially" and posts a different opinion, THAT you consider a "personal attack". Give me a break.
Click to expand...

Are you aware that there is a difference in definition between the words "substantively" and "substantially"?

There are two possibilities:

1) You are not.

2) You are, but dishonestly decided to use a different word in a strawman argument against me.

Either doesn't look good for you.

There were almost 1500 people in that demonstration. Almost ALL were women. And they weren't spread all over Alaska, they were in one city, Anchorage. That was a large group and is reflective of just how popular she really is or is NOT!
Click to expand...

OK, fine -- Anchorage has a population of 279,000. A rally of 1500 represents half a percent of its population. So 99.5% of Anchorage wasn't there.
 
ADK_Forever said:
Not everything discussed on this forum may be found interesting to someone who labels himself as a "sexual deviant". :roll:

Your posts are offensive to many of us.
Click to expand...

Exactly what does any of this have to do with the topic?

Please try to stay focused, I know that's a tall order for you.
 
conquer said:
There is only one way to have an acurate account of the percent of who is against or in favor of Palin, and it is by comparing the number of participants in both groups.
Click to expand...

This is hilariously wrong.
 
Harshaw said:
OK, fine -- Anchorage has a population of 279,000. A rally of 1500 represents half a percent of its population. So 99.5% of Anchorage wasn't there.
Click to expand...

There you go with your ridiculous math again. You just don't get how it works.

DC has a population of 500k. They had the million man march. That means that 200% of DC is black men.

duh.
 
GottaHurt said:
Exactly what does any of this have to do with the topic?

Please try to stay focused, I know that's a tall order for you.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with the topic.
It has to do with your self-esteem. We're worried about you. :cool:
 
Harshaw said:
Are you aware that there is a difference in definition between the words "substantively" and "substantially"?

There are two possibilities:

1) You are not.

2) You are, but dishonestly decided to use a different word in a strawman argument against me.

Either doesn't look good for you.



OK, fine -- Anchorage has a population of 279,000. A rally of 1500 represents half a percent of its population. So 99.5% of Anchorage wasn't there.
Click to expand...

Did you make your appointment today for that lobotomy? ;)
 
The DNC must be spending big bucks to fly in all those "protestors". :lol:
 
missypea said:
From what I've read there were about 1000 supporters at the "Welcome Home" rally.

There were about 1500 at the "Alaska Women Reject Palin" rally.
Click to expand...

Then clearly that proves that her approval rating is only 40%. :roll::roll::roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom