If you ask a few dozen people any question you can easily put together a video of stupid answers from average people.
It's just political garbage campaigning and anyone with half a brain knows that.
So no Huck. I wonder who Sarah would throw her support to now, if that's the way she decides to go. Romney's a little too center for her, isn't he?
Who's this Pawlenty guy I keep hearing about?
Can you say.... "President Palin"
back_palin.jpg [ 86.23 KiB | Viewed 196 times ]
Free rep points to the first person to see what's wrong with that pie chart.
To be fair to Huckabee, I can see why he gave clemency the first time. From what I've read, Clemmons was given a 100+ years in jail for crimes he comitted before he was 18 that weren't murder or rape.
It's obvious that those Republicans are giving 110%
Yes, it's stupid to use a pie chart to show multiple approval numbers because there's no reason that multiple approval numbers should add up to 100% (one unit). A bar graph would have been better (maybe with disapproval numbers next to approvals). But that doesn't make the approval numbers wrong or misleading unless you assume the viewers don't understand what they're looking at. You're the one assuming the viewers are dumb and using that to prove the broadcasters are dumb. Your bias against the viewers isn't proof of anything.
Actually I saw that chart explained one time. I think it was something like they asked each person to rate his approval or disapproval of each possible candidate, or something like that.
The chart is probably accurate, but it's design is misleading.
The numbers are probably from three separate questions:
1) Would you back Palin if she ran for President in 2012?
2) Would you back Romney if he ran for President in 2012?
and
3) Would you back Huckabee if he ran for President in 2012?
The percentages displayed are the frequency of "yes" answers to that candidate's personalized question. They are then displayed in a pie layout so that no one of them is listed "first" (either left-most or top-most in a linear list).
If that is the case (which is what I assumed when I first saw the chart), the only fallacy is the unwarranted assumption Fox News viewers would believe this came from a single question, something like "Who would you prefer for President in 2012?"
Perhaps this chart is a psychology test. If you habitually assume others to be idiots, you'd naturally assume the chart to be an idiotic mistake. If you habitually assume most people do most things for good reasons, you work backward to determine what reasonable causes would produce this effect.
Saw this one and thought it was pretty funny.
This one is kind of unique, I think.
You have 2 usually, rhetoric spewing, deaf to the other side, mouthpieces - one from the left, one from the right. What's unique is they've somehow found a way to control their shenanigans, and have a reasoned 26 minute debate on whether, or not Sarah Palin is stupid.
There's no clear winner, but so what. I thought both sides made good points.
Zeigler in particular was uncharacteristically well behaved. He doesn't get extra points for that though, so it was still a tie on my scorecard.
I can't stand Young Turks but it's unusual they let someone who they don't agree with on the show.
dbl post.