Poll: Huge Support For Ann Coulter

[GOP Woman]

She sure has my support!

Poll: Huge Support For Ann Coulter (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/6/19/130250.shtml?s=ic)

1) Was Ann Coulter wrong in criticizing four 9/11 widows known as the "Jersey Girls”?
Wrong: 15 percent
Not wrong: 85 percenr



2) What is your opinion of Ann Coulter?
Favorable: 87 percent Unfavorable: 13 percent



3) Do you agree with Hillary Clinton that Ann’s book is "vicious” and "heartless”?

Yes, agree: 13 percent
No, don’t agree: 87 percent



4) Has the media coverage of Ann Coulter and her book been fair?
Fair: 18 percent
Not fair: 82 percent


5) Of the three, who would you trust for news and information?

Katie Couric: 10 percent
Ann Coulter: 86 percent Al Franken: 4 percent

[Lazarus]

Bodes ill for the Left in the Mid-term elections...

If this is an accurate snapshot of sentiment in mainstream America, all the propoganda from the MSM about the House of Reps falling to the Dems is going to be the biggest embarrassment ever for the Left...

[cerberus]

What a joke. A Newsmax online "poll" tells us nothing other than what people who read Newsmax think.

[GOP Woman]

What a joke. A Newsmax online "poll" tells us nothing other than what people who read Newsmax think.

So, are you saying that no liberals go to NewsMax?

[cerberus]

It should be pretty damn easy to see why this poll is bogus. It's just a survey of those Newsmax readers who chose to take the time to fill it out and not representative of anything more.

[Lazarus]

I'd be disappointed if Cerb didnt show up on que to denounce this story... :rotflmbo:

[cerberus]

I'll notice you don't actually dispute what I say.......

[Popperite]

I'll notice you don't actually dispute what I say.......

Most online polls are accompanied by a disclaimer stating that the poll reflects the opinions of those who care to respond and is not representative, or words of similar meaning. Curiously that wasn't done on the NewsMax site (by the way, you can still vote). I wonder if the NYT version of the poll had such a disclaimer.
Also the respondents are asked to


Please vote only once.


Which makes me wonder if ignoring that request is technically possible. Also you have to fill in an e-mail adress in order to be able to vote, which will be used to send you info.



I understand that as a voter in this poll I will be signed up for FREE breaking news alerts.


I can unsubscribe at any time.


Votes with invalid emails will not be counted.


Important: When you vote in this urgent national poll, you'll also


find out about our special offer for Ann Coulter's new book!



Most online polls you see on newssites block you from voting more than once automatically, although I suppose that can be circumvented too.

I think it needs a disclaimer

[Naturalized-Texan]

I have read about 60% of Ann Coulter's book and it's one of the best books I have ever read. She is right on in every point she makes including her criticism of the "Jersey Girls." Interestingly enough, the media inadvertently proved the whole point that she made about the "Jersey Girls" with their reaction to her criticism. Her point, of course, that the liberals choose only messengers whom we are not allowed to reply to and if we dare to reply to them, we are immediately attacked as being insensitive. Point proven!

[DoctorDoom]

Want the polls that count, snippy little liberal shits?

HARDCOVER NONFICTION

Top 5 at a Glance

1. GODLESS, by Ann Coulter
2. DISPATCHES FROM THE EDGE, by Anderson Cooper
3. WISDOM OF OUR FATHERS, by Tim Russert
4. MARLEY & ME, by John Grogan
5. THE WORLD IS FLAT, by Thomas L. FriedmanBooks - Best-Seller Lists - New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/pages/books/bestseller/index.html)

Amazon.com Sales Rank: #4 in Books (See Top Sellers in Books)
Yesterday: #3 in BooksGodless: The Church of Liberalism (Hardcover) (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1400054206/sr=1-1/qid=1150755654/ref=sr_1_1/002-0486436-2039261?%5Fencoding=UTF8&s=books)

Amazon doesn't split books into fiction & nonfiction, and: "Our most popular items. Updated hourly." It's thus a matter of who bought what during the last update period. Nevertheless, the purchase rate speaks for itself.

The people are voting with their wallets.

[DoctorDoom]

I'll notice you don't actually dispute what I say.......What a joke. A Newsmax online "poll" tells us nothing other than what people who read Newsmax think.It should be pretty damn easy to see why this poll is bogus. It's just a survey of those Newsmax readers who chose to take the time to fill it out and not representative of anything more.What did you say that was worth refuting, dogbreath? You reworded the same "argument". And would you have that same cynicism if DUh had a poll about a Shamu Mooron lie-fest?

[Popperite]

Want the polls that count, snippy little liberal shits?

Is there nothing better than this? I'm guessing that there is a real poll out there somewhere. People have been talking about this for weeks.

[DesertFox]

It's just a survey of those Newsmax readers who chose to take the time to fill it out and not representative of anything more.This is true of any survey at any time. Gallup polls reflect the opinions of those people who choose to take the time to respond to their surveys. Zogby polls reflect those people´s opinions who choose to take the time to respond to their surveys.

You´re speaking in tautologies.

[Popperite]

Her point, of course, that the liberals choose only messengers whom we are not allowed to reply to and if we dare to reply to them, we are immediately attacked as being insensitive. Point proven!

If people want to attack their PoV's they should simply do so and stop complaining. Why didn't Coulter? She chose to attack them for something else than just their PoV.
Where did they claim that their PoV couldn't be attacked because they were 9/11 widows? If they ever stated that they should be attacked for that as well. Any quotes?

[DesertFox]

Everybody is free to attack everybody for everything. More tautologies.

[Popperite]

This is true of any survey at any time. Gallup polls reflect the opinions of those people who choose to take the time to respond to their surveys. Zogby polls reflect those people´s opinions who choose to take the time to respond to their surveys.

You´re speaking in tautologies.

Aren't people actually randomly approached to participate in such polls, instead of volunteering? That's the best way to go about this I think.

[DesertFox]

That´s how it´s supposed to be done. But even so, only people who choose to take part do take part.

[Popperite]

Everybody is free to attack everybody for everything. More tautologies.

Of course! Then why all the complaining? Where was immunity from attack claimed for these widows?

[DoctorDoom]

Of course! Then why all the complaining? Where was immunity from attack claimed for these widows?It's inherent in touchy-feely liberalism. Attacks can be launched only on politically incorrect people and groups.

[DesertFox]

True. Sadly, there´s also a universal right to bitch and moan, and everybody I ever knew takes advantage of it at one time or another. Difference here is that the liberals start the war of words and keep it going long after anyone else cares.

[aaron11]

Is there nothing better than this? I'm guessing that there is a real poll out there somewhere. People have been talking about this for weeks.

:unsmile: Think I have been giving you too much credit.

[Popperite]

That´s how it´s supposed to be done. But even so, only people who choose to take part do take part.

True, but if the group of respondents is big enough its a better way than letting people volunteer that happen to be reading this or that site or newspaper. But you can dispute if that will always lead to trustworthy results. Specially when elections are concerned and a greater precision is required. My point was just that this particular poll wasn't serious.

[Popperite]

:unsmile: Think I have been giving you too much credit.

I'm not really into polls that much. It's a manner of speech to imply that at least this could have been done better and I'm just guessing somebody somewhere did. The only point again is that this was obviously not seriously done. Just a little publicity.

Coulter's hallmark is that she's controversial. That's her thing! You can't be controversial AND do great in the polls. She should be worried about these figures!

[aaron11]

Reagan was controversial and popular. Seems to me "controversial" has come to mean anything that differs from the view of the left.

[DesertFox]

You can't be controversial AND do great in the polls.Actually, you can. A populist is one who rides some issue or group of issues to popularity. That something is an issue means it´s already controversial. If some populist picks it up and makes it his own, and a lotta people agree with him, then he´s both controversial AND great in the polls on that issue.

[Popperite]

It's inherent in touchy-feely liberalism. Attacks can be launched only on politically incorrect people and groups.

That's a claim by you. I want to know where it was argued by them in the general debate about their PoV. Without that its just an accusation directed at them based on how you feel about these people.

[DesertFox]

Pop, you are apparently too young to have followed this Left-Right war, which started in the Twenties, ignited WWII, continued thru the Cold War and is still alive today. It´s a clash between socialist thinking and free market thinking. The generalizations that are made here about the Left are accurate, and accusations based on them are usually close if not spot on.

[Popperite]

Actually, you can. A populist is one who rides some issue or group of issues to popularity. That something is an issue means it´s already controversial. If some populist picks it up and makes it his own, and a lotta people agree with him, then he´s both controversial AND great in the polls on that issue.

I suppose that's true. You're right about that.

[Popperite]

Pop, you are apparently too young to have followed this Left-Right war, which started in the Twenties, ignited WWII, continued thru the Cold War and is still alive today. It´s a clash between socialist thinking and free market thinking. The generalizations that are made here about the Left are accurate, and accusations based on them are usually close if not spot on.

That clash is very important but not the only dynamic that formed the last century.
But apart from that I'm sure that people somtimes hide behind and utilise emotions, outrage and moral indignation, not only on the left for that matter. The question is, is it relevant? Was this actually done in this or that particular matter? In this matter that question is still unanswered here. To say it's an inherent characteristic of your opponent in debate is essentially introducing a diversion based on a subjective notion. Basically Coulter is doing exactly the same thing that she is accusing the Jersey girls of. The debate is not about the views anymore, but about who is righteous in taking the high ground.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Where did they claim that their PoV couldn't be attacked because they were 9/11 widows? If they ever stated that they should be attacked for that as well. Any quotes?
It wasn't the Jersey Girls who claimed that, but the liberal media did - loudly! Of course, in that chapter Ann pointed out several others that the liberals put forth as messengers that the liberals claimed were immune to criticism - John Murtha, Cindy Sheehan, Max Cleland, John Kerry, Daniel Inouye, Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame - and then raised holy hell when their messages were criticized.

[Borgia]

This is true of any survey at any time. Gallup polls reflect the opinions of those people who choose to take the time to respond to their surveys. Zogby polls reflect those people´s opinions who choose to take the time to respond to their surveys.

You´re speaking in tautologies.

ACtually, they are completely different. A professional poll will seek a cross-section of America. A certain number of females, a certain number of males. A certain number of whites, a certain number of blacks, a certain number of hispanics etc... They create a sample that mirrors America. The people are chosen at random but once they will their quota for each group they don't count subsequent responses.

Newsmax makes no pretense to attempt to mirror the populace.

[DoctorDoom]

ACtually, they are completely different. A professional poll will seek a cross-section of America. A certain number of females, a certain number of males. A certain number of whites, a certain number of blacks, a certain number of hispanics etc... They create a sample that mirrors America. The people are chosen at random but once they will their quota for each group they don't count subsequent responses.Ideally, yes. Realistically, no. Polls have become shamelessly politicized, and are worded to achieve a desired result.

Furthermore, the farking things have become as common as stale popcorn on a theater floor. The "news" media no longer report news. Now they take polls and the polls become the news. The MSM/DBM have abandoned journalistic integrity and objectivity in favor of creating news. And then the asswarts wonder why they're losing credibility and viewers/readers.

And of course there's the question of how many people lie to or bullshit the poll-takers.

As for web polls on the sites of the DBM, I have encountered few that can't be manipulated. If they set cookies on my computer, I can delete them and vote again. If they record my IP number, I log off and sign back on with another number (dialup, ergo dynamic IP# assignment). And if even those don't work, I disconnect and reconnect via my secondary ISP.

WorldNetDaily polls use email/password logins. The DBM sites don't. Ergo, Web-based polls are generally meaningless.

[Borgia]

Furthermore, the farking things have become as common as stale popcorn on a theater floor. The "news" media no longer report news. Now they take polls and the polls become the news. The MSM/DBM have abandoned journalistic integrity and objectivity in favor of creating news.

Agreed. Polls are a tad interesting but should not be replacing actual news.

Ergo, Web-based polls are generally meaningless.

Agreed again.

[ConspiracyBuff]

CerberusI'll notice you don't actually dispute what I say.......
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

I'll notice you havn't said anything since Doom disputed it.
I'll also notice that you always are quick to bark and then just as quickly are sent six ears down to the dog-house like a good little dog. It's okay,
KEEP TRYING!!!

[MichaelS]

Her point, of course, that the liberals choose only messengers whom we are not allowed to reply to and if we dare to reply to them, we are immediately attacked as being insensitive. Point proven!
Coulter hypocrisy at its finest. Conveniently ignored is the right's willingness to label anyone that criticizes the President or his policies during a time of "war" as unpatriotic, insensitive, undermining the troops, giving comfort to the enemy, etc., etc., etc.. Coulter's little knife jab cuts both ways.

[MichaelS]

Ergo, Web-based polls are generally meaningless.Something I agree with Doomie on?? Surely pork has booked the 1st class cabin.

[cerberus]

Ideally, yes. Realistically, no. Polls have become shamelessly politicized, and are worded to achieve a desired result.
---snip---
WorldNetDaily polls use email/password logins. The DBM sites don't. Ergo, Web-based polls are generally meaningless.
Exactly. That's simply the point I was making Tin-pants. No need to get your iron panties in a bunch.:D
Newsmax made it seem as though there was some broad-based support for Coulter based on this "poll". All we know from this is Newsmax readers support her.

I'll notice you havn't said anything since Doom disputed it.
I'll also notice that you always are quick to bark and then just as quickly are sent six ears down to the dog-house like a good little dog. It's okay,
KEEP TRYING!!! Some of us have jobs we have to go to and a family to tend to. You'll understand when you grow up.
Other than being Doom's lap-leech, cheerleader and a general toady to those who actually post something, do you have anything of value offer? No? Nothing? Why am I not surprised?

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Popperite:
Basically Coulter is doing exactly the same thing that she is accusing the Jersey girls of.

:unsmile: Not.

[Warlady]

You libs need to re-read Doc's first two posts. Obviously you missed them.

[Suzie]

You know, 2 of our soldiers were found tortured to death today. Just thought I would mention it since that seems to be ignored in favor of 2 threads on this topic.

[Popperite]

You libs need to re-read Doc's first two posts. Obviously you missed them.

All that was argued up till then was that the poll wasn't serious. Doc adressed that, but that was later in the thread.

[DesertFox]

ACtually, they are completely different. A professional poll will seek a cross-section of America. A certain number of females, a certain number of males. A certain number of whites, a certain number of blacks, a certain number of hispanics etc... They create a sample that mirrors America. The people are chosen at random but once they will their quota for each group they don't count subsequent responses.That wasn't the point. The point was that no matter how you randomize, no matter how huge your universe or grand your sample, no matter how small your margin of error, you still need people to voluntarily respond to your poll. If no one does, you don't end up with a poll. If not enough do, you don't end up with a poll.

[DoctorDoom]

You know, 2 of our soldiers were found tortured to death today. Just thought I would mention it since that seems to be ignored in favor of 2 threads on this topic.What we need is 945,208 self-serving DBM polls to find out what the public thinks of the atrocity. Then the liberaloonies will pay attention to it.

[DoctorDoom]

(Y)ou still need people to voluntarily respond to your poll. If no one does, you don't end up with a poll. If not enough do, you don't end up with a poll.And if the people are less than honest, you end up with a poll that's worthless.

[DesertFox]

It's hard for me to believe that Zogby and Gallup and such actually use well trained, mature adults to do their polls. They may say they do, but I don't believe them.

Normally, the only polls I believe are those that accord with my own common sense, those that have nothing to do with politics in any way, and those that show their methods and test questions so that I can personally verify their veracity.

[ConspiracyBuff]

Some of us have jobs we have to go to and a family to tend to. You'll understand when you grow up.
Other than being Doom's lap-leech, cheerleader and a general toady to those who actually post something, do you have anything of value offer? No? Nothing? Why am I not surprised?

I think all of us have jobs and Im sure yours is very important, wait no I dont.
Im sure your little puppies are very proud that you bring home the dog food. Im sure your raising those snotty nosed kids to be perfect little libs.
I'm sorry but its just that everytime i go to post on a forum that you post on i realize that your a complete moron and I cant help myself. Normally at least three others have already lambasted you and disputed (as in this case) your every point. Its hard to ignore your continued whimpering. You think the way you do because basically you are the only one I ever do it to, its just too much fun.

Besides that i offer more to this *Conservative* forum (in case your trolling DU ass didnt know) then you ever will with your idiotic fake academia.*Psss* heres a little secret-nobody here likes you and besides maybe some of your fellow liberal cohorts, nobody here gives any credence to anything you say because we know your type all too well.

[Wyatt_Junker]

It's hard for me to believe that Zogby and Gallup and such actually use well trained, mature adults to do their polls. They may say they do, but I don't believe them.

The problem is much graver than Zogby or Gallup. These two are eclipsed by our own MSM who call elections early, use fake exit polling strategies and fabricate false documents to sway entire elections. But you already knew that.


Normally, the only polls I believe are those that accord with my own common sense, those that have nothing to do with politics in any way, and those that show their methods and test questions so that I can personally verify their veracity.

Polls are for people who require the verification of their peers to authenticate their beliefs one way or the other. Independent minded people, OTOH, do not gaze at others for their cue.

[Borgia]

That wasn't the point. The point was that no matter how you randomize, no matter how huge your universe or grand your sample, no matter how small your margin of error, you still need people to voluntarily respond to your poll. If no one does, you don't end up with a poll. If not enough do, you don't end up with a poll.

Of course you need people to respond to the poll. But you only use the results that fit your demographic needs.

[Borgia]

It's hard for me to believe that Zogby and Gallup and such actually use well trained, mature adults to do their polls. They may say they do, but I don't believe them.

Normally, the only polls I believe are those that accord with my own common sense, those that have nothing to do with politics in any way, and those that show their methods and test questions so that I can personally verify their veracity.

I would imgaine they hire independent groups to actually make the calls. Call centers are all over the place. From experience, the callers are adults. Mature, I don't know.

[Lubbock]

Never forget that Zogby is a terrorist sympathizer. Everything Zogby does is filtered through that lense.

[Popperite]

I would imgaine they hire independent groups to actually make the calls. Call centers are all over the place. From experience, the callers are adults. Mature, I don't know.

Yes. The bottom line is do you trust it. And if not, what makes you wary. The last is easier to judge from method than from the underlying political implications.

[Naturalized-Texan]

I'm thoroughly enjoying reading Godless, especially Ann Coulter's chapters in which she completaly demolishes the Church of Liberalism's cult of evolution. She does it with facts and ridicule and even by using the evolutionists' own words to prove their lies. I heartily recommend that everyone, including especially those who worship the icons of the Church of Liberalism, to read Ann Coulter's book.

[Riverboat]

Apropos of nothing, I came across this photo of Miss Coulter as I was rummaging through National Review Online, which led me to columnists, which led me a blog, which led me to, well, see for yourself.

http://cdn-98.cdn.buzznet.com/assets/users11/emmanuelle/default/2_blonds_getting_along--large-msg-115068022301-2.jpg

I hope the woman on the left isn't planning to smoke those things or drink what's in that bottle. The health nazis may throw her on the pavement and arrest her for endangering her health.

[Foquet]

True. Sadly, there´s also a universal right to bitch and moan, and everybody I ever knew takes advantage of it at one time or another. Difference here is that the liberals start the war of words and keep it going long after anyone else cares.
They do so by using Orwellian/Leftist/Cloak words like "diversity", "multiculturalism", "hate crimes" and their fave word of all time, "racism". These, to the Left, are bulletproof words that can be smeared on any and all who dare raise an objection to the GroupThink that their lemming like brains process. Since they can only process what their fellow Leftist Borg counterparts allow them to, it is to them, without their even knowing it their Political DNA that they themselves are incapabale of escaping from.

Not to mention that there are a lot of wannabe Borg Queens within the MSM and the DNC.

Starting with The Bride of Satan herself.

[ldb83]

They do so by using Orwellian/Leftist/Cloak words like "diversity", "multiculturalism", "hate crimes" and their fave word of all time, "racism". These, to the Left, are bulletproof words that can be smeared on any and all who dare raise an objection to the GroupThink that their lemming like brains process. Since they can only process what their fellow Leftist Borg counterparts allow them to, it is to them, without their even knowing it their Political DNA that they themselves are incapabale of escaping from.

This claim could be made of virtually any group of people who utter the same ideas.

[Foquet]

Hmmm...if that is all you can retort with, then you have already lost the argument.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

Interestingly enough, the media inadvertently proved the whole point that she made about the "Jersey Girls" with their reaction to her criticism. Her point, of course, that the liberals choose only messengers whom we are not allowed to reply to and if we dare to reply to them, we are immediately attacked as being insensitive. Point proven!

Check and mate.

[Foquet]

This reminds me of an old Nos Toon Time toon I did back in 2003:

http://www.nosferatuscoffin.com/cartoons/CoulterAthena.jpg

[DoctorDoom]

Note: all evolution-related posts have been split off and moved to the Evolution forum.

Evolution posts from Coulter thread (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?t=37162)

[Maggie_T]

Newsmax makes no pretense to attempt to mirror the populace.

On the contrary, Borgia. Newsmax is the only one that mirrors the populace. Don't you remember? It's only uncouth, redneck, hicks like us conservatives that like Ann Coulter.

The liberal elite (you know, tenured Birkenstock-clad frauds in academia, the w(h)ine and cheese crowds in Manhattan, Georgetown, etc., the sacred cows in Hollywack, et al ... oh, yeah, and the High Priests and Priestesses of Civil Discourse) hate Ann with a virulence only slightly less intense than that they feel for George Bush.

Do your homework, Borgia. Go see if there's a poll conducted by CNN, NSMBC, and the rest of the alphabet media and see which of them is favorable to Ann. The alphabet media is the one that makes no pretense to attempt to mirror the populace.

No. The alphabet media mirrors the leftist elite.

You're losing touch, Borgia. Shame on you.

[Maggie_T]

Incidentally, I see that no thread about Ann goes for less than 3 pages. Coulterphobes simply cannot restrain themselves from bitching against Ann.

*Y A W N*

[Foquet]

She just needs to eat a few more sandwiches....and she could pose for National Review in a bikini...thereby knock SI out of business for good.

Reminds me of the idea that I suggested at the start of the war when I suggested that the lovely Fox ladies do a calendar (tastefully, of couse) and whose benefits would go to the families of affected military families. It might not be out of the realm of possibilty yet.

As for Ann, she is just one big gun that has helped us to silence the Kerry Rice-in-the-ass Guns "fake heroes" that fire for 2 seconds....whine and bitch...reloard and then call for a Senate vote calls them back to their millionaire estates, they want to drink with Ted.