It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is ATS A Political Bubble for Democrat Opinion?

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

You have to remember most people are, stupid, uninformed and lazy. All they have is name recognition.




posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:39 PM
link   
I think there's huff and puff on ATS by a few. But mostly, being a political bubble for Democrat opinion........on Hillary????? Naaaaw.

As far as the media and this whole Iowa caucus thing tho, I'd like to put in perspective the data:

Iowa caucus 2016 2/2/16 votes

Ted Cruz 51,649

Trump 45,416

Rubio 43,132

Carson 17,383

Paul 8,478

Bush 5,235

Fiorina 3,485

Kasich 3,474

Christie 3,284

Santorum 1,783

Jim Gilmore 12




Clinton 701

Sanders 697


Would you call that a political bubble if it were discussed? Quite frankly, I find your argument confusing. If anything, all political parties are equally "bubbled" by the vast variety of opinions here on ATS.


edit on 2-2-2016 by StoutBroux because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Are you trying to say that the majority of the democrats in the nation prefer Hillary to Bernie?

God help us...



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: eXia7
I like to think the users of ATS are smarter than the public at large, despite whatever political stance they may take. So just know that you are probably smarter than the average citizen.


I agree. There are some very well-developed minds here...some are borderline nuts, but the line between genius and madness is often blurry here.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: StoutBroux
I think there's huff and puff on ATS by a few. But mostly, being a political bubble for Democrat opinion........on Hillary????? Naaaaw.

As far as the media and this whole Iowa caucus thing tho, I'd like to put in perspective the data:

Iowa caucus 2016 2/2/16 votes

Ted Cruz 51,649

Trump 45,416

Rubio 43,132

Carson 17,383

Paul 8,478

Bush 5,235

Fiorina 3,485

Kasich 3,474

Christie 3,284

Santorum 1,783

Jim Gilmore 12




Clinton 701

Sanders 697


Would you call that a political bubble if it were discussed? Quite frankly, I find your argument confusing. If anything, all political parties are equally "bubbled" by the vast variety of opinions here on ATS.



Good point.
However, don't Republicans and Democrats caucus a little differently in Iowa?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

To be a Clinton supporter you must fully embrace ignorance and be closed-minded with regard to conspiracy theories.

I honestly think that explains why there aren't many Clinton-supporters around these parts.

ETA: Anecdotal case in point...there is a Clinton supporter on my FB friend list. If anyone strikes up a debate with his constant pro-Hillary posts, he either asks them not to comment any further or deletes the entire post if they've made a profound point.

It's ridiculous.


edit on 2-2-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: StoutBroux

As I thought, Democrats and Republicans in Iowa, use a different counting formula.




The Iowa Democratic Party determines its winner not based on a head count like in the Republicans' straw poll, but based on delegate equivalents tied to a math formula. And there was enough confusion, and untrained volunteers on Monday night, that errors may have been made.

www.desmoinesregister.com... 2010/
edit on 2-2-2016 by IAMTAT because: highlighting



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

Ya because the parties having totally different election procedures makes a lot of sense...

This world is kind of a joke huh



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: StoutBroux
I think there's huff and puff on ATS by a few. But mostly, being a political bubble for Democrat opinion........on Hillary????? Naaaaw.

As far as the media and this whole Iowa caucus thing tho, I'd like to put in perspective the data:

Iowa caucus 2016 2/2/16 votes

Ted Cruz 51,649

Trump 45,416

Rubio 43,132

Carson 17,383

Paul 8,478

Bush 5,235

Fiorina 3,485

Kasich 3,474

Christie 3,284

Santorum 1,783

Jim Gilmore 12




Clinton 701

Sanders 697


Would you call that a political bubble if it were discussed? Quite frankly, I find your argument confusing. If anything, all political parties are equally "bubbled" by the vast variety of opinions here on ATS.



Good point.
However, don't Republicans and Democrats caucus a little differently in Iowa?


Yes, but my point is, all the hub-bub about Hillary winning in Iowa with her measly pittance of points, Sanders too for that matter isn't what I would call a win by any means. She's gushing over her win.

I know, I know, maybe not relevant to the topic but it's been bugging me and I decided to add on my opinion of the caucus......and the Democrats over zealous enthusiasm in a state caucus that doesn't support them in the least.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

While I have been supporting Sanders, for political reasons I may vote Jill Stein. I like how she plans to pay for the changes she would make.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: enlightenedservant

While I have been supporting Sanders, for political reasons I may vote Jill Stein. I like how she plans to pay for the changes she would make.


First I've heard of her. She's Green Party?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

From my perspective, I see ATS as having a much more "anti-establishment" sentiment (on all sides) than the general population.

Ron Paul, Bernie Sanders, Alan Grayson, Trump, Ben Carson, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz seem to all be favored much more on ATS than the typical "establishment" candidates like Hillary, Bush, Rubio, etc. Where in the general public it appears many more are enthusiastic about the "establishment" candidates.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Most ATSers are information seekers, we read and we question everything, to a degree. Because of this ATS has a much more diverse political arena than most forums have or most people are exposed to.

HERE is a good read on Jill Stein of the Green Party.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 11:01 PM
link   
So we have the msm composed of propagandists and ATS filled with paranoid partisan conspiracy theorists....

For unbiased information; I think I'm better off asking the drunk that hangs around outside my office bldg.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
So we have the msm composed of propagandists and ATS filled with paranoid partisan conspiracy theorists....

For unbiased information; I think I'm better off asking the drunk that hangs around outside my office bldg.


I thought that's what you had been doing.
Just kidding



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 11:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
I'd say apparently not...

Out of the few Democrats/liberal-leaning folks on here -- I haven't seen very many (if any) Hillary supporters. How she got much support in Iowa is beyond me.

Apparently people actually would vote for her.


The Hillsry supporters on ATS I've talked to, see no point in discussing it here.

I doubt many serious voters feel the need to "duke it out" on a conspiracy board



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 11:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
I'd say apparently not...

Out of the few Democrats/liberal-leaning folks on here -- I haven't seen very many (if any) Hillary supporters. How she got much support in Iowa is beyond me.

Apparently people actually would vote for her.


The Hillsry supporters on ATS I've talked to, see no point in discussing it here.

I doubt many serious voters feel the need to "duke it out" on a conspiracy board


Serious voters?

Geez.

I am sure every voter that invests their time and effort is serious. Please. How smug.

ETA: Besides ATS is not just a conspiracy board. It is a political forum and its participants are probably more informed than most voters.

Hillary voters know they have no argument or are completely closed off from discussing her. Nothing more.

I scoff, Annee.


edit on 2-2-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 11:38 PM
link   
How do we know for sure if Hillary Campaign operatives are not here?




posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

The Hillsry supporters on ATS I've talked to, see no point in discussing it here.



Not surprising since the arguments are so weak.

Especially the past few weeks.

Shattered ideals are hard to accept for the first year after total breakdown failure.


edit on Feb-02-2016 by xuenchen because: FBI Inc.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 11:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: mekhanics
a reply to: IAMTAT

ATS sees, two parties = two cheeks on the same as*s!

I think you'd be surprised at just how inaccurate this has become.
edit on 2/2/2016 by eNumbra because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join