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.

 

51% See Occupy Wall Street Protesters As Public Nuisance

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 
if OWS would have had a set game plan , a set voice and should have set there sites on DC not on wall street, yes wall street did get the hand out, but then who gave them the hand out? DC! There motto should have "stop DC from giving to wall street" then this would have been their support not some folly. that this has turned in to, there the 99 of 100 not the 1% that calls the shots and I am of the .0001% if that, that do not mean a thing. one voice can not be heard in a room full of Manny.


edit on 9-1-2012 by bekod because: editting




posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by satron
People in Iowa voted a virtual tie between Santorum and Romney too. 41% of the people going in to vote that day were still undecided as who they would vote for. Voters are always very well informed!


It's a primary election and there is a lot on the line. I can see how many are undecided...

I'm still on the fence...

I'm not undecided about OWS though. They need to go away and stop starting trouble already. They demonstrate their classlessness when they interupt stump speeches by people trying to run for office and make REAL changes in this country. Carrying signs won't change laws or end corruption.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by DrNotforhire
 


Yeah...I'm gonna need you to back those statements up with some facts please. Never heard that one before lol.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


endoftheamericandream.com... -who-wish-to-bring-down-the-free-enterprise-system
edit on 9-1-2012 by DrNotforhire because: (no reason given)


here's your proof
edit on 9-1-2012 by DrNotforhire because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 


You're sadly misinformed. I wish people would know their "enemy" before regurgitating talking points.

edit on 9-1-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by bekod
 


I agree completely. Had they targeted DC and our corrupt leaders, I would have supported them all the way. Instead we got a bunch of left leaning, lazy, hippie dressed, freeloaders who couldn't manage to make a coherent statement that meant anything more than giving them a free ride.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 


agreed... Protesting the people working in this country... another form of classwarfare that just divides a nation..

They wouldnt DARE protest Obama, since you know.. they all voted for him LOL



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


So you're saying they did not turn the parks into tent cities? Hate to burst your bubble, but in DC they sure had a tent city going. I am sure the videos from various sources were not edited to add in tents and filthy people dressed like they just arrived from 1967 sporting dreds and the like.

nice try though.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by DrNotforhire
 


Try harder. And we are protesting Obama.
Obama is just as corrupt as the rest of them.
edit on 9-1-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


This pretty much sums it up!




posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 


They do still have tents in DC and they're growing by the day. I didn't take you for a person that would dismiss someone based on whether they had dreads or not...which by the way does not make a person dirty, dreads can be washed as easily as non dreads.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Great Video

will look for more myself!



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by satron
People in Iowa voted a virtual tie between Santorum and Romney too. 41% of the people going in to vote that day were still undecided as who they would vote for. Voters are always very well informed!


It's a primary election and there is a lot on the line. I can see how many are undecided...

I'm still on the fence...

I'm not undecided about OWS though. They need to go away and stop starting trouble already. They demonstrate their classlessness when they interupt stump speeches by people trying to run for office and make REAL changes in this country. Carrying signs won't change laws or end corruption.


Who goes to vote when they are undecided? Why didn't they just stay home? And I'm sure this isn't a just a fluke.
edit on 9-1-2012 by satron because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by DrNotforhire
 


Yeah I know. I should know better by now.
Read the link...yep, I think he is right on the money.
OWS = Oh We Suck!



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 
I have tried [in vain] to talk to some , the tent is still up at the Galvan plaza, but when one starts to tell you his her views ,[ one turns into 20] then it becomes a free for all, not one will agree with the other, at that point I just leave. now i have been able to talk to some that have good points to make , but they are not full timers, ones that camp out they have jobs and go to the UofU, they are the ones that are up front, and get to the point, that being, it is time for change.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
When I here people say they don't like OWS and that they don't speak for them, I say good on you, I guess you support corporations being "people" and corporations speaking for "you" with lot's and lot's of money.

Two important issues which OWS stands for.... get money OUT of politics, and remove corporate person-hood. I guess that would just be too smart a move for the people of this country.

When the American people refuse to speak out against corruption, you guys complain about the complacency of Americans, when a percentage finally say enough is enough and start protesting, the same group of people then start bitching about them dirty nasty druggie "protesters" who should "get a job".

Whatvah!

Make up your minds will ya? Either you want people to stand up for what they believe in, or many of you just like to moan and groan but really never take a stand.

Some of you remind me of politicians, you can never take a stand and stay there, always flip flopping.

Harm None
Peace



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrNotforhire
reply to post by haarvik
 


Haar, its not worth it.. No matter what piece of evidence you throw she will deny it..

Don't feed the trolls, lets stay on topic so we can keep this thread up...


Kali is no troll. Kali has been defending OWS quite well since the beginning.

I disagree most of the time, but nevertheless, Kali usually puts forth a good argument.

I think the arguments get weaker though because after all, how do you continue to defend some of this stuff as it gets worse every week?



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 
no it is Oh We Shout, about any and everything all at once," whose street, our street" no it is not!!! it is everyone's street!!!!



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   

51% of Likely U.S. Voters now view the protesters as a public nuisance


Bolded for emphasis.


The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey also finds that just 24% think the Occupy Wall Street protesters who first began their protests in early October have gotten their message across to the American people


By telephone survey do they mean landlines or both landlines and cell phones? Makes a bigger difference then most would believe.


The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence


So the margin is 3% either up or down. So it could be 54% or 48% with a 95% level of confidence. So how is that conclusive of anything?

Here are the questions asked:

1* How closely have you followed recent news reports about the Occupy protests on Wall Street and in other parts of the country?
2* Do you have a very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable or very unfavorable impression of the Occupy Wall Street protesters?
3* Which is closer to your point of view – The Occupy Wall Street protesters are a valid protest movement representing the frustrations of most Americans, or the Occupy Wall Street protesters have become a public nuisance?
4* Will the Occupy Wall Street movement help or hurt the Democrat Party in the 2012 Elections?
5* Have the Occupy Wall Street protesters gotten their message across to the American people?


Is it me or is #4 out of place? What is the point in asking that question? And why not conduct a poll while the protest was in full stream?
edit on 9-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join