carlfense

YouGOv, if you prefer (and yes, they ask about the videos): https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/08/05/after-video-releases-opinion-planned-parenthood-li/

Yes. I'm quite sure that it was based on methodology and not the fact that you found a lower number. Not particularly. They seem like more hype than substance. The claim that you (and many others) are making is that they're selling or trying to profit from the sale of body parts. That claim has not been substantiated. Unless and until that evidence is provided there's really no "there" there. But then again, I don't doubt that my ties to the medical community have made it hard for me to be too surprised by the comments from people who deal with this every day.

Of course. Along with 45% of the country. If you'll note the conversation above that qualifies Planned Parenthood as wildly popular. Are you implying that 45% indicates that it's "wildly popular"? Most certainly not. ok It's a joke . . . bnilhome was trying for several posts to pretend that 41% approval indicates wild popularity.

You said wildly popular. You're walking that back now to just "popular." I don't blame you for that . . . it's probably your best option at this point. Please refer back to post #53 and review where I did or did not put limitations on my approval number. If you don't see any limitations please don't try to act like your own preferences are relevant. What?

Of course. Along with 45% of the country. If you'll note the conversation above that qualifies Planned Parenthood as wildly popular. Are you implying that 45% indicates that it's "wildly popular"? Most certainly not.

That's not what you stated. You said that he was wildly popular. Now you're walking that back. It's not a stretch at all. You definitely stated that my 45% number was wrong and that the correct number was 37%. That was not correct.

What's the DNC equivalent of Trumpmentum?

Wait...I missed this. It worked??? I didn't know the election was over. If it DOES work, it doesn't say anything about the party other than they have a hard time all getting behind just one candidate. I think he meant "it worked" as in it got Trump into the race and the GOP base embraced his rhetoric.

Of course. Along with 45% of the country. If you'll note the conversation above that qualifies Planned Parenthood as wildly popular. Well for started, only 37% have a favorable opinion of PP, and in this recent poll, 53% of respondents had yet to see the disgusting videos, which would raise that unfavorable rating significantly. http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm Here's the poll I was looking at. http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/how-public-views-planned-parenthood-nra-n403451 It's more recent than your link. Feel free to cherry pick however you want . . . but you're not going to have much credibility if you keep providing inaccurate information like you did about Walker and now PP.

And, that's right where politicians want it. Yep.

Of course. Along with 45% of the country. If you'll note the conversation above that qualifies Planned Parenthood as wildly popular.

You keep saying that.

Oh. Conspiracy theorists like the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence? ". . . the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent." If that's too much reading I can give highlights. Heck, there are even videos of W. claiming that an IAEA report said that Iraq was six months from a nuke. No such report existed. But hey . . . that's just an extremely well documented and factually supported conspiracy theory. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you weren't trying to deceive when you posted dated numbers . . . but you might want to give up on your attempt to define "wildly popular" to include 41% of people thinking you're doing an acceptable job. No wrongdoing whatsoever on Benghazi. Don't take my word for it . . . take a stroll through the 9 (NINE!) investigations since the attack. Frankly, it doesn't sound like you are in on the joke that the conservative entertainment complex and GOP pols are playing. Criticisms of Hillary? She's mediocre on the campaign trail. She's hostile to the press (often with good reason, admittedly). She's overly secretive. Currently supporting? None of them. In the general when there's a high probability that we'll get to decide between Jeb(!) and Hillary I'll vote for Hillary. No. None. In fact, we should probably increase funding for womens health programs.

I hope that you're right. It'll play right into the playbook.

Oh. Do you deny that Bush lied about the existence of intelligence supporting his claims about Iraq's WMD program? That should be a "yes" or "no" question.

So were you intentionally providing dated and incorrect information to falsely support your claims or were you uninformed as to Walker's "wild popularity"?

Must have failed. Sorry, lol. I'm having a lazy, tired Sunday afternoon. I meant conception. Haha. No worries.

Must have failed.

Finally, FWIW, I have very low expectations for President Clinton. 1. Nominate justices, 2. Hold the line against attempts to dismantle the ACA and Dodd-Frank, and 3. Don't start any idiotic wars. Fortunately Obama is leaving the country in much better shape for President Clinton than his predecessor did for him.

It's not odd and I tried to explain why above. I'm not sure I can make it any more clear. Would you do so?

Show me. (You have a few options here. You can admit that you're wrong. You can re-define "wildly popular" to mean roughly every other person. Or you can ignore this after actually looking up the numbers.) First, here are some poll numbers showing the popularity factor. http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/02/10/poll-kasich-approval-rating.html http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2014/10/rick-perrys-approval-ratings-unchanged-in-texas-following-indictment-but-voters-split-over-whether-hes-innocent-or-guilty.html/ (This despite the allegations against Perry that were politically motivated) http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_25002454/wisconsin-gov-scott-walkers-approval-rating-remains-about (this in a very progressive state) For any politician to have an approval in the 50s is very notable in this day and age of so much partisanship. So you're going with option two, redefining "wildly popular" to mean roughly every other person. Nice. (Also, were you being dishonest when you cited a Walker poll from more than a year and a half ago when his approval rating was ten points higher? Looks like he's down around 41% now.) You just invoked Benghazi? Oof. Also, did you vote for Romney? Be honest. Listen, if you're honestly suggesting that the eventual DNC candidate, whether Hillary or anyone else, is as or more likely to start another war in the Middle East this isn't worth either of our time. Hillary definitely supported the Iraq War. She acknowledges her mistake and I'll freely admit that it was erroneous. What do you think? Was it a mistake for W. and company to lie us into Iraq? Let's talk in mid-November 2016, eh? Some people need to beat their chest with predictions before the contest because they're never quite convinced that they'll be able to do it after. I'd lay odds at about 70% that we're both going to have to get used to saying President Clinton again. And that's even with me agreeing with you that Hillary isn't impressive on campaign stops. She's average at best at campaigning. Fortunately for the DNC (and the country) she's running against a party who is currently infatuated with Donald Trump. Haha.

That's correct. I can't definitively answer that and neither can you. My own opinion is that it's not a "living being" until it could live outside of the human body. That puts it sometime after 22 weeks. That said, even after 22 weeks there is no guarantee that it's a "living being." For example, a fetus with anencephaly is not a "living being" and I think it'd be barbaric (and needlessly risky) to force a woman to give birth to a fetus that didn't develop a brain. Frankly, as a rapidly-approaching-middle-aged male, I'm more than comfortable leaving that decision up to the mother, father, and their doctor. Some might even call it relying on personal responsibility. And while our opinions differ on this issue only one of us is trying to force everyone to adopt their definition.

Show me. (You have a few options here. You can admit that you're wrong. You can re-define "wildly popular" to mean roughly every other person. Or you can ignore this after actually looking up the numbers.) Wouldn't have imagined that you were an Obama supporter. Who gave us that war again? Who wants to return to Iraq and start more wars? You'll never get the chance to see that. Best case for Carly you'll get to watch her in the VP debate. That's possible.

Not so much that you feel that it's wrong but rather that you don't seem to understand that it's an opinion and not a fact that a fetus is a "living being." That's the "fact" that you're building your outrage on. It's certainly your right to believe that . . . but it does not make it a fact.

That's because you don't understand that the basis for your entire premise is an opinion and not a fact.