When I started clicking, the total was a little under 18000. I think somebody was there helping me because the number was going up faster than I was clicking.
May 11, 2003, 07:28 PM
Further proof that this sort of poll is worthless...except as potential propaganda for the "other" side.
So, yeah, I voted. At least once.
May 11, 2003, 07:40 PM
I went ahead and gave it a single "yes" vote, not because I in any way support the AWB, but because of the "let's vote 30 times each" attitute evident here.
c'mon guys, just vote once. skewing polls is bad, no matter who's doing the skewing.
May 11, 2003, 08:56 PM
This poll is kind of pointless as anything less than 80% in favor of ban extension will never see the light of day unless it is spun to be a poll which was ruined by the evil NRA.
The Editorial Page editor for the AJC is Cynthia Tucker. I've never met Chairman Mao nor Stalin, but suspect Cynthia's politics are to the left of both of them. In the new world order I envision her ideal place will be as the commandant of a reeducation camp for conservatives to keep them busy until more soylent green is needed.
May 11, 2003, 10:16 PM
Never a smart thing to do to cook the books.
Just gives them more ammunition.
Let the other side resort to petty chicanery to win.
We shouldn't have to.
May 12, 2003, 11:37 AM
Perhaps next time they'll take the time to protect their polling from such conduct. Until then, it's guerilla politics! I'ma lowcrawl up on the next gun poll I see and take it out with mah Kabar.
May 12, 2003, 01:05 PM
Perhaps next time they'll take the time to protect their polling from such conduct. Until then, it's guerilla politics!
I have to agree with that. Online polls are nothing but an exercise in psy-ops anyway. It's a chance to try to demoralize the opposition. I applaud people who stand on principle on the matter, but frankly if anybody looking at such poll results is naive enough to believe that there is some sort of fair-play at work on either side of these polls, I'm sorry for their gullibility. It's a psychological operation for both sides, pure and simple, and says vastly more about the commitment of one side or the other than it does about any meaningful viewpoints on either side.
May 12, 2003, 01:37 PM
Remember to vote in this poll, just as Emperor DICK Daley the First of Chikago, ILL said back in the 60's.....
"Vote Early...Vote Often"
May 12, 2003, 06:52 PM
It's still open... heck! Keep nukin' it!!
May 12, 2003, 07:09 PM
This survey is not a scientific sampling and does not reflect the opinion of the general public, but only of those who choose to participate.
Was this little gem underneath the questions in the beginning of the poll? :rolleyes:
May 12, 2003, 07:22 PM
After I humbly submitted my, um....one....vote...it stands at 96% to 4%.
May 12, 2003, 08:25 PM
22,000 + N
May 12, 2003, 10:11 PM
96% NO 4% yes
May 12, 2003, 10:46 PM
www.vote.com also has an AWB poll going. That site has a mechanism in place to resist skewing by way of allowing only one vote per e-mail address.
May 13, 2003, 12:16 AM
May 13, 2003, 12:18 AM
I can't believe that left that poll up with those lopsided results. :rolleyes:
May 13, 2003, 12:29 AM
If you enjoyed reading about "AW Ban Poll - We are losing badly" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!