Quote:
Originally Posted by duane1
I think the poll is slanted drastically to the left just due to the bias in the possible responses. You are trying to win this poll, not get a reasoned response.
If you want to get true numbers about his credibility we need a wide range of responses and alternatives rather than the liberal insult of "he's too important".
Open and honest debate is the only way to work through any issues.
|
LoL, I made the pole this way after thinking what would Scott Walker do?
I also modeled it (albeit more blatantly) after the poles I have received for the last 2 years from different sources both political, research, fox and others including my workplace hiding behind an so-called anonymous poll agency. These polls ALWAYS have obvious agendas and are obviously trying to force specific answers. I have never had a poll that was truly neutral, they always try to force specific stances, and unless I placed 100 answers in the poll it is unlikely I would cover you anyway (in this case I didn't care, figured your statements in the forum would cover OTHER).
Pretending I posted the poll as it is, as something other than irritation with the lack of proper representation at the state and federal levels is foolish. And arguing with the poll answers is stupid, argue why Walker should or should not place the bill forth as stated, not why you don't like my poll (which has an obvious, apparent reason that is unnecessary to argue).
The simple truth is the bill in question is Biased, it was made by a man who was elected by outside funding and a man who stated
the bill is for the specific purpose of breaking unions (those are his words). A man who is bought and paid for and cares little for anyone in the state besides those who directly paid for his election.
Anything anyone says here is not going to convince people one way or the other on Scott Walker. Nor would anything I say have that effect either.
But I should not need to argue the point (or anyone else)...
In fact his intents and purposes are stated, known and not negotiable (his words not mine) I don't see why there would be any argument about his purposes when he already said why.
I cannot support someone who wants to build a straw man to throw in other terrible legislation that has nothing to do with the main stated intent of the bill. The bill is actually very much like Thymeclocks wifebeater question, Name a law "Food for orphans" that includes legislation to dump sewage in the orphans wellwater.
If he wants to decrease the pay and benefits of government workers to help with an artificially created budget crisis that would be fine by me.
The trouble is this bill has little to do with that, its a pointed political attack against a specific group coupled with unrelated legislation that will take years to fully understand, encapsulating a variety of non-budget issues that will negatively effect most everyone.
If Walker wants me or anyone here to trust him as working for the common good he would move for the bill to be straightforward without the clutter and BS and it would apply to ALL government workers including himself and the legislature. (which it DOES NOT DO AT ALL) Telling me that because of a shade of gray that one worker is different than another or that he isn't in a union means absolutely nothing. Anyone who gets a government pension and government pay should take the same cuts.
He also would have to be willing to work with the other side, which has not happened and per him will never happen, he is going it alone.
The simple fact is he is doing exactly what he said he would do, overwhelmingly his tactics are not support by pollsters of the Wisconsin public, including many who elected him because they apparently didn't understand what he really stood for.
I do FULLY believe government workers should not be overpaid and their wages should follow the local average (aka mode) of wages in the private sector with caps. Sadly this bill has nothing to do with implementing that either. All the time Milwaukee has several $Million Plus government employees, they seem to get little attention. Nice
And If I do post a poll on a whim as an afterthought, do to frustration with something I will make sure I include the Wife beating portion so thymeclock is happy.
And logically to that question I would have to answer No. I cannot logically stop what never started. It would be like turning my car off when the motor wasn't running.