Take Our Poll (Ended)
January 25th, 2011
By B.J. Reyes
By B.J. Reyes
UPDATE: Polling has ended. Thanks to everyone who participated and who left comments. Here are the results of the poll:
Remember, the results are unscientific. The only restriction that was placed on voting was a limit of one vote per day.
>>> <<<
In what we hope will become a semi-regular feature (maybe weekly, depending on the response) we are posting a poll question for the week. Feel free to vote and send the link along for others.
This week’s poll is based on the governor’s State of the State speech.
Posted in In Politics | 16 Comments »
Political Radar
January 25th, 2011 at 2:02 am
I should add that the results of this poll are purely UNSCIENTIFIC!
January 25th, 2011 at 10:25 am
It’s OK. We don’ need no stinking science for this poll, heh. We need science in our schools, though.
You know, I voted for this gov’nor. He’s going after me sodas?!?! Ehy, tax the DRINKING WATER at restaurants, by gum. Whenever I go out eat with friends (which is often), I’m the only one ordering a soft drink! I look at the adjacent tables and what do I see? Patrons drinking water, water, water. Time to tax these beverage freeloaders. And when they’re not drinking free water, they’re buying bottled water [!]. Tax THEM for Pete’s sake.
Can I state the obvious? If the gov’nor has already (or shortly plan to) raid the disaster/tsunami fund and tourism fund(s)n then, WHY should we trust his Administration with doing up other NEW megamillions public funds. Stop digging already — taxpayers are way past a hole in their pockets when they HAVE no more pockets. YOU know?!
So, then, speaking of megamillions, gonna have to do lottery if Abercrombie intends on funding all of his aims and such. I mean, taxpayers gonna de-hibernate and assume their van cam alter ego if they tax us some mores instead! Time to lay off state workers really, honestly not needed. Sorry. Hard times, then slash your own camp’s jobs before anyone else’s, union or not.
I’ll support the gov’ even more if he is akamai about doing things. Yep, be there. Aloha.
January 25th, 2011 at 10:51 am
I worry that an unintended consequence of your poll will be to bring in a larger crowd of eyeballs to this blog. Online polls are notorious for creating a competition between “two sides” on an issue, each trying to make sure there side wins. SO they call upon their friends to help them “freep” the poll.
So how can that be “bad”? Of course you want more eyeballs rolling across your pages. I would expect the quality of the discussion here to degenerate to that of the Disqus “discussions” which follow the news articles.
I DO wish you success. I am just not sure of the best way to measure that success.
Good luck.
(Oh, and I actually HATE online “polls.” Not only are they “UNSCIENTIFIC,” as BJ says, they tend to debase people’s understanding of the value of a true poll, making them ALL seem to be arbitrary and unworthy. I actually value good polls. I love it when we get access to the actual questions, get to see the demographic breakdown, have a chance to look for bias in the language, etc).
So it goes….
January 25th, 2011 at 11:39 am
Thanks for the feedback. This blog is still evolving, so we’ll see how it goes.
January 25th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
Yes. Kolea is right. The last thing we need is a larger crowd of eyeballs. This is inside info and we must keep it to ourselves.
January 25th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
Couldn’t agree more with Kolea.
While posters on this blog don’t lack for strong opinions, sometimes not entirley pleasantly expressed (including by myself), it attracts people who are generally thoughtful and who have knowledge, perpsective, and even some wisdom, not the knee-jerk, binary, black and white, put-keyboard-in-motion-before-placing brain-in-gear, vituperative crowd that inhabits the comments section following articles in the main part of the “paper.”
To the extent that this or other polls is linked or highlighted on the main page or in those articles, that crowd may migrate here with all of its baggage, leaving the rest of us to sort thru the dreck to find some kernel of a rational discussion.
January 25th, 2011 at 1:59 pm
I would say polls are Religious.
It is to one’s belief that by
voting a miracle will happen.
January 25th, 2011 at 9:21 pm
Agree with Kolea about the value of unscientific polls and the “junk” such an activity will attract to these pages. I agree that it’s helpful to have place for a small number of focused, well-informed readers to participate in these discussions. Wouldn’t go so far as Walking Vaughn as to say this is “inside” info and certainly disagree that it needs to be kept “to ourselves”. I think the point is to keep the discussion balanced, respectful and well-informed – not limited.
As for Chicken Grease’s concern about taxing soda, have you seen the studies linking sugar in soda to childhood obesity and how the obesity epidemic is raising the costs of health care? It’s the largest source of sugar in the diets of obese children – number 1. The government (i.e. we tax payers) have a STRONG interest in limiting soda consumption because the manufacturers can’t seem to limit the sugar in it themselves. It’s almost as bad as nicotine. People become habituated and it’s becoming very expensive for all of us. It’s heresy, I know, but I hope the feds end sugar subsidies too, for the same reason.
January 26th, 2011 at 12:05 am
Yep. Seen it ad nauseum. So tax kids when they buy soda, don’t tax my soda, bwaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Look. They start at soda, they gonna end up taxing celery. And then more of our salary. Do YOU see that?
January 26th, 2011 at 12:47 am
I also think online opinion polls are mostly junk. 5* for the blog, though!
January 26th, 2011 at 1:20 am
Just as they should end the subsidized price of gasoline, mswong. Alternative energy won’t attract large scale investment until it can compete price-wisae with fossil fulels. Also, to be even more heretical, I think health insurance should be priced to reflect consumer behaviopr — including said sugary drinks. Sure, lots of stuff is genetic and no one should have to pay for that but conditions created or aggravated by smoking, drinkling, drugs, overeating, etc.? I don’t wnat to pay for the effect of someone else’s vices. They wanna kill thgemsleves, it’s not my place to say. Should I have to pay for the consequences? Fuhgeddaboudit!!!
January 26th, 2011 at 2:13 am
Yes. We must keep the dirty peasants away. We are the elite.
January 26th, 2011 at 8:35 pm
Derrick and BJ offer up high quality reports on what is going on in local politics. They avoid the sensationalist and keep their opinion to a minimum.
Contrast this with any of the other local blogs. No one else is trying to accomplish the same thing.
To start running online polls in an effort to attract more hits, would degrade the quality of the product they offer. And, because such online polls DO stimulate competition, which results in people emailing their friends to “help” freep the poll, it would attract people who may be partisans, but who are only here to help “their side” win.
If that happens, it will debase the quality of the discussion on here.
If Walking Vaughn cannot distinguish between thoughtful debate and the “talk radio” style sniping which occurs on the Disqus discussions atached to regular news articles and editorials, he might not feel the sense of loss many of us would. IF my fears were to come to pass.
The “ekitist” charge is very cheap. I cannot guess what WV reads in his spare time. I prefer to read well-researched and well-reasoned things. Apparently, that is elitist and he thinks one should treat all sources as “equally” valid. I do not know what types of food he eats. maybe MacDonalds is just fine for WV. As an “elitist” who cares about my health, I rarely wat there. What a snbob I am. Can I distinguish between cheap wine and a decent $10 bottle, or is that snobby, too.
Are all television shows equally worht watching? Why do people bother going to University and stuf=dying, if all ideas have equal merit?
Lordy, I am a snob! I guess it dates me. I believe in equal opportunity to attain excellence, but that it requires setting some standards in order to accomplish. I think poor kids from disadvantaged backgrounds, without regard to race, religion, class, gender or sexual orientation should have an equal opportunity to achieve intellectual excellence.
And I think people who watch Fox News or listen to Clear Channel talk radio are idiots at risk of getting even stupider.
January 26th, 2011 at 8:37 pm
And I think people should proofread their text before hitting the “submit comment” button!
January 27th, 2011 at 7:56 am
I think Kolea’s point is that there is a difference in the quality of posts in blogs like this and in the regular paper’s articles. I agree.
Now whether this blog should mirror the regular paper’s responses is not all that important, I suppose. But it will be harder to separate the wheat due to the increased amount of chaff.
Que sera sera.
January 27th, 2011 at 1:47 pm
I guess I also should’ve mentioned that for this blog entry, polling will end tonight at 5 p.m.
Still deciding on the future of this type of interaction for our blog, so thanks, again, for the comments.