[Kitschy]

I believe that there are more liberals here on the MacNN boards than conservatives. I came up with a way to operationalize this hypothesis.

I did a search in the MacNN Lounge with the words "hate bush" and another search for "hate kerry". "hate kerry" had 54 hits. "hate bush" had 467 hits.

Further searches revealed "hate john kerry" had 14 hits. "hate george bush" had 72 hits.

Discuss.

[PacHead]

Not surprising at all. Kneejerk liberals are all over the net.

I also notice how more "political" topics are started in the lounge by certain people (usually anti-Bush) who think they are above the rules, or that the rules don't apply to them.

These are probably the same sort of people that will protest by laying down in the middle of the street or blocking entry ways or other ingenious techniques.

[constrictor]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
I believe that there are more liberals here on the MacNN boards than conservatives. I came up with a way to operationalize this hypothesis.

I did a search in the MacNN Lounge with the words "hate bush" and another search for "hate kerry". "hate kerry" had 54 hits. "hate bush" had 467 hits.

Further searches revealed "hate john kerry" had 14 hits. "hate george bush" had 72 hits.

Discuss.

Nice idea, but gone about in the wrong way. If you read the majority of those hits, you'll see that the knee-jerks come from the supposed conservatives on the board who seem to continually ask "why do you hate Bush", or say "these Bush haters", or "their whole platform is to hate Bush." The fraction of those 467 posts that include "liberals" saying "I hate Bush" is very small compared to the spin.

[MindFad]

I didn't mean to post here. My post got sucked into the spin.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally posted by constrictor:
Nice idea, but gone about in the wrong way. If you read the majority of those hits, you'll see that the knee-jerks come from the supposed conservatives on the board who seem to continually ask "why do you hate Bush", or say "these Bush haters", or "their whole platform is to hate Bush." The fraction of those 467 posts that include "liberals" saying "I hate Bush" is very small compared to the spin.

lol. um, ok.

The truth is obvious - even to the casual observer.

[juanvaldes]

lets apply some logic to your hypothesis (sacrilege I know!)

You claim more hits for "hate x" over the other determines the political leanings of the forum.

Bush has been the president for almost four years now, and been in the running for 4.5 (rough).

Kerry has been in the limelight for the duration of the campaign (for the most part, I know I never heard of him before)

So Bush has a rough four year head start of being "hated".

Conclusion. Your hypothesis is flawed.

[Zimphire]

Yeah, I say we do a poll of posts SINCE Kerry started running.

I am betting it's not too far off.

I think we know who the REAL Hatriots are.

[Atomic Rooster]

Where the hell is Laura? Is she hiking till the end of November?

[MindFad]

Originally posted by Atomic Rooster:
Where the hell is Laura? Is she hiking till the end of November?

Just be happy she's hiking and not driving. (lawl)

[Saad]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Not surprising at all. Kneejerk liberals are all over the net.

I also notice how more "political" topics are started in the lounge by certain people (usually anti-Bush) who think they are above the rules, or that the rules don't apply to them.

These are probably the same sort of people that will protest by laying down in the middle of the street or blocking entry ways or other ingenious techniques.

Can you cite specific examples? I thought that those like tokenconservative and dcolton probably start more beginning with personal attacks than our more liberal members, like Logic and Taliesin.

[Spliffdaddy]

lol

careful what you ask for.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
I did a search in the MacNN Lounge with the words "hate bush" and another search for "hate kerry". "hate kerry" had 54 hits. "hate bush" had 467 hits.

That's interesting. I wonder if it proves that people hate Bush, or that people accuse others of hating Bush. I'll make you a bet: that the phrase "hate Bush" was more often used in an accusatory way, such as "you hate Bush," than a declaration, like "I hate Bush."

PS: Can you do a search on a connected phrase like "hate Bush," or does it just search for those two words anywhere in the thread?

[phoenixboy70]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
I believe that there are more liberals here on the MacNN boards than conservatives.

so? there've been many polls done in the lounge that show different.

i don't hate bush, i just throughly am against what he stands for.

and again, the world isn't divided into "liburals" and "conservatives". the universe isn't a two party system.

[zigzag]

Maybe there are more liberals than conservatives, maybe not, but Constructor is correct that a search for "hate Bush" is meaningless.

I challenge you to find more than a few posts in which someone says "I hate Bush." I would bet that there might be a few, but only a few. It's far more often the case that liberals are reflexively accused by conservatives of hating Bush. The Michael Moore threads and Zimphire's posts probably account for half of those results. I was once accused of being a "Bush-basher" for criticizing Bush's Iraq strategy, as if mere criticism were not allowed, even when it represents the views of prominent conservatives. Then there's the fact that Kerry's only been in the picture for 6 months. Not even his most ardent detractors are likely to say "I hate Kerry."

I guess a better question might be: Who cares? I see no shortage of conservative opinion around here. In fact, in light of the urban liberal Mac-user stereotype, I'm often surprised at the diversity of people around here - liberal, conservative, Christian, Moslem, rural, urban, etc.

[zigzag]

dp

[Earth Mk. II]

Originally posted by BRussell:
PS: Can you do a search on a connected phrase like "hate Bush," or does it just search for those two words anywhere in the thread?

No, you can't do a search on a phrase with the forum search. There is only a simple boolean search.

For example, a search for "hate bush" (with or without quotes or boolean operators) includes the thread, National sales tax? in the results, but the phrase "hate bush" never occurs in the thread at all. In fact, the closest the word "hate" gets to "bush" is 3 words, in this post by "el chupacabra," quoted below:

I have a feeling it will including new service taxes (and I hate service taxes). Bush has added many service taxes and I can see having to pay more taxes to buy stock.

The method is technically invalid.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Not surprising at all. Kneejerk liberals are all over the net.

I also notice how more "political" topics are started in the lounge by certain people (usually anti-Bush) who think they are above the rules, or that the rules don't apply to them.

These are probably the same sort of people that will protest by laying down in the middle of the street or blocking entry ways or other ingenious techniques.

Of course, there is no such thing as a "kneejerk" conservative, is there?

Stop watching Fox and learn something about the world you've been in for the few years you've been around.

[Wiskedjak]

I hate the fact that people will resort to almost any length to prove that MacNN is either biased towards George Bush or toward John Kerry.

(I wonder how the above sentence will affect the statistical accuracy of your "poll"?)

[CreepingDeth]

This is a big Red board. Should we just have, like, an official poll with the candidates, the third parties, etc?
Republican
Democrat
Green
Libertarian
Constitution
I think that's it. Should we just have an official poll? But there's obviously an easy way to tilt the results…

[Dale Sorel]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Not surprising at all. Kneejerk liberals are all over the net.

Yep

[LoganCharles]

We're all nutters.

[Kitschy]

Originally posted by juanvaldes:
lets apply some logic to your hypothesis (sacrilege I know!)

You claim more hits for "hate x" over the other determines the political leanings of the forum.

Bush has been the president for almost four years now, and been in the running for 4.5 (rough).

Kerry has been in the limelight for the duration of the campaign (for the most part, I know I never heard of him before)

So Bush has a rough four year head start of being "hated".

Conclusion. Your hypothesis is flawed.

I figured someone might say that. So, I did another search: "hate clinton." After all, Clinton had 8 wonderous years of presidency. He is also still very involved in politics. The response? 150 occurences of "hate clinton." Still much less than Bush.

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
I figured someone might say that. So, I did another search: "hate clinton." After all, Clinton had 8 wonderous years of presidency. He is also still very involved in politics. The response? 150 occurences of "hate clinton." Still much less than Bush.

Doesn't seem like that's a very good comparison. Clinton was president from 1993-2001. Bush has been president from 2001-present. MacNN didn't even exist for most of Clinton's presidency. In fact, even the WWW itself didn't exist when Clinton took office. So that's not a fair comparison. There's been a lot of talk about Bush because he was the current president throughout most of the life of MacNN.

[constrictor]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
I figured someone might say that. So, I did another search: "hate clinton." After all, Clinton had 8 wonderous years of presidency. He is also still very involved in politics. The response? 150 occurences of "hate clinton." Still much less than Bush.

I figured you might say that. So I did another search: "feces bush." One hit.

***********SMACKDOWN*************

Boy, this forum is awesome.

[chris v]

How may times have you-all typed "hate bush" in this thread, Mr. Shrodinger's Cats?

Oops, there's "hate bush" again.

CV

[MacGorilla]

hate is sucha strong word...where's the love?

[mo]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
I believe that there are more liberals here on the MacNN boards than conservatives. I came up with a way to operationalize this hypothesis.

I did a search in the MacNN Lounge with the words "hate bush" and another search for "hate kerry". "hate kerry" had 54 hits. "hate bush" had 467 hits.

Further searches revealed "hate john kerry" had 14 hits. "hate george bush" had 72 hits.

Discuss.

This should give pause to those guys who have been arguing that the majority is always right in other threads.

[sanity assassin]

Maybe, just maybe, the sentiments towards Bush here are representative of the general consensus of the world.

I certainly know that in my city, most of us think Bush is a travesty of a human specimen. Come here and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who, a. even cares about the ****, or b. knows something about him and still thinks he's a ****.

Come on, the guy is a prick, sorry, but he doesn't deserve anything better than that kind of sentiment.

[CreepingDeth]

Thus the result is the **** about Kerry. But you guys get your panties in a knot when we attack Kerry for being a damn liar.
Should we have an official poll thread?

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by sanity assassin:
Maybe, just maybe, the sentiments towards Bush here are representative of the general consensus of the world.

I certainly know that in my city, most of us think Bush is a travesty of a human specimen. Come here and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who, a. even cares about the ****, or b. knows something about him and still thinks he's a ****.

Come on, the guy is a prick, sorry, but he doesn't deserve anything better than that kind of sentiment.

What did Bush rape your mother or something?

[voodoo]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
What did Bush rape your mother or something?

Bush raped his country.

I'd like to declare to eveyone that I do not hate Bush.

Ooops another "hate" and "Bush". A rather flawed research Kitchy. Sorry mate. There are probably about 50/50 libs vs cons on this board, much like in teh reality.

[CreepingDeth]

No, 30% of Americans call themselves conservatives. I think liberals are less than 25%.
And what the hell do you know? You don't live in America! How do you that one leader "raped" a country you don't live in? Everything is fine, thank you very much. We haven't been attacked and the economy is out of the hell it was in 3 years ago.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
No, 30% of Americans call themselves conservatives. I think liberals are less than 25%.
And what the hell do you know? You don't live in America! How do you that one leader "raped" a country you don't live in? Everything is fine, thank you very much. We haven't been attacked and the economy is out of the hell it was in 3 years ago.

I'm actually glad I don't live in U.S.A. - I enjoy having my personal freedoms untouched by the government.

I don't have to live in the U.S.A. to know what is going on - where did you get that notion. In fact it seems that most of the people who really DON'T know what's going on live in the U.S.A. (There are notable exceptions of course)

[CreepingDeth]

But since you hate America, you're going to hate it no matter who runs it. Raped is a strong word, especially since you have no idea how "free market" works, nor the threat of terrorism. If he was an ass like Carter, then I might say that, but still, I don't think andy President has the power to rape anything. See, in A-mer-i-ca, we have a system of checks and balances. That's how we got through Clinton. Checks and balances do not put all the power on the President, or any other branch for that matter. This system was started by the foun-ding fa-ther-s. And for a reason. So your conclusion on Bush is wrong.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
But since you hate America, you're going to hate it no matter who runs it. Raped is a strong word, especially since you have no idea how "free market" works, nor the threat of terrorism. If he was an ass like Carter, then I might say that, but still, I don't think andy President has the power to rape anything. See, in A-mer-i-ca, we have a system of checks and balances. That's how we got through Clinton. Checks and balances do not put all the power on the President, or any other branch for that matter. This system was started by the foun-ding fa-ther-s. And for a reason. So your conclusion on Bush is wrong.

You are projecting quite a lot.

I don't hate the U.S.A. and certainly not the continent of America. How can you hate a continent?

The rest of your post is just rant. Can't really comment on that.

[CreepingDeth]

United States of America

*Clap Clap Clap* Not funny.
Besides, I can assume that's you're very liberal and you see Bush as a neonazicon or whatever you Merxists call moderate.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
United States of America

*Clap Clap Clap* Not funny.
Besides, I can assume that's you're very liberal and you see Bush as a neonazicon or whatever you Merxists call moderate.

Mostly I see Bush as incompetent. You crack me up.

[CreepingDeth]

Incompetant? Oh that's right, he's the only retard to graduate from Yale and get a Harvard MBA.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Incompetant? Oh that's right, he's the only retard to graduate from Yale and get a Harvard MBA.

Pretty good for as you say a retard

[CreepingDeth]

Yeah, only Teddy to Tater-Tot addicted Retard can get graduate from Yale and get an MBA from Harvard.
He's not the best speaker but he's an intelligent man. No matter how much money you have, it won't get you through college. If it was true, don't you think someone would say something about it?

[Kitschy]

Originally posted by chris v:
How may times have you-all typed "hate bush" in this thread, Mr. Shrodinger's Cats?

Oops, there's "hate bush" again.

CV

Actually, this thread will only add one to the 467 "hate bush" threads since no matter how many times it is said in this thread, it is only counted as ONE thread.

I know it's nothing scientific. I just thought it was interesting at the very least. And since I sense that there are more libs here, it just confirmed it...to me. That's all.

Anways, it's just sad that any political thread here turns into a pitiful tit-for-tat kindergartenesque bicker-fest. I like logical discussions. Those seem to be few and far between around here.

[constrictor]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Incompetant? Oh that's right, he's the only retard to graduate from Yale and get a Harvard MBA.

I thought conservatives abhor education?

[CreepingDeth]

Who said that?
The evil closet monkey? Don't listen to him because he's lying. It's evil monkey propaganda.

[UNTeMac]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
Actually, this thread will only add one to the 467 "hate bush" threads since no matter how many times it is said in this thread, it is only counted as ONE thread.

I know it's nothing scientific. I just thought it was interesting at the very least. And since I sense that there are more libs here, it just confirmed it...to me. That's all.

Anways, it's just sad that any political thread here turns into a pitiful tit-for-tat kindergartenesque bicker-fest. I like logical discussions. Those seem to be few and far between around here.

If you want logical discussion, you shouldn't make illogical conclusions based on questionable data. Though I agree, there are only a few self-described conservatives on this board, your word search will prove very little either way. This whole thread sounds an awful lot like flamebait anyway.

(Oh yeah, another logical way to look at things is to stop thinking there are only two sides to the world...or the forums for that matter.)

[Millennium]

Unfortunately, that's not really a valid set of statistics.

You looked, for example, at the phrases "hate bush" or "hate kerry". Several phrases with very different meanings could fit these terms. My guess is that you were looking for phrases such as "I hate Bush". However, the phrase "Why do you hate Bush?" also fits, yet the speaker's own feelings are left uncertain. Then there are those who see "plenty of valid reasons to hate Bush" but do not. I myself have used that phrase multiple times, but I do not hate him; most of the time I use that phrase to indicate that I don't believe a particular reason to be valid or informed, while conceding that there are more than enough valid reasons for a person who hates Bush to justify his feelings adequately. As others have noted, that phrase can also be used in an accusatory fashion, such as "you hate Bush"; that statement may or may not actually be true, and it says little to nothing about the speaker's own feelings.

Moral of the story: Find yourself some better search terms. Statistics aren't very useful when applied to humans, and this kind of loaded sampling is the reason why.

[Earth Mk. II]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Unfortunately, that's not really a valid set of statistics.

You looked, for example, at the phrases "hate bush" or "hate kerry". Several phrases with very different meanings could fit these terms. My guess is that you were looking for phrases such as "I hate Bush". However, the phrase "Why do you hate Bush?" also fits, yet the speaker's own feelings are left uncertain. Then there are those who see "plenty of valid reasons to hate Bush" but do not. I myself have used that phrase multiple times, but I do not hate him; most of the time I use that phrase to indicate that I don't believe a particular reason to be valid or informed, while conceding that there are more than enough valid reasons for a person who hates Bush to justify his feelings adequately. As others have noted, that phrase can also be used in an accusatory fashion, such as "you hate Bush"; that statement may or may not actually be true, and it says little to nothing about the speaker's own feelings.

Moral of the story: Find yourself some better search terms. Statistics aren't very useful when applied to humans, and this kind of loaded sampling is the reason why.

That whole issue is moot. The fourm software doesn't search for whole phrases. Ever.

see my post above about a thread that matches those search terms, yet never contains that phrase "hate bush."

[edit]
And, for what it's worth, Google doesn't index the fourm pages, so a Google search turns up absolutely nothing.

[BRussell]

I did a google search (whole internet, not just MacNN) on "I hate Bush" in quotes and got 14,800 hits; "I hate Kerry" got 617 hits.

For "hate Bush" I got 54,600 hits, but for "hate Kerry" I got 2,710 hits.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by BRussell:
I did a google search (whole internet, not just MacNN) on "I hate Bush" in quotes and got 14,800 hits; "I hate Kerry" got 617 hits.

For "hate Bush" I got 54,600 hits, but for "hate Kerry" I got 2,710 hits.

Wow I think the NSA or someone wants to have a word with you

Being able to search the whole internet is sort of a holy grail to many agencies and institutions and yet you sound so modest about it.

E42295 Sec op def 88ins ******
**#$rea(

Internal error has occurred, please turn off the internet.


And go to sleep people. This forum is hazardous to the Bush administration your friend. This is of course still voodoo writing. Ha ha. Not like the NSA just kidnapped him and is holding him in an undisclosed location for an indeterminate time for Anti-American activities. So there.

It will be considered unpatriotic to visit this website from here on!: http://www.evilgopbastards.com/

Bush is your friend, vote Bush and he is not a chimp!