Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Judged:

1

1

1

Kenose wrote:

<quoted text>
Once again, the infamous abortroll, Lil, is unable to express what she is really trying to say. There is no rational debate with the closed minded.

Judged:

1

1

1

lil Lily wrote:

<quoted text>
Paranoid? I was called "Abortroll" before the mocking "my deepest apologies". lol I'm not paranoid, you're just stuupid.

Judged:

1

1

1

lil Lily wrote:

<quoted text>
I do understand how polls work, and I understand that polls are not reliable estimations, no matter which side is being polled or what the polls are about. Polls are subjective, and people can claim to be whatever they want to claim, and be dishonest about it. Just as people here can claim to be PL when they're really PC.
You can't make a claim that 64% of the population wants RvW upheld, because there's NO WAY you can prove that. You failed to prove it, even using your silly link.
To try to claim ONE poll from ONE source as being the voice of "the population", was ridiculous on your part. It was just the voice of those 2,605 who answered that one.

Judged:

1

1

1

Bitner wrote:

<quoted text>
No, you're right.
But you know me....stubborn ;-D

Judged:

3

2

2

lil Lily wrote:

<quoted text>
"I am not clear on what you're asking."
I don't care what you're clear on, Katie. This isn't about a claim you made, but one Bitner made. "64% of the population wants RvW upheld".
This is about HOW MANY people answered the poll which Bitner linked that I could see, from Quinnipiac University, which had 64% agreeing with RvW. That's my question about the 64% she claimed.
Since you can't even argue your own claims with any sense or intelligence, what makes you think your opinion about what I'm asking Bitner is of any interest to me?

Judged:

2

2

1

Bitner wrote:

<quoted text>
That's how polls work, Imbecile. They select a random sampling of the population, ask them a question, and then extrapolate to the whole of the population.

Judged:

2

2

2

lil Lily wrote:

If there were more polls with that particular question about RvW on your link that you quoted the 64% from, Bitner, and the consensus of the people answering on the combined polls was; the majority of those polled wanted RvW upheld, was 64%, then you'd have proven your claim.
From what I saw on the link you got your 64% from, it was ONE POLL from ONE source, that gave you the 64%. 64% of 2,605 people answering that one poll. Estimating what "the population" thinks, with ONE poll from ONE source isn't what that 64% was about. You can't estimate what "the population's" views are, by ONE question, on only ONE poll, from only ONE source.
To suggest it was would be what's stupid.

Judged:

3

2

1

Kenose wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, I believe abortroll is a perfect name for you. Go whine on the internet some more.

Judged:

2

1

1

Bitner wrote:

<quoted text>
No, you're right.
But you know me....stubborn ;-D

Judged:

1

1

1

LadiLulu wrote:

<quoted text>
Stubborn, infinitely patient, a veritable WALL!
LOLOL!

Judged:

3

2

1

elise in burque wrote:

<quoted text>That poll was sampling registered voters, which is a huge population. I wonder if some people really believe that all registered voters must be surveyed for this type of poll. Lol.

Judged:

3

1

1

lil Lily wrote:

Mind bogglingly STUPID PCers here, and I've had my fill for the day. I have places to go and people to see and since Bitner didn't prove her claim of "64% of the population wants RvW upheld", that particular discussion has concluded.
The argumments from you boneheads will probably continue, but it's typical of what you do here. You're proven wrong, and in the face of being proven wrong you deny it and claim you're right.
That's the nature of your insanity.

Judged:

2

1

1

lil Lily wrote:

<quoted text>
Where do you see me asking HER anything except, "Since you can't even argue your own claims with any sense or intelligence, what makes you think your opinion about what I'm asking Bitner is of any interest to me?", or asking HER to explain YOUR post?
~"I don't care what you're clear on, Katie. This isn't about a claim you made, but one Bitner made. "64% of the population wants RvW upheld".
This is about HOW MANY people answered the poll which Bitner linked that I could see, from Quinnipiac University, which had 64% agreeing with RvW. That's my question about the 64% she claimed.
Since you can't even argue your own claims with any sense or intelligence, what makes you think your opinion about what I'm asking Bitner is of any interest to me?"~

Judged:

2

1

1

lil Lily wrote:

Mind bogglingly STUPID PCers here, and I've had my fill for the day. I have places to go and people to see and since Bitner didn't prove her claim of "64% of the population wants RvW upheld", that particular discussion has concluded.
The argumments from you boneheads will probably continue, but it's typical of what you do here. You're proven wrong, and in the face of being proven wrong you deny it and claim you're right.
That's the nature of your insanity.

Judged:

2

2

2

Lady_Venus wrote:

<quoted text>
Sweetheart, lets talk about the meaning of insanity and how this fits perfectly with the characteristics you display on this thread daily shall we. You have spent the entire day arguing with yourself about semantics. You have not won this argument, in fact, I wouldn’t even chalk it up to a failed attempt, for you put such little effort into it. Again, this also sums up what is “typical of what you do here” day in and day out.
Perhaps if you indeed had places to go and people to see you’d lose that chip on your shoulder, a most unbecoming attribute, not very lady like dear, though nothing much about you is.
Get your knickers out of a twist dear, have a nice cup of tea, relax, collect your thoughts before you subject us to more of your endless nonsense.

Judged:

1

1

1

Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:

<quoted text>That last was cruel and uncharitable - telling her to collect her thoughts, is like putting a mouse in a round room, and telling it to pee in a corner........
:)

Judged:

1

1

1

Bitner wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh, I proved it. Your denials are fooling no one.