Why don't you answer my question?
An intelligent person would be able to recognize that any question that asks about news reports that have a positive or negative aspect is a leading question. Are you an intelligent person?
Are you not answering it because you don't want to admit you aren't intelligent based on the question?
The reason I'm IGNORING your question because it's pointless and has nothing to do with the topic.
Plus, it's a weak, lame attempt to draw a false parallel between the pollster's question and your own bogus comparison.
The only reason you keep asking it is to deflect attention away from Disney and change the subject from the way they create content to expose children to sexual ideas.
That is precisely why it is a loaded question. It implies that Disney is exposing children to sexual ideas and then asks if the person supports exposing children to sexual ideas. It is skewing the response by implying that if you support Disney you support exposing children to sexual ideas.
No, it doesn't. It asks if news reports about such a thing would negatively or positively affect their future decisions to patronize Disney.
If it were the kind of loaded or leading question you're trying to mischaracterize it as, it would be worded more like....
"Disney exposes children to sexual ideas. Does that make you any more or any less likely to do business with Disney in the future."
You can try to twist and squirm and deflect all you want, and you can try to insult me by attempting to imply that I am somehow intellectually inferior until your face turns blue. But the more you try to push this sham defense of Disney, the more obvious it becomes that you're just trying to peddle bullshit.
This isn't about Disney. It's about how pollsters questions that are loaded questions are not valid polling questions and result in skewed results.
No, once again, this is about a survey which asked respondents about how news reports of Disney exposing children to sexual ideas would affect their decision to patronize Disney in the future.
YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE IT ABOUT THE POLLSTER BY CHANGING THE SUBJECT.
I refuse to let you get away with it.
My standard is the same for all loaded questions. I am not covering for Disney. I am also not covering for pollsters that use loaded questions.
You have not come anywhere near proving that it was, as you claim, a loaded question.
You have not provided one iota of evidence or any statistical calculations about to what percentage the results were supposedly skewed or invalidated by the way the question was posed.
All you've supplied is your own personal assessment of the question.
Either supply some unbiased, outside data that strongly supports your argument, or continue wasting both our time by making your flimsy claims based on your unqualified opinion.
Goodness gracious, you aren't asking an unbiased poll question. That is a loaded question since it implies something before asking for the response. Pollsters should be asking questions and not giving information to form opinions. For your question, what is the reasonable way a person that is aware of Trump taking documents but believes he declassified them supposed to answer? There is no valid way since they would believe the first half of the question is a lie. The correct way would be to first ask if they have heard news reports. Then ask them what they have heard as a multiple choice and then finally to ask if what they have heard makes them more or less likely to support him.
People who are intelligent can recognize when poll questions are actually loaded questions. Are you intelligent?
You keep avoiding that loaded question. It's almost like you can recognize a loaded question but then you say you can't recognize a loaded question.
Once again, you cannot or will not grasp the idea that the question was concerned with what the effects of seeing/hearing/reading news reports about a given issue would be on the respondents' loyalty to a particular brand (Disney/Trump).
You're too mired in denial of the possibility that Disney's gay agenda is costing them business and losing them customers, to see the actual point of the question.
And to reiterate, I'm ignoring your question because it's irrelevant, pointless and not germane to the issue at hand.
Awwww, you seem upset that I eviscerated your hopelessly lame analogy. I have an idea for you. Come up with something better.
While you're at it, how about you link to a news report that establishes that Disney is sexualizing children.
I'll wait.
Awwwww, how cute.
Little Miss Conkedcart is playing the age old losers game of claiming false victory.
You couldn't eviscerate a dead fish, Hoodieman.
You want a news report that establishes that Disney is sexualizing children?
No problem. They're everywhere!!!!
In the following article, the NY Post discusses the video further down.
https://nypost.com/2022/03/30/disney-is-boasting-about-pushing-gender-theory-to-kids/
The following video is just a few clips from a much longer, company-wide virtual video meeting that was obtained by a reporter who made it public.
From around 1:20 on, they are actually BRAGGING about filling up their stories with "queer" content. The black woman excitedly waves her hands around as she describes how in every opportunity, she's "adding queerness" everywhere she could. Next, the obese, bearded fairy talks about how nuance requires them to go into the queer characters' "whole self", which I suppose means depicting them in romantic or possibly even sexually suggestive situations.
Anyway, if you're so dedicated to being such an extremist progressive nitwit that you'll go along with exposing small children to this queer crap, then there's nothing else to say to you as you've already gone so far off the deep end, common sense and decency will have no effect on you anyway.
