Arzel, please do not misrepresent the situation; especially on my talk page, where you know your misstatements will be quickly corrected. Given the possibility that you have misread or are confusing one edit summary with another, I will copy my edit summary here just so we can be sure we're on the same page: 
 ::(restored content deleted without explanation) 
 As you can see, that is not an uncivil edit summary.  If you'll look a little more carefully at the edit previous to mine, you'll see that an editor had deleted content without giving an explanation for the content removal, and without participating in the existing talk page discussion  so my edit summary was not only civil, but accurate. As for your suggestion that I should "engage in talk"; please note that I have already been discussing this very issue on the talk page, which leads me to believe you are probably confusing me with another editor. 

 With regard to the ongoing discussion about your proposal to remove certain the polling data, you still have not made a case for its removal.  Your initial objection that the poll was only of the Seattle area has been shown to be inaccurate.  According to the news link provided by you, "Similar to nationwide numbers, about 20 percent of registered voters in Washington state identify themselves as strong supporters of the Tea Party movement. University of Washington Professor and pollster Matt Barreto decided to delve into the social and political opinions of that 20 percent." The poll sample was of 1700 folks from Washington State, and the specific findings were based on results from strong supporters of the Tea Party movement, not some special "fringe" group of TPers that don't represent the "real" TPers. 

 Finally, in your haste to revert, you apparently overlooked and wiped away other edits that included reference formatting, etc.  Please use a little more care.  Regards,