Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is what it is....it's not untruthful, the numbers are what they are...it's how they used them that doesn't mean much to me but, that's journalism these days. If you take time to read ALL of it, you'll understand what the prediction is being based on but, most people won't do that, they'll just start making assumptions from a quick glance at the map/chart. They make it confusing enough to where people just don't want to be bothered with researching where all the data came from and how it was used to make the map/chart. That's what the journalist is suppose to do in the first place...and too many still assume that they're doing their job correctly.
The stories originate from a source that has an agenda to begin with (either left or right), they post it some where on the Internet and then before you know it, it's getting copied and reported by the media all over the world (on the Internet, television, radio and in print).
Having to follow a trail to research where it originated from so you can try and find the truth (the whole story), is ridiculous....and unless you happened to have read it while you were on the Internet, you can't even do that (like if you were watching TV or listening to the radio). As it passes from one source to another some being more extreme than others, the story starts getting slightly edited (not researched any better, just edited.....they just start omitting details that don't suit their agenda)....so then the trail starts to split off into several branches because of editing (slightly different versions).
Going on the Internet and copying something from some blog some where, is not what journalism is suppose to be. Reporting the story first seems to be all that matters now, accuracy is unimportant. They don't retract anything any more...and even worse with the Internet, the inaccuracies never go away...they resurface every time a writer doesn't fact check.
That is hilarious. Now if New Gingrich wins the GOP nod, you can change 3/4 of those red states to blue. No one with more than half a mind would want that guy as president.
Even Romney is no shoe in to unseat the current Commander And Chief. What a bunch of total and complete losers the GOP are considering. Had it not been for the idiot woman from Alaska, we would all be saying President McCain right now. I feel horrible for McCain because that guy should have been president. Would have been had he picked almost anyother person as a running mate.
If the religious right would not be so stupid in worry about Romney because he's a Mormon, my GOP party would definitely upset the current pres.
Polling information from a year ago has little relevance on an election that will take place in 9 months. If you want to use your logic, polling information that was 21 months before the 08 election would have predicted that Obama would not have won. Most Americans probably didn't even know who Obama was 21 months before the 08 election. A few months ago Cain was leading in the polls.
Actually this data is not "from a year ago." It is from Jan 2011 to Dec 2011, so some of it is a year ago, and some a month ago. I don't find any problem with the timing--it seems pretty reasonable to use 2011 data to look at what's going to happen in 2012. After all, lacking a time machine, we don't have a way to get all the 2012 data.
I guess it is beat-up-on-dixiegirl day. Have at it; I suspect she is more than tough enough to handle you guys.
It's even more outrageous when you consider the data used for the prediction was based on 2011 polls.
Tell that to Gallup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skinny Puppy
No, it's not my opinion, it's a fact. The author works for a very conservative organization and is using data that is a year old to predict an election that will take place in 9 months. .
.
So that's your defense for posting an inaccurate article, that other people do the same thing? Sounds like 5th grade reasoning to me.
GALLUP is a conservative organization? Let me guess...you didn't actually look at the source, which will SHOCK you if you do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Lexus
The desperation of the clueless right never ceases to amaze me.
I don't know, GALLUP is pretty good with the numbers, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skinny Puppy
It also appears as though you didn't read it.
Have you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbobobbo
Including the Washington Examiner. Believe me, they throw their crap paper on my driveway every morning.
But..it's NOT from the WE, it's from GALLUP and these numbers have the WH in a panic tonight.
The Republicans will NOT carry Pennsylvania and Oregon. No matter who wins, it's going to be close. Nobody will get a landslide this year.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
