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.
You must be the only person left in a America who is stilling getting a live person asking political polling questions instead of the auto-system where you just push buttons to answer their pre-recorded questions.
Not to mention the fact that I have never, ever, ever gotten a phone call from anyone who said they didn't want to talk to me, but to the "Democrat" in the family. That would be immediate grounds to terminate any conversation. They get to talk to the person who answers the phone . . period.
Other than the robo-calls, the folks who call most often are volunteers working on campaigns. There is no reason to "outsource" any of those calls, since candidates aren't paying for them to begin with.
Yes, Pew Research notes in their poll report (near the back, no surprise) that they asked 46% more Democrats than Republicans, who they would vote for.
Did Obama come out 46% ahead?
Ummm, try 8%.
Is there any limit to how far these people will skew their samples of the American electorate, in their desperate desire to pretend more people would vote for Obama than for Romney in November?
You created a thread just like this the other day where I explained where you went wrong. Perhaps you could go look at that post and learn something instead of creating a duplicate thread violating the TOS?
I see you're back to clinging to the pronouncements of the guy who laughably embarrassed himself last time we held a Presidential election.
MCCAIN SURGES AMONG YOUNG VOTERS at DickMorris.com
massive shift in younger and older voters is roiling the presidential race according to new data from the Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll concluded October 28-29. Younger voters — under 45 — once Obama’s base, now are evenly divided between the two candidates.
"But don’t write Obama off. His candidacy strikes such enthusiasm among young and minority voters that there is still a chance that a massive turnout will deliver the race to the Democrats. None of the polling organizations has any experience with – or model for – so massive a turnout, especially among voters notorious for staying at home."
I don't see any conclusive predictions in your two links. One was Morris reporting on a Fox poll, the other was indecisive about the youth vote.
I know who is the biggest tool, the one that falls for the lying Obama, YOU.
You do know that pollsters adjust for this kind of thing, right?
Polls often asked questions in such a way as to generate a desired result.
For example.
If you were voting today and you found out that Mitt Romeny wanted to trade Alaska to China to pay off our debt to china, who would you vote for?
Not surprising. When you stand in front of a room full of millionaires and insult working people by saying they are not taking personal responsibility for their lives, what do you expect? Romney already had the stigma of the rich people's candidate and now it is on him like white on rice. On top of all the other "wars on ..." Romney opened a front on working people. He is going to find that those people are going to use the only power they have left, the ballot, to toss him into the dustbin of history.
He told the truth, something that is already known by the general population, not to mention the politicians and the media.
What's all the shouting about? Is it such a surprise to hear a candidate tell the truth?
Perhaps he doesn't care as much about polls as some of you do.
Funny analysis. The presidential agenda increases the cost of employing people, which reduces employment. It increases the cost of doing business, which reduces economic activity. It shuts down a significant fraction of our heavy industry and electricity generating capacity, which directly causes loss of jobs. It drives up the cost of making conventional loans to prime borrowers, which depresses house prices, prevents transactions, and costs jobs. It is hostile to capital investment, a wellspring of American jobs and prosperity. And it penalizes American companies for hiring Americans for jobs in America.
Other than that, yeah, those who have taken a severe hit from the Obama "recovery" can't wait to get to the polls to vote him another four years.
Of course Obamas agenda increases the cost to employ people but the democrats think you can print money or borrow money to pay for it but to borrow money today is crazy and that is why businesses only hire only if they absolutely have to and the unemployment is still above 8%. It's common sense but you can't tell a leftie that though.
[quote=Little-Acorn;26165875]Morris noted what happened in 1980 - Carter was either tied or ahead for months. Only in the last few days before the Nov. 1980 election, did Reagan even get back to a tie, and even a few points ahead. And then on the day of the election, Reagan won by 9.
This is total BS. Reagan took the lead in May of 1980 not a few days prior to the election.
Uh, hate to tell you this, but Romney is Obama are tied per Gallop. If Gallop has them even, your savior is in trouble.
Well, today's pew poll has Obama up by 8 points. Even more importantly is the latest polls from the must have for Romney, states of Florida, Ohio and Virginia. He's getting whipped in all three.
Yep, they can add to the debt in record levels
add to the deficit at record levels
add people to the welfare rolls at record levels
add to the unemployment rolls
yep, they can add alright..
and common sense seems to always elude some, if not all, repugs...
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.