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.
Polls will show this, others will show that. It is going to be close in the vote count, but Obama has a strong advantage in electoral votes. He will be re-elected with relative ease. Accept it and begin plans for 2016.
oh for heavens sake, of course he has...You don't like to even thing about Obama being in trouble, well you might want to get used to it. As I mentioned yesterday, even Eleanor Clift admits he could be in trouble. Of course the poll is within the margin of error and of course Rasmussen polls lean right, but to say none have ever shown a Republican behind is rediculous.
Lol at the level of difference. If I was a statistician working for them and saw that, I would immediately have to check for flaws in my polling sample. That is well beyond margin of error.
Polls will show this, others will show that. It is going to be close in the vote count, but Obama has a strong advantage in electoral votes. He will be re-elected with relative ease. Accept it and begin plans for 2016.
The electoral follows the popular vote. Even when they produce different outcomes, they are still very close. not as many polls have been taken in individual states following Romney's recent rise, but expect his numbers to improve in key swing states in a manner correlated with his overall popular vote rise.
Rasmussen was demonstrably the worst pollster in 2010 with an enormous Republican bias. The had an error rate of 5.8 (by far the worst of all the major pollsters) and a Republican bias of +3.9. Amazingly, the polled far more than anyone else. If Rasmussen was just experiencing inordinate statistical drift, their sheer bulk of polling wouldn't corrected that. It didn't. Because they have a massive house bias.
Their final 2008 poll had Obama by 6. Their house tilt in 2010 over about 100 polls was ~ +4R. I think their internal methodology changed or something because they used to be one of the least error-prone major firms until a couple years ago.
Why because it doesn't say what you want it to...lol?
Oh my, if Rasmussen says so I should just throw in the towel! I wonder when they will finally come clean and put "For Novelty Purposes Only" after their ridiculously biased inaccurate push polls lol
Why because it doesn't say what you want it to...lol?
No. Seriously, what's your problem? Do you have a pathological compulsion to attack anyone who holds a different opinion or viewpoint? Do you get pleasure from acting like a child on the internet? Are you in fact a child? For a supposed real estate agent you sure do seem to spend an inordinate amount of time posting on a message board.
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.
