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.
I am amused by the biased liberal polls, which sample 1,000 people across the US with a skewed demographic composition who "predict" an Obama victory.
I know of NO ONE who was a McCain supporter who is voting for Obama. Conversely, I know MANY people who voted for Obama in 2008 who are voting against him. I am sure that this trend is happening across America, as we now have a failed presidential record which tarnishes all the "hope and change" enthusiasm of 2008. Common sense tells us (despite what the liberal media says) that Obama does not have a chance.
Consistent with that is the prediction of the Univ. of Colorado political science professors who have developed a model which has correctly predicted every president since 1980. They have Romney winning.
The diabolical poll-skewing Democrat-oversampling media-elite fifth-column Marxist/Kenyan/birth-certificate-fakers have now convinced Scott Rasmussen to join the Dark Side!
The diabolical poll-skewing Democrat-oversampling media-elite fifth-column Marxist/Kenyan/birth-certificate-fakers have now convinced Scott Rasmussen to join the Dark Side!
I am amused by the biased liberal polls, which sample 1,000 people across the US with a skewed demographic composition who "predict" an Obama victory.
I know of NO ONE who was a McCain supporter who is voting for Obama. Conversely, I know MANY people who voted for Obama in 2008 who are voting against him. I am sure that this trend is happening across America, as we now have a failed presidential record which tarnishes all the "hope and change" enthusiasm of 2008. Common sense tells us (despite what the liberal media says) that Obama does not have a chance.
Consistent with that is the prediction of the Univ. of Colorado political science professors who have developed a model which has correctly predicted every president since 1980. They have Romney winning.
To the neo-cons, any piece of info that doesn't jive with their agenda or world view is somehow biased or corrupt.
Thanks for the insight.
One simply needs to use an ounce of common sense. Again, can you name ONE McCain voter who is voting for Obama (not a television actor)? I can name MANY, MANY people who voted for Obama in 2008 who are voting for Romney now. Pollsters use small sample sizes and the previous election demographic. The liberal polls oversample democrats in an effort to make it appear as though Obama is leading. The converse is true.
As noted earlier, we have the "disconnect" between polls which sample 100 Iowa voters, vs one that sampled 50,000 voters. In the 100 voter sample, Obama is winning by 2 percentage points. In the 50,000 sample, Romney led Obama by 12%. Which do you believe? I am sure that the same sampling errors are occuring all over the country.
Further, when the pollsters sample "voters", they are calling on the phone. Who in the hell has a land line anymore? If they have a land line and a brain in thier head, they have caller ID and ignore the pollsters/telemarketers. In short, we are oversampling idiots for these phone polls. This is the democratic constituency, therefore there is going to be a large bias in sampling toward democrats simply by this method.
When things do not make sense, usually they don't. I can still think for myself and have learned not to trust the US media. If one wants some modicum of objectivity, one must read the European media to get some idea of what is going on in the US.
I am amused by the biased liberal polls, which sample 1,000 people across the US with a skewed demographic composition who "predict" an Obama victory.
I know of NO ONE who was a McCain supporter who is voting for Obama. Conversely, I know MANY people who voted for Obama in 2008 who are voting against him. I am sure that this trend is happening across America, as we now have a failed presidential record which tarnishes all the "hope and change" enthusiasm of 2008. Common sense tells us (despite what the liberal media says) that Obama does not have a chance.
Consistent with that is the prediction of the Univ. of Colorado political science professors who have developed a model which has correctly predicted every president since 1980. They have Romney winning.
One simply needs to use an ounce of common sense. Again, can you name ONE McCain voter who is voting for Obama (not a television actor)? I can name MANY, MANY people who voted for Obama in 2008 who are voting for Romney now. Pollsters use small sample sizes and the previous election demographic. The liberal polls oversample democrats in an effort to make it appear as though Obama is leading. The converse is true.
As noted earlier, we have the "disconnect" between polls which sample 100 Iowa voters, vs one that sampled 50,000 voters. In the 100 voter sample, Obama is winning by 2 percentage points. In the 50,000 sample, Romney led Obama by 12%. Which do you believe? I am sure that the same sampling errors are occuring all over the country.
Further, when the pollsters sample "voters", they are calling on the phone. Who in the hell has a land line anymore? If they have a land line and a brain in thier head, they have caller ID and ignore the pollsters/telemarketers. In short, we are oversampling idiots for these phone polls. This is the democratic constituency, therefore there is going to be a large bias in sampling toward democrats simply by this method.
When things do not make sense, usually they don't. I can still think for myself and have learned not to trust the US media. If one wants some modicum of objectivity, one must read the European media to get some idea of what is going on in the US.
Funny and illustrative that you should mention that. Did you know that the Rasmussen tracking is one of the few polls done anymore that is ENTIRELY land line. It is a robo poll as well - no humans involved. It is the only one that is even close to having Romney in the lead anymore, which makes your argument appear more than a little silly.
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.
