- Oct 10, 2006
- 21,568
- 3
- 0
The most balanced, realistic and fair overview of the election I've read to date: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/04/politics/margin-of-error-campaign-foreman/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
Not really. It is predicated on the false premise that everything is in the candidates' hands, when the American electorate is largely uneducated, stupid, and vote based on vagaries of feeling.
Not really. It is predicated on the false premise that everything is in the candidates' hands, when the American electorate is largely uneducated, stupid, and vote based on vagaries of feeling.
Actually it addressed that aspect several times.
No, it treats the baseline as equal to reach the conclusion that "within the margin of error" is meaningful. But with the economy not instantly, magically fixed like the impatient, self-centered, self-entitled Americans feel they "deserve", they'd unthinkingly vote for anything different on the hope that that change might *poof* them a solution. If Jesus was the incumbent he'd be out on his ass on the specious methodology of, "He had his chance; now it's Romney's turn."
So Obama is better than Jesus. Pretty good, IMO.
Ah, so you're saying that people are only voting for Romney because they're stupid.
Ah, so you're saying that people are only voting for Romney because they're stupid. Therefore polls and margins of error are meaningless?
I can't speak for Dominion but if you're not a millionaire and you're voting for Romney, I'm saying it.
CNN, like the other news outlets, must perpetuate the myth of the horse race down to the wire because horse races are exciting and it allows them to avoid having to pick a side and risk being wrong. This article is just more in that same tired line of crap.
Well, how do you define doing something that carries with it deleterious effects for the future of the country and your countrymen with zero good reasons to do so, not even self interest, if not idiotic? That describes the average Romney voter.Well you're entitle to your opinion, and I'm entitled to point out how phenomenally idiotic it is. I pity you if you truly judge people so superficially, that mentality will screw you over quite quickly if applied generally. I guess there are fewer consequences for idiots on the internet.
Alright, so the polls are corrupt, and the mainstream media is corrupt. They're all (in your mind) presenting false images. Well where should we get our information from then?
Fuck. Was I really that wrong?
The most balanced, realistic and fair overview of the election I've read to date: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/04/politics/margin-of-error-campaign-foreman/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
Yes, CNN has become Romney fluffers, and I'm sure he appreciates it.
National polls don't matter in the electoral college system. Battleground state polls matter, a lot, and in that Mitt isn't doing so hot, at all.
The likelihood of an Obama victory, with gains in Congress, looms large, so Righties may as well stay home, get drunk, kick the dog, find somebody to blame other than their own defective belief system.
Blame Christie, OK? Blame Romney for not being "conservative enough". Blame the evil Kenyan voodoo mind control of Obama. Blame anybody but yourselves for being so far off to the right fringe of absolutism that any candidate who has to pander to your wishes can't appeal to enough swing voters to win.
Purge the Repub party of all but the most ardent Teahadists, gun fetishists, misogynists, xenophobes, racists, Tenthers, Libertopians, Fundie-whacks & the lootocrats who exploit you. Then brood about how you can't win, OK?
Nice partisan hackery
It makes no sense to call the Tea Party jihadists which is an islamic term to describe Christians. Its funny how lefties will call the right ''teahadists'' yet wont dare say anything about islam for fear of being labelled 'islamophobe'. Complete pandering
1.
a holy war undertaken as a sacred duty by Muslims.
2.
any vigorous, emotional crusade for an idea or principle.
It's the same zeal & blind faith driving all extremists, the same rigid thinking.
Definition of Jihad, not what you think it is-
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/jihad
jihad is an islamic term, what is wrong with American Patriots wanting freedom?
You still didn't answer why the left refuses to acknowledge real jihad committed by islamists
jihad is an islamic term, what is wrong with American Patriots wanting freedom?
You still didn't answer why the left refuses to acknowledge real jihad committed by islamists
Nothing at all, but I don't see how the rest of us are obligated to accept someone else's definition of "patriot" or "freedom"...particularly when they're conveniently applying that definition to themselves and their actions.
If there has been a rash of liberals pretending specific terrorist attacks didn't happen, I must have missed it...
any vigorous, emotional crusade for an idea or principle.