can't speak for him, but the answer is yes. Obama is the first intellectual president since Reagan, but reagan had too much sympathy for his oppressors. Obama tried to game the system but failed.
So you would rather trust those polls that were less accurate in 2008. I agree however that past performance isn't always an indication of future performance but Rasmussen was the most accurate in 2008 and now we have people calling it wrong because it doesn't agree with the rest.
Can you rephrase that buddy old pal? I think you're not saying that Romney is going to win, but that Obama is less anti gold and anti oil because of the boots Romney would put on Iran, but not the State of Iran. I kind of like ahmedinejahd too, he just has to do what that idiot Ben netanyahu is forcing him to do. Ben netanyahu is Romney and they butt fuck each other every time they see each other. He actually thinks his iq is 180 but he is the anti-Israel although he does govern Israel as the State of Israel. When I first heard him talk, he sounded like the fucking anti Christ or something and that the applause he got was at gun point... He wants legislation and order now but he is going to crash the state of Israel. Israel will become it's original self again but it will be Neo Israel because it will realize that Jacob was wrong to be ethnoreligious centric. Every ethnic group is a little Jewish and a little Irish and even a little Scottish: ). Israel is coming to his senses, but bIbi rifle shotgun isn't going to let them until he crashes the state of Israel. I am jeffersonian america, so I don't give a fuck if Romney crashes the hamiltonian state of america. Hamilton, as an intellectual, the Al gore of his day, would realize he was wrong.
you might be right, but it would be good to have gold, some well preserved gold backed swiss francs and/or the new Iran currency as soon as it comes out, when Romney, the antithesis of Jefferson, collapses. That is, not even Lincoln was Jefferson's 99% antithesis because the two men could appreciate each other... George Romney may or may not be related to Willard, but the latter is certainly a pure ape in mind. I love Romney's father if that is what you want to call him, but you know how I am. Willard, ben netanyahu, and the Roosevelt presidents et al, are the evolved 99%, the state incarnate.
Yeah spending a trillion plus more than we take in every year is just so intelligent.
Not at all...read what I wrote again. Citing a single poll, immediately before election day in a single election does not prove (or even really suggest) that Rasmussen was "more accurate" in 2008. At the very most, it suggests that I should look at Rasmussen immediately before the election to see what the results might be.
The majority of polls don't "use" any ratio...the ratio is what they get when they ask people for party identification. So what you're saying is that either the polls are throwing out Republican answers, people are lying about their party (or who they'll vote for) or the polls manage the incredibly unlikely feat of randomly selection a non-representative sample in poll after poll.
If you read the full analysis, Rasmussen was tied for ninth most accurate... out of twenty pollsters listed. I suppose that does barely qualify as "one of the most".
It defies logic to suggest that the turnout for democrats will be higher this year over 2008 and yet many of these polls have more Democrats responding to the poll than Republicans. However they are getting their sample this just won't be the case when it comes time to vote.
haha, that PDF hurts my eyes. Have they heard of OCR?
Facebook
Twitter