Interesting online polls for debate no. 2

HAHAHHAHAHA IMPARTIAL VIEW?

Every political thread i go to, you're there burning president bush about everything and going to bat for Kerry on everything. Who are you to tell me to "view the debate with an impartial view", you're obviously not.

I said that John Kerry is a wonderful debator, i respect the man, he's done a hell of a lot for this country. But i don't appreciate the fact that, during vietnam, he crucified his fellow soldiers by saying all they were doing was committing war crimes. After he did that, how can he possibly say he'll take a hard-line on terrorism and countries like Iran and NK? And he says he's not going to raise taxes. Well how's he going to cut the defecit and implement all of his fanciful ideas for the future w/o raising taxes? I don't think God could do some of the things Kerry says he'll do. You know if Kerry can do everything he says, i'd love to have him as my president. But until he CONVINCES me he can, i'm with Bush, the neo-conservative "puppet"

For me, it's not a question of whether your liberal or conservative, it's a question of safety. And I stand by Mr. Bush b/c i feel he can keep me safer than John Kerry. Perhaps that's just a false sense of security, but isn't a false sense of security better than NO sense of security?

Originally posted by Kwintz
snip

isn't a false sense of security better than NO sense of security?

Hmmm, lets see....
Would I rather be led to believe I was safe, when in fact I was in danger or would I rather know something was coming.

I cant decide....

Lie to me some more Mr. President, it seems to be helping.

DemocraticUnderground Helps Polls Favour Kerry.
FreeRepublic.com Helps Polls Favour Bush.

This is where the term "freeping" polls comes from. They've been doing it for the past 8 years and DU etc have only really started to hit back. Freep used to write seminars for people trying to manipulate polling data. The most famous incident was in 2000 when CNN conducted a snap e-poll on whether Al Gore should just drop out of the race, there was a massive influx of people voting "yes" and CNN was able to say that 95% of the referring links came from Freep.

FreeRepublic... Where English is "freeperized" and Logic is vaporized.

Originally posted by Belgarath
I think Bush missed one though. The woman who asked him to give three examples of mistakes he had made in his first term and what he did to fix them, didn't receive a complete answer. GW assumed her question was aimed specifically at the war in Iraq and refused to admit any mistakes on his part. I could be wrong, but I would think every president, with all the decisions made, would make at least three mistakes. If GW is unable to admit to any mistakes whatsoever, how am I to trust him to take accountability for the decisions he makes[edit on 9-10-2004 by Belgarath]

Well that's no surprise. The Fuhrer always thinks he's made the right choice, but, as always, "it's hard work, I understand that."

Originally posted by Nerdling
DemocraticUnderground Helps Polls Favour Kerry.
FreeRepublic.com Helps Polls Favour Bush.

This is where the term "freeping" polls comes from. They've been doing it for the past 8 years and DU etc have only really started to hit back. Freep used to write seminars for people trying to manipulate polling data. The most famous incident was in 2000 when CNN conducted a snap e-poll on whether Al Gore should just drop out of the race, there was a massive influx of people voting "yes" and CNN was able to say that 95% of the referring links came from Freep.

FreeRepublic... Where English is "freeperized" and Logic is vaporized.

The self selecting on-line polls now measure ground game more than anything.

But here's where Freepers have lost their minds this time.

HALF ARE VOTING FOR KERRY IN ON-LINE POLLS!

FR: Freep Fox Poll
CALL TO ACTION, FREEP WWW.FOXNEWS.COM..., BUSH DOWN 60-40

Effort:

Whole lotta freepin' goin' on! (We're catching up!)

Who won Friday night's presidential debate?
a. President Bush (48%)
127,254
b. Senator Kerry (51%)
136,999
c. I did not watch (1%)
1,264
d. None of the above (0%)
680
266,197 total votes

Confusion:

Instead of freeping legit polls, why aren't we freeping biased polls? and better yet, instead of playing the dem's game, why not freep the biased polls in favor of the targeted result?

Wouldn't that have a more positive effect in actually exposing the poll for what it is?

Confirmation:

I actually suggested that we freep a targeted biased pole and vote in favor of the democrat... If it's done right, the news agency would be stupid to use the numbers at all... and they couldn't really blame us because the poll is scewed their way.

Freep Reversal:

What is with everyone reverse freeping or thinking it is great when commentators get a negative view of Bush over polls being out of whack. I have heard the folks at Fox change the way they talk about a debate after looking at thier own polls yet I hear people here at FR think that this is a good thing?

Freep Implosion!

A negative freep shouldn't be attempted unless the poll can be totally blown out of the water with an obviously skewed result
I have noticed a lot of rather new freepers really spouting off about doing a reverse poll. This has occured about the same time that DU and the DNC really cranked up the steam for online polls. Check the dates on a lot of the poeple advocating reverse freeping.

The Republican ground game is as quagmired as Iraq this year. They run around like chickens with their heads cut off sending mexed missages to each other, the media and the world... just like Dim Son. :shk:

You can't blame any poll skew on Democrats when half the Freepers are voting Kerry to make it look biased... which is honestly just about as lame as you can get when losing a game you invented.

If this is the new "four corners" defensive offense in on-line activism they need a new coach. I sense alot of "youth" over at FR these days. Thank God the "Bush is mah Homie" net kiddies can't vote in the real election.

Anyway, the scientific polling coming out shows another Kerry win among all important registered and independents.

Bush Fails to Stem Kerry Momentum in Second Debate, Polls Show

Oct. 9 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush failed to gain a victory in the second presidential debate to stem the momentum built by John Kerry, a four-term Massachusetts senator, since their first match-up last week.

Two polls gave Kerry an edge in the 90-minute contest at Washington University in St. Louis. An ABC News survey of registered voters showed 45 percent considered Kerry the winner and 41 percent picked Bush. In a CNN poll, 47 percent said Kerry won and 45 percent favored Bush. Both are within the margin of error.

I mean really that's game, set and match at this point. Nothing to argue about. Bush pretty much has to carry Osama's head onto the stage in the final debate to stop Kerry now.

As for Bush on-line activism, with even less of a plan to win the election than the peace in Iraq, there's really only one option left...

The final refuge of all scoundrals.

[edit on 9-10-2004 by RANT]

[edit on 9-10-2004 by RANT]

As a relatively unpartial observer, neither candiate won me over really.

But, to analyze it further, like the first debatem Kerry just looked SMARTER, and sounded as such. He delivered his message alot better, and was more capable of thinking on his feet independantly. Bush's performance just confirms what is basically news to everyone, that hes a puppet, and Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rice are the real brains in the operation. It is clear, without his circle of handlers, Bush is incapable of really thinking and acting on his own.

However, when Bush is removed from his axis of evil, he is actually very likable. Alone, with the crowd, he certainly appealed to them better emotionally. he was alot more animated, connected better I think emotionally, appealing to their hearts rather than their heads. If you removed him from his circle and got him alone, he seemed like the kind of guy you'd invite over for steaks and ribs, and get drunk and be entertained as he demonstrated a chorus of raunchy armpit noises.

Kerry, as a person, was less likable. Seemed more pompous, distant, aristocratic, more logical and detatched emotionally. While he spoke alot better, it was a bit more distant. Emotionally, his appeal was lacking. He seemed more like a patronizing arrogant ass at times. he seems like the kind of guy if you invited him over for steaks and ribs, hed roll his eyes, check his watch, be yappin on the cellphone, and leave early and "take a raincheck".

As far as looks go, Kerry looked alot more presidential. Did anyone notice his hair? What the hell did they do, spray it on? It seems Kerry was going for the distinguished look, and had his make up people spray on some silver. he cuts a good figure, being tall, lean, graceful, the artifical silver helmet they sprayed on him made him look more leaderlike. Bush looked like a little antsy kid at a baseball game getting impatient cuz he wants a hotdog too. His mannerisms were less formal and more impulsive. There were times I swore he was going to throw down the mike, throw a tantrum on the floor. he is very readable. He
'd lose at poker if I played him.

The most important factor to me, the issues, neither candidate really won me over. Kerry's plans do seem a bit too liberal and socialistic for me. His evadaing the question of whether or not tax dollars would be used to fund abortion was curious. he needs alot of explaining on that issue. (I support abortion rights, but dunno about funding the practice). Bush came off as too conservative/religous on a few issues. neither really answered my questions.

Kerry perfromed better overall as far as textbook mechanical and logical debating, but Bush appeared to be more approachable, more likeable.

The question remains, will Americans vote with their heads or hearts?

Hamilton, those are liberal lies, he is going to come and eat our babies! He is going to allow gays the same rights as straights! He is going to win(not just go yep, sent troops, now what?) Iraq war. He isn't going to invade the rest of the middle east for the oil. He will stop the billions going to Haliburton and that is bad because Bush&Co say so.

Wait, I don't support corruption, republicans, Bush&Co, wait, same thing.

Anyways, only ones who don' realize Bush got stomped are Bushies, for Bush is god to them.

I'm wondering how people think Kerry's senatorial voting record will impact on his decision-making as President? Specifically, what do you expect will happen?

MK

Originally posted by fusion360
The conservatives seem so paranoid that the liberals will do anything at all odds to skew the media and make everyone think that everything in this world is anti-conservative. I mean come on Bush last night was refering to internet rumors? So they have the internet on computers now?

It's not parannoia if someone REALLY IS out to get you..!

After the debate last week, the online polls were almost as screwed up as last night..

Right after last nights debate, when the spin had begun, Democratic supporters/pundits began to cite these online polls, one after another.
I think they believe this is some sort of Cyber-karma. For Bush "stealing" the election last time around...

I'm happy to say that the poll I was refering to last night, has been removed, because of the obvious cheating..I'd be interested to know, how many of the obviously skewed ones are still online..

Originally posted by spacedoubt
I'm happy to say that the poll I was refering to last night, has been removed, because of the obvious cheating..I'd be interested to know, how many of the obviously skewed ones are still online..

Look a couple posts up Spacedoubt. I just showed you what's happening. Bush supporters over at FreeRepublic are voting KERRY to make polls look biased when they lose. That's how they "discredit" them and get them dismissed.

Obvious cheating yes, by Bush supporters. :shk:

Many polls say under them that it isn't a scientifically valid survey, meaning those polls don't mean anything.

Surf