It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly:
The 105 polls released in Senate and gubernatorial races by Rasmussen Reports and its subsidiary, Pulse Opinion Research, missed the final margin between the candidates by 5.8 points, a considerably higher figure than that achieved by most other pollsters. Some 13 of its polls missed by 10 or more points, including one in the Hawaii Senate race that missed the final margin between the candidates by 40 points, the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998.
Originally posted by clay2 baraka
The poll was conducted by Pulse Opinion Research which is a partner of Rasmussen Reports.
Rasmussen in the past has been found to have a heavy conservative bias at times erroring 40% in favor of Republican candidates. How anyone can take a biased pollster seriously is beyond me.
Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly:
The 105 polls released in Senate and gubernatorial races by Rasmussen Reports and its subsidiary, Pulse Opinion Research, missed the final margin between the candidates by 5.8 points, a considerably higher figure than that achieved by most other pollsters. Some 13 of its polls missed by 10 or more points, including one in the Hawaii Senate race that missed the final margin between the candidates by 40 points, the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998.
fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com...-3323edit on 9/4/2012 by clay2 baraka because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Jeremiah65
reply to post by RSF77
I miss Clinton as well. I told my wife the other day after seeing Clinton on the tube that I wish he would have run again. The funny thing is, we Americans have a knack for looking back with Rose colored glasses. At the time, a LOT of folks hated him and wanted him gone...funny how selective memory can be.
For me, there is only one choice...Gary Johnson. Anything else is going to be a continuation of the crapstorm we are in now...more war, more debt, more stripping of freedoms...woo-hoo...I just can't wait!
Originally posted by pajoly
I don't doubt this, but for me the grim reality since Romney/Ryan is the other ticket, the only viable option for me is to vote for Obama.
Every policy proposal -- limited in detail as they are -- put forth by Romney has been near universally panned by unbiased economists as being entirely void of reality. You can't cut taxes across the board, cut business taxes, raise military spending and reduce the federal budget without raising taxes on a large percentage of the country. This is true even assuming Romney's beyond realistic growth projections and accounting for closure of all wealthy loopholes. There is still left over a delta that would have to come from somewhere and all that'd be left are things like eliminating the homeowner exemption, child credits, etc.
His foreign policy plans, again what little has been revealed, look eager to put us in a new cold war and a hot war with Iran.
His energy policy is non-existent beyond burn more coal, drill more oil, etc. Under Obama, our production has already increased on ALL energy fronts, from solar to wind to coal to oil to natural gas.
His social policy is retro and tries to put women back firmly on second class status -- no equal pay, no control over their reproductive rights, etc.
His environmental policy? He has none.
Veterans? Education? Basic R&D? Infrastructure? Nothing but cut, slice and shear.
Had the Republicans given me a real option, such as someone committed to re-establishment of civil liberties, end to wars of empire, education and infrastructure vision, etc. it would have been a no brainer for me. But Romney, by his treatment and under-handed schemes in the primary process, shows me what he's about.
I would have voted for Ron Paul. Even as I disagree with the extreme let-everyone-fend-for-themselves side of his thinking, the restoration of civil liberties and end to wars would have been worth all the other potential pain.
Were this election not so serious (meaning if I thought Romney as merely benign instead of potentially massively destructive), I'd be voting for the Libertarian party. But I cannot risk a Romney presidency. The oligarchs take over would be complete, if it is not already.edit on 4-9-2012 by pajoly because: grammer