News Polls VERY good for Obama

OH god, i hope mitt Romney wins, even though i am Australian i find it entertaining to watch american's debate!

They didnt poll me....

Heres my opinion- I think they are both losers....Obama more so cause he is always getting caught.

I really dont want 4 more years of his bs.

I am afraid that voting just isnt my calander for November when it comes down to the President.

I picked the lesser of two evils last election- and it did me no good.

We still got Obama. Now its more important to me to get my message across that I wont play into these parlor tricks anymore until both parties get their act together.

America had a chance for a real leader- and the funny thing about that is- we all know who that man was.

Cept I didnt let Party Affiliation and special interests buy out my soul. F both parties. They are destroyinh our nation do to their childish games. Nothing is debated with any seriousness anymore. Its all one big show with a crappy cast of actors.

I've heard posters on all sorts of political threads here say the election is rigged. If it's rigged then why is everyone concerned about polls? Especially if they don't matter?

PPP is Hefty Lefty.

They luv the heart throbbing and brain bouncing ..

Mitt Romney leading Obama in the latest poll results from left-leaning Public Policy Polling for the Daily Kos. Romney leads Obama 49 percent to 47 percent. That’s all because he bombed during the presidential debate last week. This is the second poll to show a Romney lead. Pew Research Center showed him with a 4-point lead nationally on Monday. The poll also showed Romney got an 18-point swing among female voters. Still, these bounces can dissipate in a matter of hours.

Left-Leaning Public Policy Poll Shows Romney Leading Obama 49 to 47 Percent, on Surge from Women Voters

Originally posted by xuenchen
PPP is Hefty Lefty.

They luv the heart throbbing and brain bouncing ..

Mitt Romney leading Obama in the latest poll results from left-leaning Public Policy Polling for the Daily Kos. Romney leads Obama 49 percent to 47 percent. That’s all because he bombed during the presidential debate last week. This is the second poll to show a Romney lead. Pew Research Center showed him with a 4-point lead nationally on Monday. The poll also showed Romney got an 18-point swing among female voters. Still, these bounces can dissipate in a matter of hours.

Left-Leaning Public Policy Poll Shows Romney Leading Obama 49 to 47 Percent, on Surge from Women Voters

Yes and Gallup is heavy right, which also shows Obama ahead.

Battleground polls 2012, Romney is leading Obama in Ohio and Florida
www.examiner.com...


Romney 49% to Obama 47%: Rasmussen daily tracking poll for Saturday
www.examiner.com...

Originally posted by jimmiec

Battleground polls 2012, Romney is leading Obama in Ohio and Florida
www.examiner.com...


Romney 49% to Obama 47%: Rasmussen daily tracking poll for Saturday
www.examiner.com...

bwahaha examiner.com

Gravis Marketing Exposed As A Fraud

www.dailykos.com...

As far as Rasmussun, as the bunny pionted out earlier, it's right-wing.

So one fraud of a pollster and one right-wing one...

[slow clap]

Why do people keep saying that Gallup and Rasmussen are 'right wing'??
Is it because the Obama administration tried to 'lean on' Gallup and they fought back?
Rasmussen has been found to be the most accurate of polls (along with Pew Research)

Story Here

The Pew Research Center and Rasmussen Reports were the most accurate in predicting the results of the 2008 election, according to a new analysis by Fordham University political scientist Costas Panagopoulos.

Fordham University Analysis of Presidential Polls

ETA -

Originally posted by longlostbrother
As far as Rasmussun, as the bunny pionted out earlier, it's right-wing.

WHERE did he say Rasmussen was 'right wing'??
I just went back and re-read .. I don't see it.

Polls showed Carter ahead of Reagan by 9 points right up to the election. Reagan won by a landslide. Polls are more or less meaningless. When the votes are counted we will all know who won.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Why do people keep saying that Gallup and Rasmussen are 'right wing'??

Is it because the Obama administration tried to 'lean on' Gallup and they fought back?
Rasmussen has been found to be the most accurate of polls (along with Pew Research)

Story Here

The Pew Research Center and Rasmussen Reports were the most accurate in predicting the results of the 2008 election, according to a new analysis by Fordham University political scientist Costas Panagopoulos.

Fordham University Analysis of Presidential Polls

ETA -

Originally posted by longlostbrother
As far as Rasmussun, as the bunny pionted out earlier, it's right-wing.

WHERE did he say Rasmussen was 'right wing'??

I just went back and re-read .. I don't see it.

edit on 10/14/2012 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)

click through his link...

Originally posted by jimmiec
Polls showed Carter ahead of Reagan by 9 points right up to the election. Reagan won by a landslide. Polls are more or less meaningless. When the votes are counted we will all know who won.

ahh yes, that old cannard... if you ACTUALLY go and look at how the election played out, that story is pretty meaningless... it's only dragged out when people want to pretend that polls are meaningless...

Originally posted by texasgirl
I've heard posters on all sorts of political threads here say the election is rigged. If it's rigged then why is everyone concerned about polls? Especially if they don't matter?

That's what I'd like to know.
The same goes for claims that both candidates are pretty much identical in terms of what will happen if either one wins, or that they are puppets with the true power working behind the scenes.
Despite those two claims, I personally still care about whose face I would least mind seeing over the next four years.

reply to post by beezzer

I think the conservative ideology is better than a leftist one.

You're right a conservative ideology is better. It's just too bad that the GOP is no longer conservative.

I'm a registered Republican and a conservative, but nowadays the mainstream conservatives drive me absolutely up the wall. But that doesn't mean that I like the left side of the paradigm... They're both liberals as far as I can tell. Except for those preaching austerity, of course. Just making the point that it's possible to be conservative, or liberal, and yet not be biased.

I'm trying to stay sane unlike the majority of most Americans.

Originally posted by PatriotGames2
I'm a registered Republican and a conservative, but nowadays the mainstream conservatives drive me absolutely up the wall. But that doesn't mean that I like the left side of the paradigm... They're both liberals as far as I can tell. Except for those preaching austerity, of course. Just making the point that it's possible to be conservative, or liberal, and yet not be biased.

I'm trying to stay sane unlike the majority of most Americans.

I don't think that's a makeable point.

bi·as/ˈbīəs/
Noun:
Prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.

Even if you think your ideology is the only sane one, and ergo there's no other REAL option, you're being biased, as least as far as other sane people with differing opinions are concerned.

I happen to be anti-Obama, much stronger anti-Romney and much much stronger anti-Ron Paul. Not because I think Paul is a bigger liar than the rest; he's obviously not; but because his ideology would ruin America.

That's not a causal opinion, based on my desire for Marxism, or some other fringe reading, but an informed opinion based on my values and my reading of history.

To each other, our opinions are biased.

Bias is pretty much impossible to avoid in politics, when people on every side genuinely believe, for reasons they can defend, that they are, "right".

Obama's entire setup got flushed when he showed up on that stage as retarded as some of the
right wing ATSers we know and love.

Obama is in big danger of losing, Romney is now free to be the Liberal Gordon Gecko because
the "conservatives" are too braindead to realize.

reply to post by longlostbrother


I understand the point you are making, yet I have to disagree.

Conventional wisdom would say that because I am a Republican or conservative, I am biased towards my way, or my party's way, of doing things. However, there is this thing that most people now a days tend to forget about, especially our brothers and sisters in Washington DC, and it's called compromise.

I may favor one way of thinking, but I am not biased towards it. Favoring one way is technically biased, but I do not disqualify or dismiss other ways of thinking or doing things simply because of my opinion. In my eyes, and I understand the dictionary's definition, bias is a stubborn adherence to said ideology. Though I believe in small, efficient government, non-interventionalism, and fiscal responsibility I do not dismiss socialistic policies in fact I agree with many of them. It's my personal opinion that no one position is what works best or is "right". I believe things are more complicated then that, and it takes a mixture of many ideas to suit the world we live in best.

I do not see "my way" as the best way. I only believe it to be my personal opinion on how things should be run. Some would undoubtedly call this a bias, but I reserve my right to change and alter my way of thinking when better ways present themselves. We all have to play the game on some level, and I tend to align myself with the conservative way of thinking based on my personal beliefs. But I would never stubbornly adhere to my political beliefs in the face of a better way.

That may be "bias" based on Webster's, and I understand we are all technically biased one way or another, but I see a stark contrast between how I believe and the political masses that align themselves with either the left or the right. They see it as a battle, in which they must defend their one side while destroying the side across from them at the same time. I grew up a Patriots and a Giants fan (if you know anything about the NFL). They've played each other twice in the past few years in the Super Bowl, the championship game. I tend to be biased towards the Patriots because they were geographically closer to me growing up (Maine) but when the Giants win, when they beat the Patriots both times in the Super Bowl, I was not angry, I was happy for them though at the same time disappointed.

That isn't a very good example, but it was the first one off the top of my head. (It's Sunday, I've been watching football all day) My point I guess is that bias may exist but that does not mean we have to hold on to it with white knuckles and in the face of a better way. One must compromise their beliefs, their bias, in order to actually get things done. We have to work together, with other ideologies, we have to understand and be empathetic to the other side. So, I may be bias but I hold no allegiance to my bias, because I am not arrogant enough to think I know everything, to think I know best. I am open to others beliefs.

Originally posted by PatriotGames2
reply to post by longlostbrother

 

I understand the point you are making, yet I have to disagree.

Conventional wisdom would say that because I am a Republican or conservative, I am biased towards my way, or my party's way, of doing things. However, there is this thing that most people now a days tend to forget about, especially our brothers and sisters in Washington DC, and it's called compromise.

I may favor one way of thinking, but I am not biased towards it. Favoring one way is technically biased, but I do not disqualify or dismiss other ways of thinking or doing things simply because of my opinion. In my eyes, and I understand the dictionary's definition, bias is a stubborn adherence to said ideology. Though I believe in small, efficient government, non-interventionalism, and fiscal responsibility I do not dismiss socialistic policies in fact I agree with many of them. It's my personal opinion that no one position is what works best or is "right". I believe things are more complicated then that, and it takes a mixture of many ideas to suit the world we live in best.

I do not see "my way" as the best way. I only believe it to be my personal opinion on how things should be run. Some would undoubtedly call this a bias, but I reserve my right to change and alter my way of thinking when better ways present themselves. We all have to play the game on some level, and I tend to align myself with the conservative way of thinking based on my personal beliefs. But I would never stubbornly adhere to my political beliefs in the face of a better way.

That may be "bias" based on Webster's, and I understand we are all technically biased one way or another, but I see a stark contrast between how I believe and the political masses that align themselves with either the left or the right. They see it as a battle, in which they must defend their one side while destroying the side across from them at the same time. I grew up a Patriots and a Giants fan (if you know anything about the NFL). They've played each other twice in the past few years in the Super Bowl, the championship game. I tend to be biased towards the Patriots because they were geographically closer to me growing up (Maine) but when the Giants win, when they beat the Patriots both times in the Super Bowl, I was not angry, I was happy for them though at the same time disappointed.

That isn't a very good example, but it was the first one off the top of my head. (It's Sunday, I've been watching football all day) My point I guess is that bias may exist but that does not mean we have to hold on to it with white knuckles and in the face of a better way. One must compromise their beliefs, their bias, in order to actually get things done. We have to work together, with other ideologies, we have to understand and be empathetic to the other side. So, I may be bias but I hold no allegiance to my bias, because I am not arrogant enough to think I know everything, to think I know best. I am open to others beliefs.

Sorry, but you're still wrong. Though I appreciate you taking the time to write such a lucid response

Compromise is at essence finding a middle ground between two or more positions... without bias there would be no compromise because there'd only be one position.

I understand you are trying to say you're not an party faithful ideologue that accepts a position based purely on real politik, but that's far from being without bias.

Bias is ok, as it's unavoidable, as it's an unavoidable side effect of your strong beliefs... the desire to achieve good through compromise is an even better instinct; if only more folks had that.

But at the end of the day, you will believe that your opinions of what things are problems and what solutions are best to solve those problems, you believe your ideas are right - you have to, or else you wouldn't by definition "believe" them.

So no, you can't be passionate about something like politics, something with no absolute truths and many competing ideologies, without bias. You may be willing to as you say, "compromise your bias," but that's a far cry from being unbiased.

Originally posted by campanionator
Obama is in big danger of losing,

Naaaaaaaaaaah ... if you look at the Real Clear Politics electoral map, Obama looks to be winning. I'm still predicting a win for him even with his lousy record and lousy debate.

Romney is now free to be the Liberal Gordon Gecko because
the "conservatives" are too braindead to realize.

Oh please .. you want to start insulting people for being braindead?
O-bots aren't exactly the brightest bulbs on the christmas tree ya' know.

(I voted Gary Johnson two weeks ago .. so I don't like EITHER Romney or Obama.)

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by campanionator
Obama is in big danger of losing,

Naaaaaaaaaaah ... if you look at the Real Clear Politics electoral map, Obama looks to be winning. I'm still predicting a win for him even with his lousy record and lousy debate.

Romney is now free to be the Liberal Gordon Gecko because
the "conservatives" are too braindead to realize.

Oh please .. you want to start insulting people for being braindead?
O-bots aren't exactly the brightest bulbs on the christmas tree ya' know.

(I voted Gary Johnson two weeks ago .. so I don't like EITHER Romney or Obama.)

People think different things are, "smart".

Some would argue voting for someone that'll never win isn't, "smart" - others the exact opposite.

I don't think the REAL issue is brains, per se, but the fact that America and Americans have a very strong and pretty delusional sense of self. They demand religious politicians, they demand trillions in military spending, etc., etc.

On top of that, the REAL big issue is the system itself: for sale to the highest bidder, with only one winner... this allows corporations and the ultra-rich to set the agenda and easily control the government. Proportional representation would fix most of that, but sure... that goes back to the American sense of self - that we figured out Democracy better than Europe, etc., even though they get better results.