... and you'll get sold another with Romney.
Why anyone thinks that electing Romney will present any better of a chance of fixing things continually surprises and disgusts me.
He's Obama with an (R) behind his name, not a true fiscal conservative.
Oh ya because we know Obama never tried to sell us a bill of goods.
Poor people vote obama because taxes dont affect them. Most people on anandforums are young. Most young people are poor due to lack of education and professional experience. Thus the obama rah rah pom poms is exhibited here early and often.
haha, that PDF hurts my eyes. Have they heard of OCR?
Ok, you're right. Rasmussen sucks. We'll see next month when Obama loses by 4.
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.
Michael Barone writes about this...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/10/01/the_particulars_of_polls_115620.html
Leaving Rasmussen out of this, you'd have to believe that there are more Democrats now than in 2008 (on a percentage basis). I think this is highly unlikely and we will see for sure next month.
Ok, so you are of the mind that more democrats will come out to vote this year over 2008. That won't happen, sorry.I would argue that it defies logic to suggest that unweighted polls are universally wrong based on what amounts to intuition. Of course the polls could be wrong, but unless anyone can factually back up that idea, the smart money seems to be in believing the professionals.
You can quote me on November 8th.wow buckshot...pop that fox/drudge/rush bubble you live in...the air is wonderful out here.
And more importantly, you'd realize how stupid you sound
Everything is lining up to be a Romney landslide.
So you didn't bother to read the study you cited until someone disputed your conclusion from it...haha, that PDF hurts my eyes. Have they heard of OCR?
Ok, you're right. Rasmussen sucks. We'll see next month when Obama loses by 4.
I didn't cite the study.So you didn't bother to read the study you cited until someone disputed your conclusion from it...
I'm certain we're all shocked.
wow buckshot...pop that fox/drudge/rush bubble you live in...the air is wonderful out here.
And more importantly, you'd realize how stupid you sound
Ok, so you are of the mind that more democrats will come out to vote this year over 2008. That won't happen, sorry.
2010 happened and the idea that it doesn't mean anything for 2012 will be proven incorrect. All of those voters who came out to repudiate Obama in 2010 will be in line first thing in the morning to vote for Romney next month.
Here is Rasmussen's party affiliation poll.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub.../partisan_trends/summary_of_party_affiliation
Democrat registration is down as well, Michael Barone mentions this in his article, and yet Democrats are weighted higher in all of the polls.
Everything is lining up to be a Romney landslide.
I didn't cite the study.
I stand corrected. You just cited the wiki reference to the study.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#Elections
"According to Politico, "Rasmussens final poll of the 2008 general election showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent closely mirrored the elections outcome."[40] In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there."[41] An initial Nov.5, 2008 Fordham University analysis ranked 23 survey research organizations on the accuracy of their final, national pre-election polls, assuming a 6.15% margin of victory by Obama. Rasmussen Reports and Pew Research Center tied as the most accurate.[42] Obama's actual margin was 7.2%, and a complete analysis published in 2009 by the same author, Costas Panagopoulos, revealed Rasmussen to be tied for 9th most accurate. Democracy Corps, Foxnews/Opinion Dynamic, CNN/Opinion Research, and Ipsos/McClatchy all predicted an accurate seven point spread."
OK, I was hasty. Sorry folks. :whiste:I stand corrected. You just cited the wiki reference to the study.
Romney has surged after the debate, especially in polls taken in Ohio, Florida and Virginia. Would be interesting to see if he can maintain that momentum. If he wins 1 of the next 2 debates, I think he might have salvaged his chance to actually be elected. I don't think the polls reflect yet the full picture of the debate but on the flip side, I don't think that the polls show any picture of the unemployment dropping OR the negative of gas rising (lately).
Even if he won all of the debates I wouldn't stay up late at night holding my breath that he has a chance.
He lost based on his moral values and lies. Thankfully some can see it.
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.