So the rightwinger wants to discount information revealing how Romney, in the campaign against the President, is lagging as made evident in the data collected by the preponderant number of reputable polling organizations, including Fox News.
So what gives? Are we now going to shoot the messenger? The rightwinger has 'created' their own polling entity based on specious data and inaccurate assumptions and they think that this is going to save them and their precious Romney? I would think again...
Leave it to the rightwinger to bumrush the consensus, insisting that the moon is made of green cheese because there has to be a liberal bias associated with the scientific method, and consequently, its proponents. Give me a break ! Can someone toss me a bone here?
I actually don't think Romney even wants the job. The neo-con nuts are chomping at the bit because they now realise that they can't put a stooge in the White House! When Fox news reports that a Republican candidate is biting the bullet, you know that the fat lady has sang!
To me wouldn't Romney's numbers being higher convince more Democrats to vote?
Are they higher? The UK media are somewhat more cautious in this regard I think.
I don't think so, but I was thinking conservatives would also be happy if Obama was leading because it would bring out more of their voters.
One thing for sure, Hollie, if he does not up his game soon this will be his last stand and with the demographics going in the direction that it has been going, the GOP will continue to lose ground in the coming years.
It's funny, because polls had them neck and neck until recently, and conservatives were fine with those polls.
All of the sudden, Mitt Romney's campaign implodes, the right criticizes him for it, and his numbers go down.
It's his own fault really. He says stupid things.
That's because he either (1) isn't extremely bright, or (2) opens his mouth and says things without thinking them through. (Shades of George W. Bush!)
Take your pick, but either of those options makes him a poor candidate for president.
Well, Sooner the polls have proven to be most inconvenient, even though if the number were reversed they could not stop refering to them. They are all so transparent and have the scent of defeat all over them.
If the Right don't like the poll numbers from some pollsters, then they should just rely on the likes of Rasmussen, still in the dark ages, not calling cell phones. Then ... oops, but wait, Obama's winning there, too! Darn.
If you check out unskewedpolls.com you will see the Facts and how they arrived at these facts. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion but the facts are the facts....
I will check, CL, but that is a stretch that all these reputable organisations being such over many years are now discredited by the GOP, because they are losing? If 99% o f professionals all being equal attests to a circumstance, I am going to give that more credibility than a !% that says otherwise and may be politically motivated in its position.
Why is every other pollster incorrect not stating the facts yet these guys that you cite have it right? But I will check and see......
Ignoring facts? Like the fact that "unskewed polls" is run by a GOP operative in Massachusetts? That the owner of the site also owns GOP2012.com? The same site that is run by Dean Chambers who Business Insider claims is deliberately skewing polls to Mr. Romney? http://www.businessinsider.com/unskewed … ney-2012-9
Fascinating that something that is reportedly "unskewed' uses some bogus math that makes no sense even to the most uneducated voter.
For the record: I'm not a Democrat
You are aware, I'm sure, that unskewedpolls.com this is an entirely right wing polling site by an entirely right wing "news" organization called QStar News?
That is a FACT.
I hope all is well with you my friend,
We have discussed politice here on HP for more than a years now. If you can recall, in all our chats I never mention polls. I do not believe in them. Depending on the poll, and there are to dam many of them now, they sample 100 people, some do 500 people, others do 1,000 people. I am sorry, but 1,000 people is not a good sample of the tens of millions who vote.
I could skew a result based on where I take samples. I could call 100 people in Harlem, all say Obama, the other 900 go even. I now have a poll of 550 o 450 or 55% Obama 45% Romney.
Now I am not saying that is what the pollsters are doing, it was just showing an example of how a false poll could happen. One could do the same thing and show Romney as the leader.
If you poll 100 people, half Dems half Republicans, you may one or two to cross on their vote, but it still will be an almost 50-50 split. The real gauge is a large poll of likely independent voters and no other party involved. would reveal a more likely outcome of who is in the lead right now. It is there vote that is going to elect the next president.
Conservatives may be voicing the most concern about the polls now, but it was in response to reports that the polls were being swayed. There are so many and the differences are huge. For example, A New York Times-CBS News-Quinnipiac University poll from yesterday says Obama up 10% over Romney in Florida, Rasmussen polls released on the same day has Florida even. Both sample 1,000 people in Florida yet a 10% different result. This is only one small sample of one state, but it shows why there is concern being voiced
Here is a quote from a strong Democrat and supporter of their party:
"For instance, highly-regarded pollster John McLaughlin was recently quoted in National Review saying media pollsters are being lobbied by Democrats to, ‘weight their surveys to emulate the 2008 Democrat-heavy models.’ McLaughlin added that, ‘the intended effect is to suppress Republican turnout through media polling bias.’ (source ST Pete Times, A strong left newspaper)
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz- … t-accurate
Another Democrat said on Fox about using a false model:
http://nation.foxnews.com/polling/2012/ … t-accurate
Here is a story from Forbes on accuracy of polls:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenkrogue/2 … 2008-2004/
Don't think the major polls capture R voters correctly?
Worry that Rasmussen or unskewedpolls.com might be biased in the other direction?
Here's the Goldilocks of polls. Purple Strategies.
For the record: I have no affiliation with or financial interest in this poll.
www.purplestrategies.com/wp-content/... … .21.12.pdf
Thanks for stopping by, AV, while I am hardly an expert in statistical analysis of this nature, i can assess the big picture. The new polling entity is produced by a clearly partisan source. All of these reputable polling entities have been doing what they have doing in this way over several election cycles. It all seems politically motivated, much like the voter id stuff.
In reality, I guess no one really knows what the outcome will be until it occurs, when I looked at the site showing Romney leading by 7-10 points, am I not to ask what is the bias in their polling data? Something is wrong when a politically motivated polling outfit like the unskewed dot com has such stark different outcomes than every other reputable polling outfit, even FOX news. What do you think the chances are that FOX would particlpate in polling that had a bias in favor of democrats, not much?
While it is not absolute, previous election cycles do point to a correlation of sorts between the polling data and the actual outcome.
Av, this just doesn't look good for the GOP, and many of us are questioning the sincerity of the revision or is it an attempt to accuse the Dems of disreputable influence in the polling process? No one has convinced me of that.
Well, I refuse to vote for either of the two morons that are running this time, but there just might be something to this "skewed" polling idea.
If the polls are weighting their results based on the 2008 election numbers - we're not going to get a fair reading. Already the interest level for this election has been determined to be much lower than the interest in the last election.
There might just be something to this after all.
The sad reality is that no matter who we elect in November - we all lose.
I really hope you vote. The next four years are going to prove to be some of the most important in history. Yes, I agree that the choice isn’t ideal, but sitting back and accepting the way things are won’t make you feel any better.
The bombardments and snippets blared at us from the media cannot be trusted.
I don't think Romney is the horror he is made out to be.
Do you know what polling data is? Let’s just say most reasonable people don’t count too heavily on it. Seems like the only ones riled up about this non-story is the ones that are hoping to avoid Obama’s issues, or flat out arrogantly think he doesn’t have any.
Romney isn’t my precious savior; I think you have me confused with a few Obama supporters. I don’t want my only choice other than Obama to be Romney, but that’s the only one there is.
Scientific method? Do you know how they do political polls? Guess what they aren’t falsifiable yet.
I truly worry about our generation and their lack of focus on relevant and important issues. Hopefully with what is going on around the world, the issues you worry about aren’t the utter lies that have stemmed from the war on women, or false hope in another doomed to fail government program. The fears people have of Romney are misplaced. Besides, Romney seems like more of a liberal democrat than a “rightwinger”
The two kinds of voters in America are those that know what the issues are and those that don’t. For the uninformed, emotion and likability usually drives their vote.
I think the demographic corner the GOP has painted itself into has become evident. They've spent decades winning elections by demonizing or dismissing African-Americans, Latinos, women, gays, unions, teachers, government workers, young people, poor people, urban dwellers, and environmentalists. Now they find that there aren't enough people left over that they haven't insulted or belitttled, and the only solution they can think of is to dial up the offensive rhetoric. Sad, really, because America needs more than one sane, viable political party.
Unfortunately, many of the poor people demonized and/or dismissed by the GOP still vote for them simply because they push the Bible Belt hot buttons in their campaign rhetoric: abortion and gay marriages. Poor, but very religious, voters (especially fundamentalists) will vote against their own best economic interests because of those two social issues. Emotion overrules good sense.
Amen! The fanatics, bigots and zealots muscled the moderates out.
If you can't read the comment on the rear window it reads: "The only thing black you can trust is COAL"
It's not that all conservatives share in the bigotry, but these attitudes are condoned and never admonished in the neoRepublican Party or rightwing media.
Racist package containing images of KKK and aborted fetuses sent to surging black Mormon Republican candidate Mia Love
Republican congressional candidate Mayor Mia Love, a star of the party's recent convention, has been sent a 'disturbing' package that included a picture of her and her husband with a hooded Ku Klux Klan figure.
The package arrived at her mayoral office in Saratoga Springs, Utah as an internal poll released by her campaign purportedly showed her surging into a 15-point lead over her Democratic opponent - an apparent dramatic turnaround after a public poll in June found her trailing by the same margin.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … z27gnPSygV
Do you think racism only resides on the right?
Your defensiveness is telling, RB. and you miss the point entirely. I made no claim that there are no racists on the left.
Instead of looking at the image and stating that that kind of overt racism is deplorable, you post a sensationalist piece of trash from a U.K tabloid to divert attention away from the obvious—it's the typical behavior of an ideologue in denial of the facts and the truth.
I find racism deplorable and do not associate myself with individuals that express their beliefs openly, I cannot see into their heart but if I know that they judge others based on some groupthink, I terminate any relationship with them.
The acknowledgement that racism resides at a level above Left/Right is something that is not seen in these forums often.
What you categorize as "sensationalist piece of trash " is quite telling though?
The Daily Mail is a tabloid with a seedy and meretricious reputation—if you didn't know that you should!
Mia Love, Republican Mayor In Utah, Receives Photos Of KKK Member, Aborted Fetuses
Utah mayor and GOP congressional candidate Mia Love was sent an envelope containing racist and disturbing photos. The black, female Republican says she's become a target because she "poses a problem to the policies of the Obama administration."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/2 … 17571.html
I have not seen any specific "rules of engagement" for the politics forums, but have on more than one occasion seen some hubbers decrie HuffPo and breitbart.com as the two biased sources that are not to be quoted. Or if they are, they are assumed to cancel each other out!
It does not matter who is reporting it, this candidate received a package in the mail. There is really no denying the story.
It is wrong to do that.
Not to be condoned on either side.
Scott Brown and his Native American tirade in MA against Elizabeth Warren is bad, but pales in comparison.
RB, while the incidence cannot be denied, why do you presume that the offensive literature comes from the left.? There are plenty of racists, KKK that exist and are attacking MS Love on the basis of miscegenation alone,.
This kind of stuff is the purview of the rightwinger, almost without exception.
The article could not identify a source for this offensive material
I do not, nor can anyone determine that it did not come from the left. Do you believe that in the entire nation there is not one single democrat supporter capable of this action?
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/104036? … ost2213166
Will you acknowledge that there are left leaning racists, or do you believe this type of individual to be similar to a bigfoot?
I cannot exclude anyone, RB, but the MO is well known by many of us and true progressive/ liberals are hard pressed to act in the antithesis of their belief system and attack this woman.You just see much more of this from the right and there is no denying that.
With all due respect, RB, a dare: I'd like to challenge you to to provide some examples of intolerant Liberals who have committed some glaring acts of intolerance, injustice or deceitful acts of political deception.
And I will try and match them with Conservative examples if you like.
First let me explain something.
I support gay rights.
I support a woman's right of choice.
I support a separation of church and state.
I support a welfare program.
I find war completely disgusting and most times unnecessary.
I resist voter ID laws.
So any examples of this I would find deplorable regardless of the source.
But the best example I can think of that Democrats used political deception was the walk of the Congressman stating that they were spit on and called names. All completely bogus, as some of the Congressmen were filming their walk and provided zero evidence!
Your tolerance and adult behavior, RB, is all the more reason to be upset with the very people who've highjacked and subverted the Conservative brand. Extremism and intolerance and division are the cancers in every culture and country.
Look at Longhunter's extremist and infantile conclusions—all based on delusion and petty resentment. And believe me, I and many Liberals can be just as petty and resentful—but Christ, if we can't see the destructive and self-defeating behaviors we all practice, we're really doomed.
As Gandhi said in the movie (but not in real life): "An eye for an eye and the whole world eventually goes blind!"
Geesh....I was about to say...Does that change the fact that it actually happened.
RB~ the usual suspects must need to argue regardless.
Yes, a better source, RB thanks for taking the time—but there is still a glaring lapse in logic here.
How can you assume, or can anyone know for certain, that a "leftist" sent her the package?
It's a despicable act of racism and bigotry, i grant you, and if it was a liberal who sent it then it's for sure that that person is deluded and filled with hate and intolerance. But I've got to say, that kind of gesture isn't a hallmark of liberals—even fanatical liberals because tolerance is a benchmark of the ideology.
The first image on that link, however, featured the rightwing agitator and dirty trickster, Lee Atwater, who was known to pull outrageous stunts like that to incite the opposition and put them on the defensive. And he's only the first of that Rogue's Gallery of Republicans who hit below the belt.
@wizard if liberal does that , that movement he/she gets converted to rightist and seizes to be liberal...
You are correct. We will never know who actually sent the package as it is really not a criminal offense.
As to subterfuge by the opposing side, it happens all the time, on both sides. Attempts to divide the people are becoming so rampant it is ridiculous. Perhaps if more people acknowledge the attempts to divert attention, and bring it into discussions, more people would become aware of how they are being manipulated.
WOW, why would a 'leftist' lead with pictures of aborted fetuses? This is coming from some white supremist or other extreme political right outfit.
Reality Bytes, reading your earlier post, it seem that you would be a progressive and thus their is still time to come to "good side" of the force.
The principles that you lay out are not embraced by conservatives in general.
I fully support the liberty and freedom of a living, breathing, human being, I will oppose any thought of having the group gain superiority over the individual. I believe with all my heart that freedom truly lies within each of us individually!
RB, honestly, if you're ever looking for an authoritative piece or one not consumed with bias, avoid the Daily Mail.
Typical...they only like the First Amendment, when it benefits them:)
The one in the center is sad and wrong. Although the ones on the left and right are pretty good.
I'm just waiting for the big money buy out of votes, (Romney sure has plenty, as does his supporters), as in the Bush-Gore election re: Florida and the recount. Sorry...I've always had my suspicions about how that one turned out...
No reason to apologize.
I think many of us are pretty skeptical. Many major American institutions have become corrupt.
Denise, sadly most of the time these moneyed Republicans usually buy the vote. George W. Bush did it, remember the premise the best democracy that money could buy. Rudolph Giuliani did it to David Dinkins in the New York Mayoral race and David Bloomberg, near billionaire did it to his opponent. If push comes to shove, Mittens will do the same thing! NOTHING surprises me anymore! Money talks in elections- and LOTS of it! Politics can be quite a tricky business!
I know...sad, but a reality. We've seen it throughout history, haven't we? It is such a close situation even now. And, even if the gap between the two parties widen, re: the %, it does not guarantee one single thing...
When these corrupt practices occur--especially to alter the effects of a major election--if a grassroots outcry went up from millions of Americans demanding an impartial, non-partisan investigation, corruption might be curtailed. But "we, the people" complain that a dastardly deed has been done, mumble and grumble, but eventually accept "that's just the way it is." It doesn't have to be that way! A revolution needn't be bloody to be effective. Americans have the right to protest and should do so in gargantuan numbers when Big Money tampers with elections. Otherwise, the corruption we see today will at some point (maybe sooner, rather than later) seem mild in comparison to the utter ruination of what was once a great country.
GMwilliams~ Moneyed Republicans? Have you seen a rundown of elected officials and their net worth’s? Your mistaken if you think the GOP takes the cake in this category.
And AMEN Jaye! Soon people may be forced to actually give a hoot.
I clearly remember election night in 2004 when Al Gore ran against George W Bush. Gore's numbers looked so promising and I feel asleep. When I woke up, the announcement was George W Bush has won the election, I almost fell out of my bed! I was totally flabberglasted, I thought to myself, four more years of that $%^$#@!
You got the dates wrong.
2000 - Bush Gore
2004 - Bush Kerry
I would just like to point out at this juncture that at least Truman, Reagan, and Bush won their respective races even though the polls showed them losing. It is why people go out and vote.
Slight correction there.
Bush did not win his election.
He stole it.
@mom bush was opportunity for world to catch up with usa...that disaster helped world catch up usa a bit..had usa constitution allowed him third term, we would have had new world order..
No third term, thank goodness!
US Constitution does seem to allow for repackaging/reselling worst Bush ideas under guise of another former governor's candidacy.
Let's not try to deflect from the fact. The polls are not the election.
If you don't like the electoral collage get rid of it. Never hear a peep when it works your way.
The sad fact of the 2000 election is neither candidate was compelling enough to leave the other in the dust.
GOP’s Self-Delusion Syndrome
by Michael Tomasky Sep 27, 2012 4:45 AM EDT
With Obama’s lead in several swing states becoming insurmountable, the right has begun to panic—by denying reality altogether.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 … drome.html
Here's a glaring (and very brief) example of a current Republican Governor's dirty trick . . .
Time to start a dedicated thread for exposing below the belt tactics?
Perhaps with predictions on how many posts it will get between now and November 6?
WOW, one more forum slamming Conservatives and Romney here on HubPages! With all the panty-waste liberals on this site, who would have thought a forum would be started as just one more way to say the same damn things OVER and OVER and OVER again!
DAMN, I'm shocked that this would happen on HUBPAGES!!!
It's becoming more and more evident the kook-aide-drinking, liberal crowd is looking for every way possible to make themselves feel better about the coming election.
Don't get your underpants in a wad, Chief, In this particular issue the conservatives are 'slamming/' themselves. I am not making anything up or do you go through life with your eyes wide shut? We are going to stay on message through November 6th and I will write the rightwingers's post mortem soon afterwards, what are your plans?
If Obama wins, you can write the obituary for this country, something I'm sure you and others of your ilk will thoroughly enjoy.
Hyperbole—and resentment that your candidate is defective—Romney hasn't a clue and America is better off with a man who has been steady, temper and tested in the fires of the office.
Barack Hussein Obama has steadily driven this country to the brink of disaster is all, Wizard. I thought you were smarter but your rhetoric is becoming more and more skewed as election day nears.
My comments have nothing to do with bigotry, Wizard. You and I have had this discussion before. I don't hate Obama for any reason, least of all his skin color. Don't you dare make what I've said into your warped idea of hate speech.
Yeah right and a racist sticker on the back of a truck with child pi$$ing on Obama isn't bigotry.
Bigotry is not solely about race—go to a dictionary!
If it had said, Romney" instead of "Obama", you'd liked it and would probably have one of those on your car.
I don't find the sticker of the kid pissing on the word "Obama" racist. For me, it's reflective of the opinion the person has for his leadership and what he's doing to the person's livelihood. You did see it said, "Coal Worker" on the kid's helmet, right? Obama is trying to destroy the coal industry, an industry this person as well as his family and friends probably work in.
It amazes me how you and other liberals play the race card so quickly now. Obviously, you have nothing else to offer because I know the Wizard of Whimsy of the past would have.
Well LH, I can be as infantile and knee-jerk as anyone, but you seem totally unconscious about your own unquestioned assumptions and erroneous conclusions.
I don't hate Romney, I just think he's yet another self-deluded and misguided Sorceror's Apprentice with an obsession to be POTUS with the money to run for the job.
But more importantly, the vitriol in your tone belies your simplistic distinctions between a racist's sticker and bigot's sticker. Those things aren't put there in satire or in good fun—they are overt acts of hatred and intolerance.
Sadly, you can't see it because you sympathize with the message and view it as just another weapon in your jihad against the infidel-Socialist, Obama that will make you momentarily feel vindicated in your anger.
The fact is, coal is polluting this planet and most people realize that we have to stop $hitting where we eat! I'm sorry for the coalminers and I'm sorry for blacksmiths and I'm sorry for all of the others who have lost their livelihoods throughout history—but do we sacrifice the few for the many or do we all risk the collapse of the very thing that supports us all?
And while I'm on the subject, bigotry is intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself; I don't deny you the right to think that coal is what America needs, but that is very different than the petty conclusions and feigned indignation implied in your posts. You seem to think Liberals are to blame for everything because we are destroying America—and that's fine, but try to understand what you are actually saying and implying in your comments.
Wizard, what it boils down to is ALL the politicians in D.C. now are "self-deluded and misguided Sorceror's Apprentice with an obsession to be POTUS with the money to run for the job." It would be nice to get rid of them all and go back to regular, everyday people running the country. NOTICE, I DID NOT SAY "NORMAL" AS I KNOW EACH PERSON'S IDEA OF "NORMAL" IS DIFFERENT.
I'm not happy with Obama. You're not happy with Romney. I'm not happy with him 100% either but, IMHO, he would be better than Obama. Hell, anybody would be better than Obama, IMHO, of course.
Perhaps what's needed is a good application of boot to ass, kicking all the present politicians out as well as the lobbyists, PAC groups, etc. and for the American people to hit the reset button with term limits in place.
You wrote: "You seem to think Liberals are to blame for everything because we are destroying America—and that's fine, but try to understand what you are actually saying and implying in your comments."
I'm perfectly aware of what I'm saying and implying in my comments where liberals are concerned. IMHO, most liberals want nothing more than to completely do away with this country's constitution and make it into their idea of some Socialist Utopia. I don't want to see that happen. It's never worked anywhere it's been tried and it won't work here so there's no reason to give up what we've got. It may not work perfectly but it's still a hell of a lot better than what Obama is trying to make it into.
You wrote: "But more importantly, the vitriol in your tone belies your simplistic distinctions between a racist's sticker and bigot's sticker. Those things aren't put there in satire or in good fun—they are overt acts of hatred and intolerance. "
I'll stand by my previous remarks. If the tables were turned and the president was trying to destroy the livelihood that had fed, housed, and clothed your family for possibly generations, I have a sneaking suspicion you'd be pissed at him, too.
As I wrote before, the middle sticker is wrong. I see the ones one the sides as a comment on what Obama is trying to do the the man's livelihood.
When it comes to bigotry, you're going to have to understand something, Wizard. I was born and raised in the Nashville, Tennessee area. I've seen bigotry at it's worst and 99.9% of it has been associated with skin color. I had parents who taught me people were people, no matter their skin color or religion. They were just different and that was a good thing. Bigotry is something I find deplorable in every way.
I hate no one, Wizard, least of all because of something as ridiculous as skin color or religion. When you throw 'bigotry' at me, I immediately think you think I disagree with Obama because he's black and, if that's the case, you couldn't be more wrong. I don't like his policies. I don't like his philosophy. I don't like where he's trying to lead this country. None of that has a damn thing to do with his heritage, his religion, or the color of his skin and I WILL NOT allow you or anyone else to imply that it is.
There's something all liberals are going to have to understand, Wizard. When the race card is played, you give a very strong, clear message to most Conservatives - I don't agree with you but I have absolutely nothing of any substance to bring to the argument so I'm going to just say whatever I can to shut you up. "You're a bigot." "You're a racist."
I'm neither and I won't sit back and allow it to happen.
You have a good weekend, Wizard. I'm done for a while.
Longhunter, I point to the moon and all you can see is my finger. Your comments actually underscore and prove my points.
1. Your conclusions are all based on resentments and petty-minded anger that you can't seem to overcome or get beyond. How ridiculous is it to blame one person for all of your perceived ills about America's economic and political situation? You obviously want to stay irrational and angry because it provides you with some kind of comfort and solace—good luck with that because you'll need it in this world where change is the only constant.
2. Sadly, you still haven't a clue about the definition of "bigotry." There is, obviously, nothing I can say or do about your reading comprehension, your conscious awareness or your unconscious assumptions about it as a human behavior trait.
Thanks for your good wishes and the same to you for the weekend and beyond.
I don't blame one person, Wizard. Obama is just one of far too many who think the way he does. He, for the time being, is the head of a snake. The snake being the people who want the government to do all for them. The people who hate companies who do what companies are formed to do - make a profit. The people who have no other desire but to hate those who have more than they only because of some excuse in their head or they're too damn lazy to try. I'm not irrational nor angry, Wizard. I just have one hell of a BS detector and the stuff liberals are shoveling is a big load of it. Their biggest problem is we Conservatives won't roll over and let it happen without one hell of a fight.
I've told you my definition of bigotry, Wizard. Take it as you will. Obviously you're not from the South, have not seen real bigotry as I have, so I was wrong to expect you to comprehend it as I do. We both deplore it. On that we can agree.
Gross oversimplification and exaggeration is fine when it comes to satire and humorous perspectives, Longhunter, but you're serious about all this and can't seem to recognize the the hasty and irrational aspects of your conclusions.
You're willing to lump millions of people together who think government should be a tool to prevent corporate exploitation and unbridled greed from subverting our democratic republic into a plutocracy or an oligarchy—but that is what has happened whether you are willing to admit it or not. (You'll ignore this paragraph instead of addressing it, of course).
But you bristle and are unwilling to be lumped into a label when someone calls you on your intolerance of people who don't subscribe to YOUR beliefs or conditioned mindsets.
I was in Mississippi in the military in the late sixties and I experienced bigotry first hand because I have a slight New England accent; so please don't presume to know what I know or think. I can only image what African-Americans had and have to put up with in a place where tribal imprinting still determines many perceptions—i.e. that truck photo I posted.
We all have bias and bigotry in us, the question is are we aware of it and do we laugh at it as just group-programming . . . or do we take it seriously and believe it's "the absolute truth?" It isn't a black and white, either/or world.
So it seems to me that you identify with your tribe and its beliefs which are all ghosts and specters conjured up by the demagogues who exploit and manipulate our fears and pains over past events. The problem is, tribal warfare and extremist beliefs are the very behaviors that are the cause of all the destruction in our country and in our world. I just wish you could see it.
Good luck. You are now in the part of the conversation that he has lost and this is his only weapon remaining.
Romney can't win, save a miracle.
Obama can't lose, save a miracle.
If you would like to finally see a third party in our political system, this is the year to vote for the Libertarians. Gary Johnson is the ONLY third party to be on every state's ballot, and is currently hitting near the 3% mark required for debates and federal help.
Even if you don't agree with Libertarians, this is the year to finally introduce a third party into the political landscape.
Make it happen!
Vote Libertarian just this once - a vote for Obama or Romney IS a wasted vote.
Who do you suggest? A write in won't make a difference. The third party idea is at least another 4 years away.
Someone with a picture of George Washington crossing the Delaware as their avatar should be well suited for reading a short post on a forum.
Check paragraph two.
There is NO way a Libertarian can win, so if you vote for Gary Johnson, you're actually voting for the candidate who needs votes siphoned off from the other candidate! That is not even making a statement--it's voting "passively." If you plan to do that, you'd better be prepared to embrace the other candidate you help elect!
Take note, Kids, phion spams the board with shallow knee-jerk drivel while no one addresses the salient issues or the fact that our country has been sold to the highest bidders and cheating weasels who want an oligarchy instead of a democratic republic.
RB and LH, I'm waiting for your honest and sincere rebuttals in this, a public forum, rather than in an extremist Hub where the bigots won't allow honest debate.
What is there to debate, another non-issue? I don't see anyone other than you and the usual gang turning this into something that it isn't.
Wait I thought the thread was about republican reaction to polls. You're telling me it's about salient issues and oligarchy.
I’m not sure where the extremist’s and bigots are that you are talking about, but any kid can read through this and see the true “knee jerkers”. Did you get tired of bothering someone else, or did they get tired of entertaining you? Have fun.
Original Topic: "Conservatives now claim that national polling data is unfairly skewed!"
You can see my original comment to the original topic above and I'll stand by it.
Assuming "LH" means Longhunter, I don't have any hubs posted, Wizard. The rest is just your opinion and one I don't agree with. That's my honest and sincere rebuttal. Short and to the point.
Thanks again, LH and no, I was referring to Hub-cowards like The Frog Prince, Wayne Brown and the others who spread bias and propaganda while refusing to post legitimate rebuttals to their agitprop.
You have courage of conviction and are in no way a coward when it comes to argumentation, IMHO.
Romney is losing. The polls using the 2008 turnout models are showing Mitt losing worse than he really is, however. Look at polling trends, where Obama is steadily gaining. That's what to watch.
What was it Samuel Clemens said, "rumors of my demise are greatly exaggerated" or something like that.
Don't count your votes until they chads are completely pushed through, right?
It's not over till the fat lady sings and all the pollsters shut down for the year.
I was just reading an article earlier on how things can dramatically turn around in the final weeks. There's also a part of me that is suspicous of all these polls. Who are they talking to? No one has asked ME who I'm voting for! How do we know they're even talking to real people
With the truly mind-boggling amounts of money being dumped into swing state ads who knows what might happen.
As hard as this may be for us politcal junkies to imagine, there really are people out there who
a) have not decided who they are going to vote for and
b) do not have any exposure to anything but ads
Wizard wrote: "But you bristle and are unwilling to be lumped into a label when someone calls you on your intolerance of people who don't subscribe to YOUR beliefs or conditioned mindsets."
The only people I have intolerance for are people who want the government to do all for them, people who hate companies who do what companies are formed to do - make a profit, and people who have no other desire but to hate those who have more than they only because of some excuse in their head or they're too damn lazy to try. In a word - LIBERALS.
I work for a living. I don't expect nor want the government to do a damn thing for me except protect the country. I expect companies to make a profit as I believe in Capitalism. When it comes to those who are too damn lazy to do for themselves, laziness is a poor excuse for failure.
You're a good one to be talking about "conditioned mindset" when you're walking lock step with the liberal talking points.
And you're so tolerant and open-minded that I'm now convinced that responding to you is an utter waste of time and effort.
Longhunter....Do you side with all corporations who "make a profit" even when to do so they send American jobs to China and exploit poor workers there so their profits can increase while Americans who need jobs can't find any? There is so much corporate greed rife in this country that it's obscene. We don't have a safe food because of this greed. American consumers are endangered by tainted Chinese products because of this greed. Do you truly believe that CEOs and CFOs are really worth the huge compensation packages they pull in for outsourcing jobs to other countries? Other countries in Europe and Scandinavia, Canada, care more about their own people than the U.S. (or rather, the huge corporations that rule). I believe in free enterprise, but these conglomerates make it impossible for smaller businesses to succeed, and they've thrown away our economy for profits that go only to a few.
In other words you ARE a bigot and still clueless about what I'm saying.
Now you're just being insulting, Wizard. If that's the best you have to offer, I'm done.
You have a nice weekend.
No, again Longhunter, I strive to be accurate with words and I was addressing your behaviors not the person . . . and sometimes the truth stings.
If you are addressing my behaviors, you're addressing me.
Here's the deal. You calling me a bigot is like the pot calling the kettle black, Wizard. You keep marching lock step with your liberal mind-set and we'll all sit back and wonder, at least for a short time, when you'll have an original thought outside the liberal talking points.
Wrong again, LH! Being human we are all capable of bigotry which is (again) a behavior that can't tolerate others' differing opinions from ones own opinions. Someonene who isn't aware of his or her own bigotry is a bigot.
I love and care about plenty of bigots in my own family and it is not my intention to insult you or to change you. My intent is to point out what you don't seem capable of being aware of in your own conduct.
Being a Liberal, I can tolerate your behaviors and opinions because I understand it, being human—just like you. The distinction here is that I know where anger and intolerance leads and you seem not to. It's destructive and self-destructive behavior, filled with angry and hasty decisions that lead to ultimate unhappiness for all parties concerned with such behavior patterns.
If those are Liberal talking points, then I plead guilty and proudly so.
Then obviously you're the bigot, Wizard, because you're unaware of your own bigotry. I have a differing opinion than yours and I will not be changed by your liberal BS. That makes you mad and you start calling me a bigot.
If you'd like to see the real bigot, step over and take a look into the nearest mirror.
Liberals are the most intolerant people on here. You look down on those that don't agree with you and are unwilling to kiss Obama's ring.
You wrote: "I love and care about plenty of bigots in my own family and it is not my intention to insult you or to change you. My intent is to point out what you don't seem capable of being aware of in your own conduct."
This tells me when you encounter even your own family members that disagree with you, you start screaming "bigot." This lets us know you have nothing of substance to bring to the discussion and start screaming "bigot" in an effort to shut us up. This points out a character flaw within you, Wizard, but I must admit it's at least one step up from rolling into a fetal position and crying like a baby.
Perhaps a lot of introspection would reveal your own bigotry and you'd stop throwing around words that apply to yourself more strongly than others.
I'm not angry Longhunter and you're the one who seems apoplectic—did I strike a nerve?
I don't look down on you—far from it—I identify with your indignation and frustration and the impulse to blame the other team for all America's woes. But why are you taking it all so profoundly serious, like some kind of a jihad?
It's Friday and I'm about to be off for a three day weekend. I'm not apoplectic about a thing, Wizard, least of all anything going on here.
"I identify with your indignation and frustration and the impulse to blame the other team for all America's woes."
You and other liberals screamed, cried, and moaned enough about GWB for that to be true. I, on the other hand, blame the guy at the top of the liberal dung heap, Barack Hussein Obama, and the only jihad here is that of Obama on the American Constitution, Wizard.
Ok i am throwing a flag on the play.
Wizard are you one of the folks who thinks if you disagree with the President.......just because you don't agree with his policies...that you are a racist?
Or let's use your term...bigot?
JS, Obama is a disappointment to me in many ways and I don't share his opinions on many things, but I support him as an American and as someone who appreciates his efforts to keep this country together for our grand kids. The man, like us all, is human and has faults but he handles himself with dignity and equanimity.
I know how nutz and angry he makes you because GWB sent my skin crawling for eight long years—but many of the assessments by the right-wingers here are extreme, unfair, exaggerated, unreasonable, petty, calumnious and often outright lies or intentional misrepresentation (like the so called Carville quote going around). Gratefully there are exceptions, however.
My sole reason for arguing provocatively in these forums is to point out what I see as atrocious comments in a public square, where extremism leads to the rot and decay of our discourse, laws, our values and our spirits. Being dyslexic and a sloppy reader, I rely on visual satire and poking fun in hopes of a laugh or two with some occasional irony. The guy behind the Wizard's curtain cares and loves this country and tries to accept and appreciate all of the people on this planet for their unique differences as well as what I share in common with them. I often fail, but like they say in the Far East, "Seven times down, eight times up—such is life!"
I have no doubt you care about and love this country. Many do who post here.
When it comes to the subject of intolerance I have figuratively been called everything but a white man here and literally called that in other forums on other sites. Why?
Merely because I identified myself as Conservative.
Oh and like LH I am from Tennessee originally and you can tell when I speak. My advise on ribbing about your accent is grow a skin.
I have a hub in my experiences growing up with racism.
However I cannot agree with the President. It has nothing whatever to do with his skin color.
I believe you and everybody gets under everybody's skin, sooner or later. The trick, in my view, is to NOT take ourselves and politics TOO seriously. I don't hold a grudge and I have a much thicker skin than I had in my younger days. Nevertheless I still believe extremism forces us all into untenable circumstances—on HP or in the actual world. If we all refuse to compromise our country goes to crap even more so than it has already.
Maybe this is another forum thread, but why are people who consider themselves liberal so narrow minded and those claiming to be conservative so radical?
It would be nice to have a good choice.
Stephen Colbert skewers unskewed polls.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colber … tial-polls
by Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago
they saw President Barack Obama as the president of promise and reformation? During President Obama's administration, unemployment and national debt is the HIGHEST it has been. More and more civil liberties are being eroded. Despite Obama's dismal and horrific record, Americans...
by Josak 6 years ago
Rasmussen has a tie, Fox has a tie, Pew has a tie, ABC/Washington Post have Obama ahead by 1 as do CBS.Gallup has Romney ahead by 5, National Journal has Obama ahead by 5 and they can probably both be written off as outliers and are older than the above which are fresh off the press. Polling...
by VC L Veasey 6 years ago
Why Were Romney Supporters So Sure He Was Going To Win?And Now seem so Angry, Paranoid and Hateful That He Lost?
by Credence2 6 years ago
I am taken back to the site 'unskewed polls' where the conservatives were saying that the mainstream polling system was unfairly skewed in favor of Mr. Obama. So, I bet I could not find them now anywhere among all the bits and bites of the internet. Maybe you guys can add to this most interesting,...
by Sam Dolloff 7 years ago
With the debates underway, and the adds starting to air. The 2012 elections will be here before we know it. I have my favorite candidates I am wondering what others think about the lineup? Please be respectful. I know there are those out here voting for Obama and you can say...
by mel22 8 years ago
Who will be the most viable candidates to run against the Dems next term?Romney?Pawlenty?Jindal?None of the Above? Palin?Other?Your thoughts on ONE that seems most viable as of now!
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|