The parallel universe where Mitt Romney leads all polls

[Liability]

No, it doesn't make it more accurate

If the voter population that the poll is evaluating is skewed, the poll should be skewed also. Not all popuations follow a perfect bell shaped curve

Wrong you fucking twit.

Nobody said ANYTHING about following a bell shaped curve, except you, you fraud.

The unskewing of the VARIOUS polls takes into account the VARIOUS political party affiliations of the respective places being polled.

You really must try to educate yourself someday, you hapless fuckchop.

Every poll is conducted by different methodologies. Artificial "unskewing" applies equal party affiliations where they do not exist. If a voter identifies as a republican, he IS a republican that day. Trying to unskew that is bad science

Regardless of the allegedly different methodologies, fuckchop, the fact remains that a vast majority of the polls (once you get underneath their surfaces) have significant OVERSAMPLING of Dims.

Denying that will not make it go away.

The ONLY way those polls thus have any chance of being statistically valid is IF -- for unknown reasons yet to be revealed -- the Dims throng to the polls in outlandishly higher percentages than the Republicans.

I think you should bank on that. Bet the ranch on that happening, in fact.

FAILING to unskew the invalid polls is the bad science, ya fuckwit.

 

[Truthmatters]

they long ago abandoned facts for the party line

 

[Liability]

No, it doesn't make it more accurate

If the voter population that the poll is evaluating is skewed, the poll should be skewed also. Not all popuations follow a perfect bell shaped curve

Wrong you fucking twit.

Nobody said ANYTHING about following a bell shaped curve, except you, you fraud.

The unskewing of the VARIOUS polls takes into account the VARIOUS political party affiliations of the respective places being polled.

You really must try to educate yourself someday, you hapless fuckchop.

What's the party affiliation of the state of Ohio, at this moment?

Is that an unknown to you, fuckwit?

If so, then you are admitting that you have NO fucking notion as to whether or not the polls are valid or not.

 

[Liability]

they long ago abandoned facts for the party line

And by "they" the dishonest hack TderpM means herself, of course.

 

[rightwinger]

Wrong you fucking twit.

Nobody said ANYTHING about following a bell shaped curve, except you, you fraud.

The unskewing of the VARIOUS polls takes into account the VARIOUS political party affiliations of the respective places being polled.

You really must try to educate yourself someday, you hapless fuckchop.

Every poll is conducted by different methodologies. Artificial "unskewing" applies equal party affiliations where they do not exist. If a voter identifies as a republican, he IS a republican that day. Trying to unskew that is bad science

Regardless of the allegedly different methodologies, fuckchop, the fact remains that a vast majority of the polls (once you get underneath their surfaces) have significant OVERSAMPLING of Dims.

Denying that will not make it go away.
The ONLY way those polls thus have any chance of being statistically valid is IF -- for unknown reasons yet to be revealed -- the Dims throng to the polls in outlandishly higher percentages than the Republicans.

I think you should bank on that. Bet the ranch on that happening, in fact.

FAILING to unskew the invalid polls is the bad science, ya fuckwit.

Texas has an oversampling of Republicans, So does Arizona

Ready to unskew those states?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Wrong you fucking twit.

Nobody said ANYTHING about following a bell shaped curve, except you, you fraud.

The unskewing of the VARIOUS polls takes into account the VARIOUS political party affiliations of the respective places being polled.

You really must try to educate yourself someday, you hapless fuckchop.

What's the party affiliation of the state of Ohio, at this moment?

Is that an unknown to you, fuckwit?

If so, then you are admitting that you have NO fucking notion as to whether or not the polls are valid or not.

I asked YOU if YOU know. If you knew, you would say so and state it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, it doesn't make it more accurate

If the voter population that the poll is evaluating is skewed, the poll should be skewed also. Not all popuations follow a perfect bell shaped curve

Wrong you fucking twit.

Nobody said ANYTHING about following a bell shaped curve, except you, you fraud.

The unskewing of the VARIOUS polls takes into account the VARIOUS political party affiliations of the respective places being polled.

You really must try to educate yourself someday, you hapless fuckchop.

unskewedpolls.com's daily tracking poll now has Obama leading by 4.

Do you accept that as accurate, by YOUR standards?

I guess I need to bump this question for Liability.

It will close this case if he refuses to answer.

 

[Liability]

Every poll is conducted by different methodologies. Artificial "unskewing" applies equal party affiliations where they do not exist. If a voter identifies as a republican, he IS a republican that day. Trying to unskew that is bad science

Regardless of the allegedly different methodologies, fuckchop, the fact remains that a vast majority of the polls (once you get underneath their surfaces) have significant OVERSAMPLING of Dims.

Denying that will not make it go away.
The ONLY way those polls thus have any chance of being statistically valid is IF -- for unknown reasons yet to be revealed -- the Dims throng to the polls in outlandishly higher percentages than the Republicans.

I think you should bank on that. Bet the ranch on that happening, in fact.

FAILING to unskew the invalid polls is the bad science, ya fuckwit.

Texas has an oversampling of Republicans, So does Arizona

Ready to unskew those states?

Have a blast if you think that makes any difference.

Not that I accept your unsupported contention in the first place, of course.

 

[Oddball]

The parallel universe where Mitt Romney leads all polls - POLITICO.com Print View

On TV, talk radio and especially the Internet is a place where the swing-state polls that show Romney losing are not just inaccurate but part of an intentional plot by the heretofore unknown media-pollster axis to depress Republican voters. In this other world, Romney not only isn’t losing — he’s on the verge of a convincing victory.

“I believe if the election were held today, Romney would win by 4 or 5 points,” trumpeted Dick Morris on Fox News last week, predicting a win for the GOP ticket in Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Nevada and Pennsylvania. In public polls right now, Romney is losing in each of those states. But, Morris said, that’s because the data are all wrong.

Conservative talk radio king Rush Limbaugh senses something more nefarious in the media and university polls.

“They are designed to do exactly what I have warned you to be vigilant about and that is to depress you and suppress your vote,” Limbaugh told his listeners last week, after bringing up swing-state surveys from The Washington Post and CBS News and Quinnipiac University. “These two polls today are designed to convince everybody this election is over.”

One website, unskewedpolls.com, even readjusts the public polling to include more Republicans in samples. The results: Romney leads in nearly every national poll released in September. Of course arbitrarily reweighting polls is wildly unscientific, but that hasn’t stopped Republicans like Limbaugh and even Texas Gov. Rick Perry from mentioning the site

Nobody said anything about Vinnie Vitalis leading all polls, Captain Strawman.

But at least you and the hacks at Politico got around to inadvertently giving some more free publicity and advertizing for Rush.

 

[Liability]

What's the party affiliation of the state of Ohio, at this moment?

Is that an unknown to you, fuckwit?

If so, then you are admitting that you have NO fucking notion as to whether or not the polls are valid or not.

I asked YOU if YOU know. If you knew, you would say so and state it.

Yes. Then I turned the question around on you. And YOU would have answered if you knew.

The difference is, if you don't know (and you don't) then you have no basis to accept as valid the percentage of Dim respondents to Ohio polls regarding the 2012 Presidential Election.

The only way to "know" the actual party affiliation of the Ohio electorate, you assclown, is to gauge it by how they voted in the last election.

The data here is a bit dated (i.e., 2008), but according to the vote tally in the Presidential Election, it broke down as: Popular vote 2,940,044 (for Obama) 2,677,820 (for McCain) which equals roughly Percentage 51.5% Dim 46.9% (GOP) in '08. (Numbers from Wiki).

Now, if the current polling reflects even THAT degree of a Dim vs GOP ratio, then even a fucking assclown dolt like you SHOULD be able to figure out why it's invalid.

Do you imagine that the Dims can GET OUT THE enthusiastic vote like they did in '08 given the hideous record of nearly ceaseless FAIL from the incumbent?

You are a dolt, but even you can't be THAT completely delusional. Can you?

 

[Liability]

Wrong you fucking twit.

Nobody said ANYTHING about following a bell shaped curve, except you, you fraud.

The unskewing of the VARIOUS polls takes into account the VARIOUS political party affiliations of the respective places being polled.

You really must try to educate yourself someday, you hapless fuckchop.

unskewedpolls.com's daily tracking poll now has Obama leading by 4.

Do you accept that as accurate, by YOUR standards?

I guess I need to bump this question for Liability.

It will close this case if he refuses to answer.

LOL.

Another pathetic attempt by Carbuncle.

I don't accept ANY current polling as valid. I also don't go about simply rejecting polls just because I do not like what they presently show.

I would say AGAIN that the unskewed polling results are likely to be a better snapshot than the skewed polls.

I see no reason to accept the "result" of any poll when I know already that the sample used to craft the poll is skewed.

I understand why you would choose to embrace such shit, though,

 

[AceRothstein]

Even Chris Christie thinks that "poll truthers" are idiots.

Chris Christie dismisses poll truthers: The polls aren’t rigged against Romney | The Raw Story

 

[Truthmatters]

Even Chris Christie thinks that "poll truthers" are idiots.

Chris Christie dismisses poll truthers: The polls aren’t rigged against Romney | The Raw Story

there are some republicans who wish to have a poltical carreer when this tea party faction of idiots are purged from the party in the next few years.


They will begin to do this more often in the coming months

 

[Leweman]

Gallup: Republicans Open Up Huge Enthusiasm Gap « TD Blog

 

[Liability]

Even Chris Christie thinks that "poll truthers" are idiots.

Chris Christie dismisses poll truthers: The polls aren’t rigged against Romney | The Raw Story

Today, when the guy says something you happen to like, you quote him.

But tomorrow, when he points out what a bunch of mindless fuckwits you libs are, you will note that he is "fat."

There is no such thing as a "poll truther," anyway.

What there IS, amongst many of us, is a willingness to call bullshit on skewed polls. There's no reason to "buy" horseshit just because the lame stream media likes it.

Until you goobers recognize that the polls are skewed, you will continue to lap up the shit that you are being shoveled.

Actually, that's pretty funny to me. Bon appetit!

 

[rightwinger]

Even Chris Christie thinks that "poll truthers" are idiots.

Chris Christie dismisses poll truthers: The polls aren’t rigged against Romney | The Raw Story

Today, when the guy says something you happen to like, you quote him.

But tomorrow, when he points out what a bunch of mindless fuckwits you libs are, you will note that he is "fat."

There is no such thing as a "poll truther," anyway.

What there IS, amongst many of us, is a willingness to call bullshit on skewed polls. There's no reason to "buy" horseshit just because the lame stream media likes it.

Until you goobers recognize that the polls are skewed, you will continue to lap up the shit that you are being shoveled.

Actually, that's pretty funny to me. Bon appetit!

Do you believe that polls should have an equal number of Democrats and Republicans to be accurate?

 

[Liability]

Even Chris Christie thinks that "poll truthers" are idiots.

Chris Christie dismisses poll truthers: The polls aren’t rigged against Romney | The Raw Story

Today, when the guy says something you happen to like, you quote him.

But tomorrow, when he points out what a bunch of mindless fuckwits you libs are, you will note that he is "fat."

There is no such thing as a "poll truther," anyway.

What there IS, amongst many of us, is a willingness to call bullshit on skewed polls. There's no reason to "buy" horseshit just because the lame stream media likes it.

Until you goobers recognize that the polls are skewed, you will continue to lap up the shit that you are being shoveled.

Actually, that's pretty funny to me. Bon appetit!

Do you believe that polls should have an equal number of Democrats and Republicans to be accurate?

No. You nitwit. You are incapable of paying attention apparently.

 

[AceRothstein]

Even Chris Christie thinks that "poll truthers" are idiots.

Chris Christie dismisses poll truthers: The polls aren’t rigged against Romney | The Raw Story

Today, when the guy says something you happen to like, you quote him.

But tomorrow, when he points out what a bunch of mindless fuckwits you libs are, you will note that he is "fat."

There is no such thing as a "poll truther," anyway.

What there IS, amongst many of us, is a willingness to call bullshit on skewed polls. There's no reason to "buy" horseshit just because the lame stream media likes it.

Until you goobers recognize that the polls are skewed, you will continue to lap up the shit that you are being shoveled.

Actually, that's pretty funny to me. Bon appetit!

Did you pull any muscles with all that stretching you did there?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Is that an unknown to you, fuckwit?

If so, then you are admitting that you have NO fucking notion as to whether or not the polls are valid or not.

I asked YOU if YOU know. If you knew, you would say so and state it.

Yes. Then I turned the question around on you. And YOU would have answered if you knew.

The difference is, if you don't know (and you don't) then you have no basis to accept as valid the percentage of Dim respondents to Ohio polls regarding the 2012 Presidential Election.

The only way to "know" the actual party affiliation of the Ohio electorate, you assclown, is to gauge it by how they voted in the last election.

The data here is a bit dated (i.e., 2008), but according to the vote tally in the Presidential Election, it broke down as: Popular vote 2,940,044 (for Obama) 2,677,820 (for McCain) which equals roughly Percentage 51.5% Dim 46.9% (GOP) in '08. (Numbers from Wiki).

Now, if the current polling reflects even THAT degree of a Dim vs GOP ratio, then even a fucking assclown dolt like you SHOULD be able to figure out why it's invalid.

Do you imagine that the Dims can GET OUT THE enthusiastic vote like they did in '08 given the hideous record of nearly ceaseless FAIL from the incumbent?

You are a dolt, but even you can't be THAT completely delusional. Can you?

So we don't know what the respective party turnout is going to be in 2012, but you want the pollsters to make a subjective guess that it won't be as favorable for Democrats?

So you end up with a self fulfilling prophecy:

1. The pollster subjectively assumes Obama can't get turnout in his favor comparable to 2008.

2. The pollster subjectively alters the D - R ratio based on that assumption.

3. The lower D's in the new, manufactured ratio by itself produces poll numbers less favorable to Obama than Romney.

See? You've manufactured the results based on a subjective, manufactured premise.


Let's apply that 'logic' in another way.

1. Let's assume that Ohioans are not enthusiastic about Romney. Let's assume that Ohioans are crediting Obama more with their lower UE rate than they are the Republicans. Let's assume that Ohioans broadly support the auto bailout that Romney opposed.

2. With those assumptions, let's lower the GOP turnout vs. the Democrats.

3. With lower R turnout, the poll numbers for Obama go up.

 

[NYcarbineer]

unskewedpolls.com's daily tracking poll now has Obama leading by 4.

Do you accept that as accurate, by YOUR standards?

I guess I need to bump this question for Liability.

It will close this case if he refuses to answer.

.

I don't accept ANY current polling as valid. I also don't go about simply rejecting polls just because I do not like what they presently show.

You just did. You refuse to acknowledge the unskewed tracking poll is accurate by your own repeated insistence of what is accurate.

You are rejecting the very argument you've been making for days.

Obama is winning in the poll you praise as 'unskewed' by about the same margin than he's winning in the so-called 'skewed' polls.

I think a logical person with any amount of brain and common sense would conclude that Obama, at this point,

is winning, period.