Conservatives continue to worship pollster who predicted Romney would beat Obama

[A Perez]

As you can see in this thread Trump vs Hillary : A dead heat | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Conservatives lack the part of the brain in charge of processing information on how much Scott Rasmussen sucks as a pollster.
Rasmussen had Romney beating Obama in his last pre-election poll in 2012.
His Senate forecasts were similarly atrocious, and had a pro-Republican bias.

Political analyst and statistician Nate Silver analyzed pollsters and ranked Rasmussen among the bottom worst.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...best-and-worst-in-the-2012-presidential-race/

Conservatives have been told this, but they have not heard it. Because of the absence of the aforementioned brain region.
And since Rasmussen is a self-confessed conservative who called for the privatization of Social Security, they trust his biased polls, as he is always ready to pretend that Republicans are faring better than they really are.
Truth about Social Security reform
An alternative possibility is that conservatives know how much Rasmussen sucks but are just playing dumb.

 

[TemplarKormac]

That coming from the cult of Hillary.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Gallup also had Romney winning, Politcio, Monmouth and CNN had it all tied up...shall we disregard those polls also?

 

[A Perez]

That coming from the cult of Hillary.

This person lacks the part of the brain in question. His "Hillary" neurons activated in response to a thread about Scott Rasmussen.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

That coming from the cult of Hillary.

This person lacks the part of the brain in question. His "Hillary" neurons activated in response to a thread about Scott Rasmussen.

You referenced Hillary in your OP....you're new to this?

 

[TemplarKormac]

That coming from the cult of Hillary.

This person lacks the part of the brain in question. His "Hillary" neurons activated in response to a thread about Scott Rasmussen.

At least I have neurons...

 

[Kosh]

It is so cute to watch the far left drones actually believe they get a choice in their nominations..

 

[A Perez]

Gallup also had Romney winning, Politcio, Monmouth and CNN had it all tied up...shall we disregard those polls also?

Rasmussen fucking up the Senate races, which distinguishes among the sucky ones. And Gallup was so embarrassed that it stopped making polls at all this year.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Gallup also had Romney winning, Politcio, Monmouth and CNN had it all tied up...shall we disregard those polls also?

Rasmussen fucking up the Senate races, which distinguishes among the sucky ones. And Gallup was so embarrassed that it stopped making polls at all this year.

Excuses are like...well you know

 

[easyt65]

Ahhh, I see the Libs are dragging us back into the past again, refusing to just 'let it go'. WHO cares? Romney lost, Obama won. 2016 is not about either Obama or Romney.... nothing to see here....move along.

 

[gipper]

As you can see in this thread Trump vs Hillary : A dead heat | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Conservatives lack the part of the brain in charge of processing information on how much Scott Rasmussen sucks as a pollster.
Rasmussen had Romney beating Obama in his last pre-election poll in 2012.
His Senate forecasts were similarly atrocious, and had a pro-Republican bias.

Political analyst and statistician Nate Silver analyzed pollsters and ranked Rasmussen among the bottom worst.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...best-and-worst-in-the-2012-presidential-race/

Conservatives have been told this, but they have not heard it. Because of the absence of the aforementioned brain region.
And since Rasmussen is a self-confessed conservative who called for the privatization of Social Security, they trust his biased polls, as he is always ready to pretend that Republicans are faring better than they really are.
Truth about Social Security reform
An alternative possibility is that conservatives know how much Rasmussen sucks but are just playing dumb.

Okay.

Then what do you conclude about liberals, who worship the lying thieves Obama and Mrs. BJ? Anything?

 

[A Perez]

That coming from the cult of Hillary.

This person lacks the part of the brain in question. His "Hillary" neurons activated in response to a thread about Scott Rasmussen.

You referenced Hillary in your OP....you're new to this?

So because the word "Hillary" appears once in the thread, (though I made no comments about her) you consider it to be central to whether or not Rasmussen sucks?
How relevant is Hillary to the argument in question? Face it. you missing that part of the brain. Stop looking for a lame excuses for your stupidity.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

That coming from the cult of Hillary.

This person lacks the part of the brain in question. His "Hillary" neurons activated in response to a thread about Scott Rasmussen.

You referenced Hillary in your OP....you're new to this?

So because the word "Hillary" appears once in the thread you consider it to be central to whether or not Rasmussen sucks?
How relevant is Hillary to the argument in question? Face it. you missing that part of the brain

You're becoming annoying. You mentioned Hillary and left the door open. That's how it works

 

[A Perez]

That coming from the cult of Hillary.

This person lacks the part of the brain in question. His "Hillary" neurons activated in response to a thread about Scott Rasmussen.

You referenced Hillary in your OP....you're new to this?

So because the word "Hillary" appears once in the thread you consider it to be central to whether or not Rasmussen sucks?
How relevant is Hillary to the argument in question? Face it. you missing that part of the brain

You're becoming annoying. You mentioned Hillary and left the door open. That's how it works

You have not made a connection between the word Hillary appearing once in the thread and how accurate Rasmussen is. You are missing the Rasmussen part of the brain

 

[TemplarKormac]

When the thread the OP cites specifically references Hillary Clinton, the link is easy to make.

Get it?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

When the thread the OP cites specifically references Hillary Clinton, the link is easy to make.

Get it?

Sadly he doesn't LOL

 

[Lumpy 1]

My diagnosis ... common sense particle..

 

[HappyJoy]

Wow, major deflection going on. Rasmussen sucks, it's documented. And as pointed out, Gallup sucked in 2012 as well. Nobody who looked at ALL the polls in 2012 thought Romney was going to win.

Memories...


And you numb nuts are doing it again.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Rasmussen knows where its bread is buttered

 

[IcebergSlim]

As you can see in this thread Trump vs Hillary : A dead heat | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Conservatives lack the part of the brain in charge of processing information on how much Scott Rasmussen sucks as a pollster.
Rasmussen had Romney beating Obama in his last pre-election poll in 2012.
His Senate forecasts were similarly atrocious, and had a pro-Republican bias.

Political analyst and statistician Nate Silver analyzed pollsters and ranked Rasmussen among the bottom worst.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...best-and-worst-in-the-2012-presidential-race/

Conservatives have been told this, but they have not heard it. Because of the absence of the aforementioned brain region.
And since Rasmussen is a self-confessed conservative who called for the privatization of Social Security, they trust his biased polls, as he is always ready to pretend that Republicans are faring better than they really are.
Truth about Social Security reform
An alternative possibility is that conservatives know how much Rasmussen sucks but are just playing dumb.

Okay.

Then what do you conclude about liberals, who worship the lying thieves Obama and Mrs. BJ? Anything?

I dunno......THIS:

is shit worthy of some propers right there...........