If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Those new GOP/Fox News talking points about "skewed polling numbers" are "a false narrative that encourages the Republican Party to take the wrong lessons from this election, no matter the outcome"   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 199
    More: Obvious, GOP, talking points, Mitt Romney, President Obama, more equal, Postpartisan, representative samples, election days  
•       •       •

3993 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Sep 2012 at 5:04 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



199 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-28 01:49:21 PM
the Republican Party to take the wrong lessons from this election

I'm pretty sure they were going to do this even before the skewed polls thing came up.
 
2012-09-28 01:55:33 PM
the whole derper echo chamber has them taking away the wrong lesson from pretty much every issue and it makes them further and futher out of touch.
 
2012-09-28 01:56:57 PM
There are no false narratives. There are only narratives that have not yet realized their underlying truth.
 
2012-09-28 01:59:29 PM
Anybody who actually thinks the GOP would moderate themselves should Obama win reelection hasn't been paying attention the last four years.
 
2012-09-28 02:04:09 PM

Serious Black: Anybody who actually thinks the GOP would moderate themselves should Obama win reelection hasn't been paying attention the last four years.


I fear that you are correct.

I suspect they're ridin' this puppy straight into the ground.
 
2012-09-28 02:05:12 PM
As I said in the other thread, this is bordering on dangerous territory, where our elections become systematically untrustworthy as every win is seen as illegitimate by the half of the country that loses.
 
2012-09-28 02:08:26 PM
I'm kinda glad that the GOP isn't learning from its mistakes.
 
2012-09-28 02:12:27 PM
The GOP will take away the lesson that the chicken didn't get farked enough.
 
2012-09-28 02:13:21 PM
"We lost because we ran a pantywaisted moderate"

Get ready to hear that for a few years. They're going to tack even harder right if they lose.
 
2012-09-28 02:14:20 PM

DamnYankees: As I said in the other thread, this is bordering on dangerous territory, where our elections become systematically untrustworthy as every win is seen as illegitimate by the half of the country that loses.


Or the result of widespread voter fraud that needs "fixing".
 
2012-09-28 02:15:19 PM

Quasar: "We lost because we ran a pantywaisted moderate"

Get ready to hear that for a few years. They're going to tack even harder right if they lose.


Yes, yes they will.

And if they manage to get even derpier people in Congress in 2012 and 2014, they can expect to lose the White House in 2016.
 
2012-09-28 02:17:10 PM
Unskewedpolls.com has an update today - a new Fox News poll.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows President Obama attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns the vote from 46%.

Unskewedpolls re-weights the polls based off of Rasmussen data, so one can assume straight Rasmussen numbers should be included in unskewedpoll's graphs.

So unskewed should really look like this:
growlersoftware.com

That's right. The only polls that "really" show Obama leading are Fox News and Rasmussen.
 
2012-09-28 02:22:00 PM
Well, actually lighting their pants on fire would probably not be legal.
 
2012-09-28 02:24:52 PM
I hope they keep purging themselves in order to be more pure.
 
2012-09-28 02:26:07 PM

vudukungfu: Well, actually lighting their pants on fire would probably not be legal.


Even if they ask nicely?
 
2012-09-28 02:27:17 PM

impaler: Unskewedpolls.com has an update today - a new Fox News poll.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows President Obama attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns the vote from 46%.

Unskewedpolls re-weights the polls based off of Rasmussen data, so one can assume straight Rasmussen numbers should be included in unskewedpoll's graphs.

So unskewed should really look like this:
[growlersoftware.com image 533x375]

That's right. The only polls that "really" show Obama leading are Fox News and Rasmussen.


Until next week, Rasmussen is reweighting their polls, so expect a big swing for Romney next week (real or imagined).
 
2012-09-28 02:30:49 PM
I just went to Unskewed Polls. Each one of the poll result leads to an examiner.com page (presumably, written by the guy who runs Unskewed polls).

At the moment, I have my suspicion that Unskewed Polls is just a scam by which the guy gets Examiner.com pageviews, which gets him paid.
 
2012-09-28 02:31:19 PM
Who will be the next ACORN? Or, will the GOP voice its heart's true desire finally, and say it's all the fault of those shiftless, lazy, idle, uppity...socialists?
 
2012-09-28 02:32:13 PM

RexTalionis: At the moment, I have my suspicion that Unskewed Polls is just a scam by which the guy gets Examiner.com pageviews, which gets him paid.


Having been on the Fark politics tab for some time, I've never heard of such a scheme.
 
2012-09-28 02:36:08 PM
I think 2008-10 was the death blow to rationality in the GOP.
 
2012-09-28 02:37:44 PM
This is just setting up for a whole bunch ignorant half-wits being completely convinced that the election was stolen, with all the implications that that carries.
 
2012-09-28 02:39:34 PM

EyeballKid: RexTalionis: At the moment, I have my suspicion that Unskewed Polls is just a scam by which the guy gets Examiner.com pageviews, which gets him paid.

Having been on the Fark politics tab for some time, I've never heard of such a scheme.


Okay, Examiner.com is a news site that functions by having people sign up as contributors. The contributors write stories reporting the news, which is published to the Examiner website (actually, the regional site for the Examiner - for instance, a New York based writer would write for the New York website on Examiner.com).

There is no editorial control over what is published on Examiner.com, the way it works is that whenever there's a click to an examiner.com page, the contributor who writes the page gets paid a certain amount (a few pennies, generally). If you generate tens of thousands of clicks, you can get paid quite a bit if you publish multiple articles on examiner.com every day.

That's why a lot of writers for Examiner.com tend to write hyperbolic hyperpartisan articles - they tend attract the most page views and the most clicks. And, because there is no "editor" making decisions on what gets published and what doesn't, there is almost nothing to stop someone from writing hoax stories or outright lies on that website, which has happened many times already.

Seriously, look it up.
 
j4x
2012-09-28 02:41:08 PM

RexTalionis: I just went to Unskewed Polls. Each one of the poll result leads to an examiner.com page (presumably, written by the guy who runs Unskewed polls).

At the moment, I have my suspicion that Unskewed Polls is just a scam by which the guy gets Examiner.com pageviews, which gets him paid.


I don't believe anything I read on Examiner or any sites associated with Examiner.
 
2012-09-28 02:42:24 PM

Big Red Al: Until next week, Rasmussen is reweighting their polls, so expect a big swing for Romney next week (real or imagined).


Historically, Rasmussen's polling trends closer to average as it gets closer to the election. It's going to be funny when they reweight, causing a cascade of Obama leading on unskewed polls. At which point we will need true_and_honest_unskewed polls to come in an find another nonsensical data transformation that will favor Romney.
 
2012-09-28 02:42:41 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Serious Black: Anybody who actually thinks the GOP would moderate themselves should Obama win reelection hasn't been paying attention the last four years.

I fear that you are correct.

I suspect they're ridin' this puppy straight into the ground.


YEEEE-HAWWW
www.hobbyistblogs.com
 
2012-09-28 02:44:30 PM

RexTalionis: EyeballKid: RexTalionis: At the moment, I have my suspicion that Unskewed Polls is just a scam by which the guy gets Examiner.com pageviews, which gets him paid.

Having been on the Fark politics tab for some time, I've never heard of such a scheme.

Okay, Examiner.com is a news site that functions by having people sign up as contributors. The contributors write stories reporting the news, which is published to the Examiner website (actually, the regional site for the Examiner - for instance, a New York based writer would write for the New York website on Examiner.com).

There is no editorial control over what is published on Examiner.com, the way it works is that whenever there's a click to an examiner.com page, the contributor who writes the page gets paid a certain amount (a few pennies, generally). If you generate tens of thousands of clicks, you can get paid quite a bit if you publish multiple articles on examiner.com every day.

That's why a lot of writers for Examiner.com tend to write hyperbolic hyperpartisan articles - they tend attract the most page views and the most clicks. And, because there is no "editor" making decisions on what gets published and what doesn't, there is almost nothing to stop someone from writing hoax stories or outright lies on that website, which has happened many times already.

Seriously, look it up.


Didn't FARK have an issue a while back with some guy who got his own Examiner articles greenlit like five times a day or something?
 
2012-09-28 02:47:23 PM

Quasar: "We lost because we ran a pantywaisted moderate"

Get ready to hear that for a few years. They're going to tack even harder right if they lose.


Exactly and.

"We lost because what he was mumbling in that fundraiser behind closed doors, he should have been shouting from the podium all along"
 
2012-09-28 02:49:10 PM

RexTalionis: EyeballKid: RexTalionis: At the moment, I have my suspicion that Unskewed Polls is just a scam by which the guy gets Examiner.com pageviews, which gets him paid.

Having been on the Fark politics tab for some time, I've never heard of such a scheme.

Okay, Examiner.com is a news site that functions by having people sign up as contributors. The contributors write stories reporting the news, which is published to the Examiner website (actually, the regional site for the Examiner - for instance, a New York based writer would write for the New York website on Examiner.com).

There is no editorial control over what is published on Examiner.com, the way it works is that whenever there's a click to an examiner.com page, the contributor who writes the page gets paid a certain amount (a few pennies, generally). If you generate tens of thousands of clicks, you can get paid quite a bit if you publish multiple articles on examiner.com every day.

That's why a lot of writers for Examiner.com tend to write hyperbolic hyperpartisan articles - they tend attract the most page views and the most clicks. And, because there is no "editor" making decisions on what gets published and what doesn't, there is almost nothing to stop someone from writing hoax stories or outright lies on that website, which has happened many times already.

Seriously, look it up.


Yup. There was a guy who used to do it with his movie reviews, here.
 
2012-09-28 02:53:40 PM

impaler: Unskewedpolls.com has an update today - a new Fox News poll.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows President Obama attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns the vote from 46%.

Unskewedpolls re-weights the polls based off of Rasmussen data, so one can assume straight Rasmussen numbers should be included in unskewedpoll's graphs.

So unskewed should really look like this:
[growlersoftware.com image 533x375]

That's right. The only polls that "really" show Obama leading are Fox News and Rasmussen.



Ooh. That's some legendary-level denial going on there.
 
2012-09-28 02:56:08 PM

vygramul: DamnYankees: As I said in the other thread, this is bordering on dangerous territory, where our elections become systematically untrustworthy as every win is seen as illegitimate by the half of the country that loses.

Or the result of widespread voter fraud that needs "fixing".


I don't know if that's true if Romney were to win. I think that the Democratic voters across the country would lament the idiocy of those who would elect such a simpering fool, but not really go as far as to say "stolen" or illegitimate or whatever.

However if Obama wins it's almost certain to result in an awful lot of derp.
 
2012-09-28 03:06:55 PM

Elandriel: I think that the Democratic voters across the country would lament the idiocy of those who would elect such a simpering fool, but not really go as far as to say "stolen" or illegitimate or whatever.


Unless Florida screws the election again.
 
2012-09-28 03:16:07 PM

Elandriel: vygramul: DamnYankees: As I said in the other thread, this is bordering on dangerous territory, where our elections become systematically untrustworthy as every win is seen as illegitimate by the half of the country that loses.

Or the result of widespread voter fraud that needs "fixing".

I don't know if that's true if Romney were to win. I think that the Democratic voters across the country would lament the idiocy of those who would elect such a simpering fool, but not really go as far as to say "stolen" or illegitimate or whatever.

However if Obama wins it's almost certain to result in an awful lot of derp.


If Obama wins the conversion of America to an African-style Socialist Kleptocracy will be complete and the Soviet USSA will begin its path through 1,000 years of darkness.

That will be the opening derp and then it will get weird.
 
2012-09-28 03:17:32 PM
alltheragefaces.com
 
2012-09-28 03:27:05 PM

DamnYankees: As I said in the other thread, this is bordering on dangerous territory, where our elections become systematically untrustworthy as every win is seen as illegitimate by the half of the country that loses.


blogs.e-rockford.com
 
2012-09-28 03:35:53 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Serious Black: Anybody who actually thinks the GOP would moderate themselves should Obama win reelection hasn't been paying attention the last four years.

I fear that you are correct.

I suspect they're ridin' this puppy straight into the ground.


Four more years of their core demographic dying off. Should work out well, Of course, the smart people have all left flyover country, leaving behind only tards, so they'll still have 40+ senate votes.
 
2012-09-28 03:41:35 PM
I'm still not willing to totally begin to write Romney's obituary yet, but we're getting close, and crazier things have happened, but I'm not so sure if the problem was with GOP's message or ideas, so much as Romney just isn't a likable sort of guy. If the exact same campaign had been run by Chris Christie or Mike Huckabee, I think the outcome would probably be different.

Clearly the lessons of 2004 went unheeded. This was the GOP's election to lose, a sluggish economy, high unemployment, and a sitting president with a dismal approval rating meant that this election by all rights should have been an easy knockout. Unfortunately all the best contenders decided to sit this one out and try their luck against what will likely be a much weaker lineup of competitors that the Democrats will field in 2016, for better or for worse. Oh well, what are ya gonna do?
 
2012-09-28 03:45:54 PM

spman: I'm still not willing to totally begin to write Romney's obituary yet, but we're getting close, and crazier things have happened, but I'm not so sure if the problem was with GOP's message or ideas, so much as Romney just isn't a likable sort of guy. If the exact same campaign had been run by Chris Christie or Mike Huckabee, I think the outcome would probably be different.

Clearly the lessons of 2004 went unheeded. This was the GOP's election to lose, a sluggish economy, high unemployment, and a sitting president with a dismal approval rating meant that this election by all rights should have been an easy knockout. Unfortunately all the best contenders decided to sit this one out and try their luck against what will likely be a much weaker lineup of competitors that the Democrats will field in 2016, for better or for worse. Oh well, what are ya gonna do?


have you looked at the polling data?

electoral-vote.com

347 Obama, 191 Romney - WITH RASMUSSEN INCLUDED
 
2012-09-28 03:50:45 PM

spman: If the exact same campaign had been run by Chris Christie or Mike Huckabee, I think the outcome would probably be different.


The thing is though, you couldn't run the exact same campaign with Chris Christie. He would be yelling at reporters instead of making odd comments about trees being the right height. Huckabee would at least come off as a genuine individual and give concrete (albeit insane) policy ideas. Romney's a one-of-a-kind guy whose personal oddities make his campaign something special and it can't be reproduced.
 
2012-09-28 03:51:50 PM
FTFA: If pollsters look at a demographically representative sample of registered or likely voters and find fewer Republicans than might be expected, it could be that voters who once might have called themselves Republicans no longer feel comfortable with the label.

Because I would rather not be viewed as a tea partier.
 
2012-09-28 03:52:35 PM

Kazan: spman: I'm still not willing to totally begin to write Romney's obituary yet, but we're getting close, and crazier things have happened, but I'm not so sure if the problem was with GOP's message or ideas, so much as Romney just isn't a likable sort of guy. If the exact same campaign had been run by Chris Christie or Mike Huckabee, I think the outcome would probably be different.

Clearly the lessons of 2004 went unheeded. This was the GOP's election to lose, a sluggish economy, high unemployment, and a sitting president with a dismal approval rating meant that this election by all rights should have been an easy knockout. Unfortunately all the best contenders decided to sit this one out and try their luck against what will likely be a much weaker lineup of competitors that the Democrats will field in 2016, for better or for worse. Oh well, what are ya gonna do?

have you looked at the polling data?

[electoral-vote.com image 580x359]

347 Obama, 191 Romney - WITH RASMUSSEN INCLUDED


I'm not in denial, I'm just saying that 4 weeks is enough time for Israel to blown up Iran and spark World War 3, American Embassies to burn to the ground in numerous Middle Eastern countries, Obama to inexplicably turn into a blubbering idiot during a debate, an insane stock market crash, or any number of plausible catastrophic events to occur, which would change the whole game overnight. Is Romney going to win? Almost certainly not. Are there still reasonably plausible scenarios in which such an outcome could take place? Absolutely.
 
2012-09-28 03:55:37 PM
Republicans deluded by 'skewed' polls

FTFY, Headline Writer.
 
2012-09-28 03:56:31 PM

Kazan: spman: I'm still not willing to totally begin to write Romney's obituary yet, but we're getting close, and crazier things have happened, but I'm not so sure if the problem was with GOP's message or ideas, so much as Romney just isn't a likable sort of guy. If the exact same campaign had been run by Chris Christie or Mike Huckabee, I think the outcome would probably be different.

Clearly the lessons of 2004 went unheeded. This was the GOP's election to lose, a sluggish economy, high unemployment, and a sitting president with a dismal approval rating meant that this election by all rights should have been an easy knockout. Unfortunately all the best contenders decided to sit this one out and try their luck against what will likely be a much weaker lineup of competitors that the Democrats will field in 2016, for better or for worse. Oh well, what are ya gonna do?

have you looked at the polling data?

[electoral-vote.com image 580x359]

347 Obama, 191 Romney - WITH RASMUSSEN INCLUDED


What about the new and improved Rasmussen polling announce today?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 03:58:42 PM

Serious Black: Anybody who actually thinks the GOP would moderate themselves should Obama win reelection hasn't been paying attention the last four years.


They will certainly change course. The red-necks aren't in control of the party, the wealthy are.
 
2012-09-28 04:03:19 PM

spman: I'm not in denial, I'm just saying that 4 weeks is enough time for Israel to blown up Iran and spark World War 3, American Embassies to burn to the ground in numerous Middle Eastern countries, Obama to inexplicably turn into a blubbering idiot during a debate, an insane stock market crash, or any number of plausible catastrophic events to occur, which would change the whole game overnight. Is Romney going to win? Almost certainly not. Are there still reasonably plausible scenarios in which such an outcome could take place? Absolutely.


I'm not worried about any foreign policy issue that might arise. Romney's smirk killed the belief he could do anything on that front. But the rest? Yeah. I know. I want to be optimistic, but am very cautious.
 
2012-09-28 04:04:23 PM

ghare: the smart people have all left flyover country


Hey man, some of us are stuck here. Yeah my state got pretty stupid in 2010 but things are feeling better for the next cycle. We will just have to see.
 
2012-09-28 04:04:47 PM

vpb: Serious Black: Anybody who actually thinks the GOP would moderate themselves should Obama win reelection hasn't been paying attention the last four years.

They will certainly change course. The red-necks aren't in control of the party, the wealthy are.


I dunno, some of those retards seem to be voting differently than the wealthy.
 
2012-09-28 04:26:32 PM
My 90YO grandpa is going to be voting for Obama...

Life long republican.

WWII vet.

Even he thinks the Republican party has jumped the shark.

I really don't think it will be as close at the polls say.
 
2012-09-28 04:34:06 PM
Obama winning is trading at 78% on Intrade. I'd like to see someone unskew that tidbit.
 
2012-09-28 04:50:02 PM

mrshowrules: Obama winning is trading at 78% on Intrade. I'd like to see someone unskew that tidbit.


In the Iowa election markets, he's trading at $0.82 and Romney at $0.18. Economic conservatives are supposed to believe that money talks, bullshiat walks. Except when they don't like it, of course.
 
2012-09-28 05:05:38 PM
 
Displayed 50 of 199 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report