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.

(The New York Times)   Let's see what Nate Silver has to say as "most of the polls that we've seen over the past several days are the last ones that polling firms will be releasing into the field"   (fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com) divider line 51
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

6135 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Nov 2012 at 4:06 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-11-03 04:23:51 PM
6 votes:

Dull Cow Eyes: "For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased"


See? Even Nate Silver admits the polls are biased.


/Willard will win eventually. If not in 2012, then in 2016, 2020, or 2024


My biggest hope is that Mitt Romney loses this election and never stops running. I hope he spends his entire fortune chasing that impossible dream. I hope he and his family become laughing stocks, punchlines and that they kill their corrupt horrible party doing it.
2012-11-03 05:40:12 PM
5 votes:

Blue_Blazer: ignatius_crumbcake: LeftOfLiberal: Popcorn Johnny: The electoral college is a ridiculously outdated concept and should be done away with.

If the electoral college cost Romeny the election you know the right will be calling for the constitutional amendment to get rid of it.

Their 2012 platform specifically is against it. I don't disagree with you, but to try and get rid of it would require an overnight 180 degree flip that I'm not even sure the GOP is capable of.

Plus an amendment requires 3/4 of the states to ratify it, and that will never happen.

FTFPlatform:
The Continuing Importance of Protecting the Electoral College (Top)

We oppose the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact or any other scheme to abolish or distort the procedures of the Electoral College. We recognize that an unconstitutional effort to impose "national popular vote" would be a mortal threat to our federal system and a guarantee of corruption as every ballot box in every state would become a chance to steal the presidency.

I know they flip-flop more than John Kerry, but I think they understand changing demographics, and that their only hope is with the Electoral College, if not now, then certainly in the near future.



They'll never support disposing of the Electoral College. If there's no Electoral College, then campaigns will focus almost entirely on the largest cities in the country, due to the cost-benefit of targeting high population density areas.

This will make it infinitely more difficult for Republicans to campaign for president since they almost never win urban areas, and it would immediately remove the Republican party from ever being a presidential contender ever again.


This is similar to how they want to remove popular voting of senators as well. When faced with a popular vote situation where they cannot gerrymander districts to their favor, Republicans generally lose, which is why they are unable to take back the Senate, despite having an overwhelming majority in the House. In general, popular votes simply do not favor Republicans; or rather, they don't give them the advantage they want.


Here's an article about how the Republicans have used Gerrymandering to permanently conquer the House.

www.washingtonpost.com

Basically there's a nearly 50/50 split of Democrats and Republicans in the country, but because of redistricting tricks they've managed to make it so that they always have 195 safe seats vs Democrats 166 safe seats. That gives them a 20% advantage right off the bat.


Republicans know that the more people learn about them, the less they want to vote for them, so they must continually fight for ways to game the system.
2012-11-03 06:00:49 PM
4 votes:
Well, we've seen the build up for years now.

The hyping of Romney as the 'great hope'....

The in-fighting and feuding with the Tea Partiers..

The betrayal of The Paulites at the RNC..

Romney's anointing and then his subsequent slow-motion self-destruction over the course of six months of campaigning.

Do you wonder if he sits up at night, thinking to himself..."This is why I got thrashed and harassed and insulted by morons on my OWN SIDE for a year and a half? To be thrown under the bus by Chris Christie at the last minute? To be a sacrifice to a President that we couldn't beat?"

Has he come to terms with the hard numbers yet? Has he faced up to the reality that he's about to lose the race of his life, a race he had no real chance of winning, but convinced himself that he 'deserved'?

Does he realize yet that he was the chosen lamb to be slaughtered on the altar of necessity? That he was 'given' that shot knowing that he was meant to fail, to lose spectacularly so that his own party could purge the crazies and fringe idiots that they themselves courted in 2010?

Would his ego let him grasp that reality?

And does he realize yet that when he loses, as he was destined to lose, he's going to be viciously torn apart by that very party that chose him to fail...for daring to fail?

He'll be harassed and insulted by men and women like Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin. He'll be mocked by the movers and shakers in his party, ridiculed as a loser by a core group of people who would NEVER dare take the chance to run themselves, the shock jocks and talking heads...

It's like watching the last leg of a marathon, with one guy way out in front, just cruising, and the other guy is behind...Painfully behind...and you can 'see' it on his face, he knows he's going to lose, and he wants to quit so bad, he wants to stop, but you can't.

You can't stop and walk away. You 'have' to finish, even knowing that you've failed, you have to 'finish' failing before you can walk off the field.

It's almost enough to feel bad for him. And then you remember the comments about 'the 47%'. And then you just grin and set the DVR to record his concession speech.
2012-11-03 04:11:33 PM
4 votes:
The electoral college is a ridiculously outdated concept and should be done away with.
2012-11-03 04:27:17 PM
3 votes:

Dull Cow Eyes: /Willard will win eventually. If not in 2012, then in 2016, 2020, or 2024


I think he's pissed off enough of the party elite that he won't make it far in 2016. Someone with charisma will show up when they're not facing the prospect of running against Obama. They thought they had a chance in 2008, so they put up somebody who could have won (till they screwed it all up). Romney got in because everyone better than him realized this election was career suicide and found better things to do until 2016. There will be a MUCH better slate in the republican primaries next time around. The loonies will still be there, of course, but there will be a real contender or two as well.
2012-11-03 04:18:43 PM
3 votes:
I truly cannot comprehend the amount of Republican butthurt that will exist starting about 8pm on Tuesday night.


In men, the researchers found, a Super Bowl loss was associated with a 15 percent increase in heart deaths compared to expected deaths, whereas in women, there was a 27 percent increase. The risks were greater in seniors than in younger folks. In terms of absolute risk, there were an extra 2.6 deaths per 100,000 people over age 65 each day during the two weeks following the loss; for those under 65, the increased death rate was 0.11 per 100,000 people each day.



I have to wonder, how many people Obama is going to kill just by being re-elected.

Think about it. I have never seen such vehement angst about an election before. It's even worse than 2008 for Thor's sake. It's not out of the realm of possibility to think that there will be a few people so pissed off about this that they'll have heart attacks.

/If there is a God, please let one of them be Rush Limbaugh
2012-11-03 02:51:25 PM
3 votes:

themindiswatching: We don't just want a horse race, we know in our gut that it is one.


If you want to think it is a horse race. It has 5 perfectly identical horses. Obama owns 4 and Romney owns 1. Place your bets.
2012-11-03 11:19:06 AM
3 votes:
Nevertheless, these arguments are potentially more intellectually coherent than the ones that propose that the race is "too close to call." It isn't. If the state polls are right, then Mr. Obama will win the Electoral College. If you can't acknowledge that after a day when Mr. Obama leads 19 out of 20 swing-state polls, then you should abandon the pretense that your goal is to inform rather than entertain the public.

Couldn't have called Scarborough (AND his editor!) out more plainly.
2012-11-03 04:56:01 PM
2 votes:

WombatControl: all the inexplicable things going on with the numbers


Care to elaborate?
2012-11-03 04:34:13 PM
2 votes:

3_Butt_Cheeks: And replaced with what?


A month-long post-election reality TV deathmatch between teams of electors, of course. The ratings would be fantastic.
2012-11-03 04:27:40 PM
2 votes:
Maybe all of this polling information will show that the era of 2 parties isn't in the best monetary interest of the 24/7 media and they need to let a 3rd and 4th party in to play against the other 2. Look at the primaries, they filled a ton of time with all the flavor of the week candidates.

One can dream.
2012-11-03 04:09:53 PM
2 votes:
Does anyone study the butterfly effect of polling?

There might be some PhD grade stuff to research on the effects of polls on future poll results.
2012-11-03 11:59:07 AM
2 votes:

Uchiha_Cycliste: cameroncrazy1984: GAT_00: Yeah, Nate has buckled a little under the pressure and attacks

I don't call that "buckling," I call that "having a spine" which is not something that media people are generally known for.

Should we really call him a media person? He's a math geek who's good enough at what he does that the NYTimes gave him a blog. I don't think he would consider himself a media personality.


He is one of the most important people to this election cycle. And just because you don't want to be a media person doesn't mean you aren't.
2012-11-03 11:56:48 AM
2 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: GAT_00: Yeah, Nate has buckled a little under the pressure and attacks

I don't call that "buckling," I call that "having a spine" which is not something that media people are generally known for.


Should we really call him a media person? He's a math geek who's good enough at what he does that the NYTimes gave him a blog. I don't think he would consider himself a media personality.
2012-11-04 12:04:31 AM
1 votes:

SouthParkCon: Well it's official, add Nate Silver to the Fark Progressive Brigade Bukkake session.


Wow...dissing libs for liking Nate Silver. Aren't you just on the cutting edge of Derp.

Have you heard about this new "MSNBC" thing?
2012-11-03 10:04:29 PM
1 votes:

thornhill: shower_in_my_socks: I wonder if Republicans will begin throwing Romney under the bus on Monday, or if they'll wait until Tuesday night. In their mind, it's always their candidate who's bad when they lose, not their ridiculous, 50-years-outdated party platform.

They seem so certain of a victory this time around that they're going to blame:

1) Liberal bias in media, specifically for not bringing more attention to Bengazi and "Fast and Furious."

2) Polling conspiracy, especially Nate Silver.

3) Sandy

4) Chris Christie

5) Chicago politics

All of these factors conspired to steal the election from Romney.


Add in

6) Illegal immigrants

7) Activist judges (Pennsylvania voter ID ruling)

8) Using welfare to buy votes

9) Romney is a secret liberal who cheated to stop "real Americans" from winning the primaries and intentionally threw the election.

And the final conclusion will be that they need a more right wing candidate. Just hope someone comes to their senses over the next 3 years.
2012-11-03 10:02:37 PM
1 votes:
No more polls? Thank the Goddess!
2012-11-03 08:49:07 PM
1 votes:

aselene: cameroncrazy1984: aselene: Lionel Mandrake: aselene: If Osama Hussein wins this election, I will cut off my own penis and give it to my father for Christmas.

Be sure to post pictures

I feel fully confident making that statement because it's so obvious he will lose.

Obvious to whom? Certainly not those who are using data. Maybe in your heart you really believe he will lose, but the science doesn't bear that out.

The "science" is all based on polls which over sample DemocRats.


So...if Obama wins, you will send pictures, right?
2012-11-03 08:28:30 PM
1 votes:
What I think the wingers are denying is the Republican stay at home factor due to their putting up such a god awful candidate.
2012-11-03 07:35:46 PM
1 votes:

joonyer: heap: joonyer: Yeah well fark you.

well, you asked a silly question, what point is there in a serious answer.

people take polls on everything from favorite yogurt to amateur singers - why wouldn't there be polls on elections, policies, campaigns, or any of a litany of other political matters?

I ask stupid questions sometimes. Sorry.


I'm not entirely convinced that it's a stupid question. On one level, it sort of is, because it's obvious why a whole range of people want to poll things in advance. Merchandisers, politicos, media - everybody with money or power "skin in the game" has a use for info about public opinion, and how effective their attempts to manipulate it are.
The question of why we, the people, are so hungry for advance info on who we ourselves are going to vote for next Tuesday is a little more problematic.
Maybe it's a psychological thing. We are a species that thinks to survive, and for most of our existence, an individual's having some idea of what was going to happen next has meant the difference between life and death on a daily basis.
2012-11-03 06:44:48 PM
1 votes:

WombatControl: Blue_Blazer: WombatControl: all the inexplicable things going on with the numbers

Care to elaborate?

The Ohio polls are showing a non-normal distribution, for one. I believe Jay Cost is the one who first noticed that.

We're also seeing a real disparity between the state polls and the national polls. Obama should not be winning in a swing state like Ohio by a bigger margin than he did in 2008 but somehow not winning nationally by as large a margin. Either Ohio has completely reversed its partisan orientation (which is possible, to be sure), or the numbers aren't adding up.

It doesn't make sense for Obama to be either slightly behind or only slightly ahead nationally, doing roughly the same in the safe red/blue states as he did in 2008, but dramatically ahead in the swing states. The demographics of the swing states aren't enough to move the numbers like that.

In short, either the national polls are hugely wrong or the swing state one are. They can't both be right at the same time.


Oversampling? Really? Everyone's oversampling because it is just impossible that people in Ohio are actually happy unemployment is dropping and the President saved the automotive industry which is a very big deal in Ohio.
2012-11-03 06:41:25 PM
1 votes:

joonyer: JolobinSmokin: joonyer: Why do polls exist in the first place? Elections are the only contest I know of where there's a 2 year tailgate party and everyone predicts who is going to win, and their predictions some how matter as to the actual contest.

Why don't we take polls for next year's Super Bowl winner? Because they don't matter. The contest itself, the election, is all that matters.

Help me see the rationale here for all this polling and prediction BS, is it all just for the lulz advertising revenue?

Bro,

there is a thing called college football and for over 100 years the winner or national champion has been determined by a poll.

Only since the BCS have we even come close to a on the field winner.

In 2014 maybe with the 4 team playoff we'll have a true NC, but where have you been to not think of College Football Top 25 polls?

^
Actually this question goes to all that have replied to you.

Yeah, I should have thought of college football. Maybe because the elections just seem like a 2 team thing, not 25, it didn't seem the same. My bad.

I still don't see the point though, other than dick wagging.


I'm with you, it's just bullcrap that keeps people interest. I didnt need mean to sounds like a farkdix, hope your having a good day.
2012-11-03 06:11:31 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: The electoral college is a ridiculously outdated concept and should be done away with.


You know what, I thought the same way until Sandy hit. The electoral college prevents those states who were hardest hit from suffering a reduced influence on the final outcome because of conditions. I think Sandy is the best argument I've ever seen heard for keeping the electoral college. And I hate that fact.
2012-11-03 06:05:30 PM
1 votes:
i309.photobucket.com
2012-11-03 06:05:27 PM
1 votes:

incendi: 3_Butt_Cheeks: And replaced with what?

The same thing, but with attractive female electors in lingerie instead of frumpy old party sycophants.


fierceandnerdy.com
2012-11-03 05:57:22 PM
1 votes:

joonyer: Yeah well fark you.


well, you asked a silly question, what point is there in a serious answer.

people take polls on everything from favorite yogurt to amateur singers - why wouldn't there be polls on elections, policies, campaigns, or any of a litany of other political matters?
2012-11-03 05:51:09 PM
1 votes:

heap: joonyer: Why don't we take polls for next year's Super Bowl winner?

because the superbowl isn't an election?

high on analogy is no way to go thru life, son.


Yeah well fark you. It was a bad analogy, I know.

PonceAlyosha: joonyer: Why do polls exist in the first place? Elections are the only contest I know of where there's a 2 year tailgate party and everyone predicts who is going to win, and their predictions some how matter as to the actual contest.

Why don't we take polls for next year's Super Bowl winner? Because they don't matter. The contest itself, the election, is all that matters.

Help me see the rationale here for all this polling and prediction BS, is it all just for the lulz advertising revenue?

I'm sorry you're upset that Mitt Romney isn't going to win.


Had your big bowl of paint chips this morning I see?
2012-11-03 05:28:14 PM
1 votes:
Hmmmmm Rasmussen no longer has Romney leading in Ohio. Wouldn't it be weird if Rasmussen started matching the other polls in the next couple of days and start having Obama in the lead?

/just like in 2008
2012-11-03 05:22:13 PM
1 votes:

Richard Roma: [i.huffpost.com image 285x209]

I'm not celebrating, not dismissing a 'false horserace', not feeling one iota of comfort, until I hear a Rmoney concession speech. The odds are against him winning, but far stranger things have happened.

But if and when he does lose... oh sweet FSM I'm going to enjoy rubbing it in the face of every indignant piece of Teabagger scum I can.



heh heh....I am holding off on the celebrating too, but am fully prepared to lose a few so-called friends on Wednesday morning. I have been listening to their falsehoods for a year now and cannot wait to drive the final spike into the coffin of these less than honest "friendships". I learned quite a few shocking things about certain people who I thought I knew before this election year. Now that i see their true colors, it is time to cut them loose.

I do not have time for bigoted morons who cannot spend even 15 seconds reading up on a candidate's position before spewing racial hatred.

I do not have time for bigoted morons period.
2012-11-03 05:06:24 PM
1 votes:
i.huffpost.com

I'm not celebrating, not dismissing a 'false horserace', not feeling one iota of comfort, until I hear a Rmoney concession speech. The odds are against him winning, but far stranger things have happened.

But if and when he does lose... oh sweet FSM I'm going to enjoy rubbing it in the face of every indignant piece of Teabagger scum I can.
2012-11-03 04:59:11 PM
1 votes:

Blue_Blazer: WombatControl: all the inexplicable things going on with the numbers

Care to elaborate?


Wombat still can't comprehend the new Democratic lean to Ohio.

images2.dailykos.com

Its not too hard to figure out. Unless you're Wombat.
2012-11-03 04:52:08 PM
1 votes:

Britney Spear's Speculum: [i566.photobucket.com image 465x640]


I should not have laughed so hard at that image.

pacified: Muta: Three numbers that aren't being talked about:

20% -- Teabag Patriots
20% -- Palin Supporters
15% -- Obama Disillusionists
======================
55% -- Romney Voters
[unskewedpolls.com image 600x515]

There will be a lot of crying libs this wednesday.

there's a fark screen cap from some similar predictions from last time. I wish I could find it.


[thatsthejoke.jpg]
2012-11-03 04:49:40 PM
1 votes:

Irregardless: It's all over but the shout. Romney can try again in 2016


Just the same, i will reserve shouting until the votes are in. With my luck I would jinx if for Obama if I shouted now.

Dull Cow Eyes: "For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased"

See? Even Nate Silver admits the polls are biased.

/Willard will win eventually. If not in 2012, then in 2016, 2020, or 2024



Win or lose, this is it for Romney.

Either he just throws in the towel on running again by his own choice or he will be bounced away in future elections by republicans who never really liked him but found him to be less obnoxious than the other 10 or so GOP candidates this year. Mitt got the nod this year not because of his political ideology, but from the experience he gained as a losing candidate before. He knew when to shut up and let the rest of the field implode while he maintained a steady flight under the radar until there was nobody else left. He is a candidate via attrition, not popularity.

So either he wins this year and resigns in disgrace in a couple of years when all the hidden crap of his life comes out or he just fades away after his concession speech Tuesday night. 

Good riddance.
2012-11-03 04:49:27 PM
1 votes:

WombatControl: and there are indications that it might not even be as close as we think


someones been hangin out at unskewed polls again.
2012-11-03 04:48:54 PM
1 votes:
LOL @ WombatControl

There's one in every crowd.
2012-11-03 04:46:07 PM
1 votes:

Blue_Blazer: NeoCortex42: tolallorti: Dull Cow Eyes: "For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased"


See? Even Nate Silver admits the polls are biased.


/Willard will win eventually. If not in 2012, then in 2016, 2020, or 2024

Doubtful. If he gets thrashed in this election I don't think he'll really have the momentum within his party to make it past the primary again. His entire campaign is just giving opponents outside and within his party ammunition.

The entire GOP establishment (including Fox News) will throw Romney completely under the bus. I figure we'll have about a week or two of whining about stolen votes or conspiracies. Once it's obvious they can't get the results changed through some legal challenges and accept the results, they'll turn on Romney completely.

They will never accept the results. At this point in this election, where most people are sure their guy is gonna win, the losing side will not accept the legitimacy of the winner.


I have no doubt there will be conspiracy crap for a long time. Just look at how the birth certificate thing is still around. But I do think that it won't be headline news on Fox for more than a couple weeks. They'll need to move on to something else to get viewers. That something else will probably be analyzing how badly Romney screwed up and how Ryan should have been at the top of the ticket from the beginning.
2012-11-03 04:42:58 PM
1 votes:

wildcardjack: Does anyone study the butterfly effect of polling?

There might be some PhD grade stuff to research on the effects of polls on future poll results.


It's turtles all the way down.
2012-11-03 04:40:08 PM
1 votes:

Muta: Three numbers that aren't being talked about:

20% -- Teabag Patriots
20% -- Palin Supporters
15% -- Obama Disillusionists
======================
55% -- Romney Voters


I know this is a joke, but no one will fall for it. Everyone knows that the correspondence between the 20% who are Teabaggers and the 20% who are Palin supporters is 1:1.
2012-11-03 04:39:49 PM
1 votes:
I carpool with my coworker. The ride after the results are announced is going to be entertaining, because he's absolutely convinced himself of two things: 1) that the economy is the most important issue regarding election in this campaign, and 2) Romney's gonna win.

I told him that the critical issue is women's reproductive rights. The look on his face was priceless when he looked up the polling in swing states and found out I was right.
2012-11-03 04:34:47 PM
1 votes:
Yes, the horserace claptrap is based on nothing. You won't hear any candidate on either side say so, though, because it suits their purpose to maintain the illusion of a competitive race as much as it suits the journalists' purpose. Everyone knows that the presidential race is done, so now all the focus is on downticket races. Both parties want their own voters to believe the presidential race is close because it will be key to winning House and Senate seats, statehouses, and state legislatures.
2012-11-03 04:31:31 PM
1 votes:
i159.photobucket.com
2012-11-03 04:31:08 PM
1 votes:

tolallorti: Dull Cow Eyes: "For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased"


See? Even Nate Silver admits the polls are biased.


/Willard will win eventually. If not in 2012, then in 2016, 2020, or 2024

Doubtful. If he gets thrashed in this election I don't think he'll really have the momentum within his party to make it past the primary again. His entire campaign is just giving opponents outside and within his party ammunition.


The entire GOP establishment (including Fox News) will throw Romney completely under the bus. I figure we'll have about a week or two of whining about stolen votes or conspiracies. Once it's obvious they can't get the results changed through some legal challenges and accept the results, they'll turn on Romney completely.
2012-11-03 04:27:02 PM
1 votes:

Irregardless: President just don't have thevability to have a huge effect on the economy.


How anyone can say that after the Bush administration is goddamn beyond me.
2012-11-03 04:18:34 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: The electoral college is a ridiculously outdated concept and should be done away with.


Would you feel that way if Romney was winning?
2012-11-03 04:18:01 PM
1 votes:

3_Butt_Cheeks: And replaced with what?


The same thing, but with attractive female electors in lingerie instead of frumpy old party sycophants.
2012-11-03 03:26:16 PM
1 votes:

mrshowrules: If you want to think it is a horse race. It has 5 perfectly identical horses. Obama owns 4 and Romney owns 1.


And Romney's is dancing.
2012-11-03 02:48:14 PM
1 votes:
I love how Silver shows how Obama's significant lead in Ohio, Iowa, Nevada and Wisconsin are not sampling errors whereas Romney's thin lead in Florida could very well represent a sampling error. Sure could see how this would piss off Conservatives. KILL THE MESSENGER!

/to they crazies out there, it is an expression - please don't kill anyone
2012-11-03 12:00:29 PM
1 votes:

GAT_00: Uchiha_Cycliste: cameroncrazy1984: GAT_00: Yeah, Nate has buckled a little under the pressure and attacks

I don't call that "buckling," I call that "having a spine" which is not something that media people are generally known for.

Should we really call him a media person? He's a math geek who's good enough at what he does that the NYTimes gave him a blog. I don't think he would consider himself a media personality.

He is one of the most important people to this election cycle. And just because you don't want to be a media person doesn't mean you aren't.


I'm not sure I agree, his *results* are a crucial factor in this election cycle. He could or could not be there and it would all be the same.
2012-11-03 11:55:11 AM
1 votes:

GAT_00: Yeah, Nate has buckled a little under the pressure and attacks


I don't call that "buckling," I call that "having a spine" which is not something that media people are generally known for.
2012-11-03 11:52:12 AM
1 votes:
Friday's polling should make it easy to discern why Mr. Obama has the Electoral College advantage. There were 22 polls of swing states published Friday. Of these, Mr. Obama led in 19 polls, and two showed a tie. Mitt Romney led in just one of the surveys, a Mason-Dixon poll of Florida.

Dammit, Nate. they are trying to sell a horse race narrative and your facts are not helping in that regard!

/Reveling in the power that is TF.
//Shoutout to Hammetman, TY 4 teh TF. [who'sawesome?.jpg]
///Now to lord it over teh filthy liters!!! 
2012-11-03 11:16:50 AM
1 votes:
Heh, "Yes, of course: most of the arguments that the polls are necessarily biased against Mr. Romney reflect little more than wishful thinking."
 
Displayed 51 of 51 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report