# Romney Pulls Ahead Despite Corrupt Media's Claims



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

> Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> 
> Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He cant get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he wont ever get there in the actual vote.
> 
> ...



This is the first election where you can just about bet 2 out of 3 times that who they are you'll know how they'll vote. At least that is how it stands today. 

Obama leads with blacks, Hispanics, and single women, while Romney leads with just about everyone else including independents. It all comes down to turnout and Romney has enthusiasm on his side and a great field organization. 

The more informed a voter is the more they lean toward Romney. 

Despite what the MSM is saying Romney is looking pretty good. He'd love to be in a better position but that only means that the race will be closer than he would like. 

So just like Obama's refusal to personally admit that al Qaeda was involved in the attack on our Libyan consulate the MSM refuses to tell us the truth about how the election is going. The states that always go for Democrats are still in Obama's camp but the margins aren't what it used to be, and he barely leads in Ohio, Florida, Virginia which if Romney wins them the election is his. The debates will decide this election and basically this is Obama's race to lose. Judging by how well Romney did in the Republican debates one trip up and Obama is toast, and Romney has plenty of ammo to throw at him. Ryan will hand Biden his ass so this thing is close but I think Romney/Ryan will pull away after the first debate regardless how much the media tries to prevent this. 

Currently Romney leads with Independents by 14 points. The electorate is divided down the middle so this will make a huge difference. Incumbency used to be an advantage but that is slowly disappearing as it usually does historically. If Obama's approval ratings stay below 50% he will lose. 

Links 

Romney Pulls Ahead at DickMorris.com

Electoral College Prediction Model Points To A Mitt Romney Win In 2012


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever. 

How confident are you?


----------



## idb (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> >
> > Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He cant get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he wont ever get there in the actual vote.
> >
> ...



Yayyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
U S A, U S A, U S A.............


----------



## candycorn (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> 
> How confident are you?



Count me in....c'mon muddy....don't sing it; bring it.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> 
> How confident are you?



My confidence is growing.

The fact that you want to get rid of me makes me want to stay more and more. 

That means I'm doing my job. 


I figure if Obama handles the election like he handled the riots in the Middle-East Romney has already won.


----------



## Salt Jones (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



Hahahaha. That's very Romney of you.


----------



## idb (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



You're paid to be a Republican cheerleader?
No-one would have believed it!


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

idb said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



Some people volunteer.......you know, do it for free. 

I know being a liberal the idea of charity instead of government mandates is foreign to you.


----------



## idb (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> idb said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



"Give me an 'R', give me an 'O', give me an 'M'......................oh never mind..."


----------



## Conservative (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> 
> How confident are you?



I'll take that bet.

Romney win, you get an IP ban, no socks, no posting here ever.
Obama wins, I get an IP bn, no socks, no posting here ever.

Deal?


----------



## edthecynic (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


>  The Republican enthusiasm and likelihood of voting is higher


Yeah! Just look at the DEAFENING enthusiasm as Willard leads his supporters in a campaign cheer!!! 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SclDiN-lcYE&feature=player_embedded]Joe Scarborough reacts to Romney clip - &#39;Sweet Jesus&#39; - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

Conservative said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



I noticed that a Liberal's hold on his or her beliefs is so fragile that they really get pissed at someone who knocks their media driven ideology.

Libs try to remove annoying opposition by any means rather than try to persuade them they are wrong.


----------



## Stephanie (Sep 27, 2012)

Tune the Lamestream MEDIA OUT FOLKS

Obama is LOSING that is why he is adding EXTRA STATES that he thought he had in the bag

VOTE Obama out


----------



## idb (Sep 27, 2012)

Stephanie said:


> Tune the Lamestream MEDIA OUT FOLKS
> 
> Obama is LOSING that is why he is adding EXTRA STATES that he thought he had in the bag
> 
> VOTE Obama out



Is that those extra seven states?


----------



## DauggyDaddy (Sep 27, 2012)

It's funny, if you think about it. The right are so desperate that they have to explain why all the polling is wrong.  Here is my prediction - the right will continue to tell us every day how Romney is actually pulling ahead, in spite of the polls showing his support dwindling. Then, when he loses, they'll tell us all how voter fraud resulted on Obama stealing the election because Romney was really more popular all along.  You can save this post and hold me to it.


----------



## Black_Label (Sep 27, 2012)

Now for the actual facts, Obama 347, Willard 191

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups


----------



## Black_Label (Sep 27, 2012)

DauggyDaddy said:


> It's funny, if you think about it. The right are so desperate that they have to explain why all the polling is wrong.  Here is my prediction - the right will continue to tell us every day how Romney is actually pulling ahead, in spite of the polls showing his support dwindling. Then, when he loses, they'll tell us all how voter fraud resulted on Obama stealing the election because Romney was really more popular all along.  You can save this post and hold me to it.



Exactly. The right wingers are brainwashed, mentally ill idiots that can't handle the fact any time one of their (R) masters is losing or proven wrong. They will just pull out their tinfoil hats, cry "liberal conspiracy!" then screw with the polls and twist them to make Willard in the lead.


----------



## Stephanie (Sep 27, 2012)

DauggyDaddy said:


> It's funny, if you think about it. The right are so desperate that they have to explain why all the polling is wrong.  Here is my prediction - the right will continue to tell us every day how Romney is actually pulling ahead, in spite of the polls showing his support dwindling. Then, when he loses, they'll tell us all how voter fraud resulted on Obama stealing the election because Romney was really more popular all along.  *You can save this post and hold me to it*.



why would we care?  It's not something we haven't heard before


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

Black_Label said:


> Now for the actual facts, Obama 347, Willard 191
> 
> RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups



Bullshit.

Nobody gives NC to Obama, nobody.

Even the Dems have written NC off.

The rest assumes that Obama will take every swing state and that just ain't gonna happen.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

Black_Label said:


> DauggyDaddy said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny, if you think about it. The right are so desperate that they have to explain why all the polling is wrong.  Here is my prediction - the right will continue to tell us every day how Romney is actually pulling ahead, in spite of the polls showing his support dwindling. Then, when he loses, they'll tell us all how voter fraud resulted on Obama stealing the election because Romney was really more popular all along.  You can save this post and hold me to it.
> ...



Pot meet kettle.

All of the polls oversample Democrats to get the numbers they're getting. This assumes the turnout will be the same as 08' and that will never happen again for Obama.


----------



## lukelk (Sep 27, 2012)

Your right daddy, they did that in 08. Remember, on fox news even the morning of the election, " this isnshaping up to be the closest election ever" then McCain lost by a land slide. I am around a lot on cons, villanova university and let me tell me tell you, mittens has lost close to 10000 votes I have never seen anything like it.


----------



## bodecea (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



So...you are willing to take his bet then.  Yes or no?


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 27, 2012)

President Obama    265     Governor Romney  191

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map

Colorado      President Obama   2.9

Florida         President Obama   3.2

Iowa            President Obama   4.7

Nevada         President Obama   4.2

New Hampshire     President Obama   1.0

North Carolina       President Obama   1.0

Virginia                 President Obama    4.5

Every time that you click on these polls, the President is showing stronger leads in more states. In fact, I would not be surprised to see him start pulling in some of the leaning to Romney states. And if Romney keeps putting his foot in his mouth, you might even see Texas in the Obama column.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> President Obama    265     Governor Romney  191
> 
> RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map
> 
> ...



Only if you pay attention to dishonest polls.

It's like the unemployment rate. It doesn't tell the whole story but the left tells us it does.


----------



## Nova78 (Sep 27, 2012)

Romney will hand Obama his ass in the debates, he will be missing his TelePrompter...

There are many who  will change there mind when the curtain is drawn..


----------



## Sallow (Sep 27, 2012)

Romney's done. Only the delusional think he has a shot.


----------



## Sallow (Sep 27, 2012)

Nova78 said:


> Romney will hand Obama his ass in the debates, he will be missing his TelePrompter...
> 
> There are many who  will change there mind when the curtain is drawn..





Yeah..maybe he can start with a 20K bet..explain that corporations are people..he likes to fire people..the trees are just the right height..and then start contradicting his own people every few minutes.

That should win the day.


----------



## bodecea (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > President Obama    265     Governor Romney  191
> ...



So...are you taking his bet or not?


----------



## Black_Label (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> Black_Label said:
> 
> 
> > DauggyDaddy said:
> ...



There is no oversampling of democrats, that's just the latest tinfoil excuse the right wing trash are using for why Willard is losing.

More people are going to be voting for Obama, it's as simple as that.


----------



## NLT (Sep 27, 2012)

bodecea said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Did you challenge him to the bet? If not then shut the fuck up. The bet is not between you and mud.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

NLT said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



Besides, I don't believe in gambling. I learned that lesson betting on the Super Bowl.


----------



## candycorn (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



Maybe if you put a few more meancing patches at the bottom of your sig line, you'll sound less like a douche bag.  Probably not Nancy.  

C'mon..if you're confident you have nothing to lose.  Oh wait...you're not really that confident are you....  

*I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!​*


----------



## hazlnut (Sep 27, 2012)

Welcome to Fantasyland...


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



So is it a bet then?


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

Conservative said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



Deal.

Book it.

*Edit - To be fair, I should let you know I have the same bet with Pale Rider. If you have issues with me making the same bet with both of you, I wanted to give you the chance to say so. If so, Candycorn is willing to make the same bet. Just putting that out there to be fair.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

candycorn said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



I think you're a fool to bet on this.

I know you'll refuse to go through if you lose.

If I lose you'll say I'm dishonest but you won't mind being called dishonest because it's not as important to you as it is to me.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



I never bet with welshers.


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



So what's your excuse for not betting with me?


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> Conservative said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



Both of you are welshers. 

Nether of you will go through with it.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



The primary reason should be obvious.

You'll never pay up.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



Isn't funny how obsessed the Dumbocrats are with silencing thier opposition (especially CandyCorn)? I guess when you're on the wrong side of the facts, the only way you can "win" is to get rid of your opposition. Any wonder why the Dumbocrats are the party of Nazi's and Fascists?


----------



## P@triot (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



What's with your obsession with making bets on something you'll never adhere to? Do you have a serious gambling problem? Do you fear conservatives who own you in debates? Both?

One thing is for certain, you have serious problems...


----------



## DauggyDaddy (Sep 27, 2012)

Sallow said:


> Romney's done. Only the delusional think he has a shot.



He's not done yet, but he's certainly treading water. He needs a juggernaut performance in the first debate though, or he WILL be finished. No question, FOX will declare him the overwhelming victor, but most Americans know what FOX is. So the only people that will really convince is people already in Mitt's corner. Mitt needs to connect to moderate, working class voters, and so far he's shown no ability to do that. The debate will make or break his campaign. Personally, having watched Mitt romney not just in THIS election cycle, but inthe 2008 cycle as well, I don't think he's got it in him. But I have been known to be mistaken from time to time, so I'll wait and see.


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative said:
> ...



Based on what evidence? 

Just say you're not confident in Romney winning and I'll drop it.


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



I'm sorry it bothers you to point out when people are full of shit. I live up to my word and will do so if Obama should lose. You have no proof that I wouldn't honor the bet, except that "I'm a stupid liberal". 

The only person being "owned" here is the one who started the thread and is being made to look like the loud mouthed, no balls idiot that he is.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...


If you're absolutely sure Obama will win then you're delusional.

I don't trust you. I thought I made that crystal clear.

You can drop this or shove it up your ass.....or wait a few days and pull it out of your ass again.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 27, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Count me in....c'mon muddy....don't sing it; bring it.



How old are you Candy? Am I correct in my assumption that you are in high school? I ask because for the past few months, I've noticed you've added absolutely _nothing_ of substance to this board. Nothing. No facts. No thoughts. No links. All you ever do is challenge someone to bet you, and then if they don't immediately accept it, you make some really sorry ass "challenge" to their man hood (as if gambling against assholes who won't pay up is somehow "manly").

You're immaturity is astounding, even by dumbocrat standards...


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



Am I 100% sure? Of course not. 

But I am sure enough to stand behind my beliefs. You obviously can't say the same. LOL, pathetic.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

Rottweiler said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Count me in....c'mon muddy....don't sing it; bring it.
> ...



You can count on a child, the mentally handicapped, and the pathetically stupid to follow Obama. 

This is the best you can expect from Candycorn.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



Actually I would be more sure if we had a massive media to prop our candidate up every time he falls. 

The uncertainty that corruption causes permeates this election.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

BTW......it is being reported that early voting is giving Romney an advantage. 

But of course nobody is writing stories about that.

Why some states would schedule early voting before the debates I can't figure other than Obama was hoping he would be leading.

Well it's not working out that way.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> >
> > Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He cant get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he wont ever get there in the actual vote.
> >
> ...








_I've been trying to figure something in my head, and maybe you can help me out, yeah? When a person is insane, as you clearly are, do you know that you're insane? Maybe you're just sitting around, reading "Guns and Ammo", masturbating in your own feces, do you just stop and go, "Wow! It is amazing how fucking crazy I really am!"? Yeah. Do you guys do that?_


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

Article 15 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> ...



Thanks for the input FArt 15......


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 27, 2012)

Pay no attention to the scoreboard

We are winning the game


----------



## edthecynic (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> BTW......*it is being reported* that early voting is giving Romney an advantage.
> 
> But of course *nobody is writing stories about that*.
> 
> ...


The CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood are lousy liars!

Please explain how something could be "reported" that nobody is writing about, other than CON$ just made it up, of course?


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

edthecynic said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > BTW......*it is being reported* that early voting is giving Romney an advantage.
> ...



I just heard it on the news a few minutes ago but cannot find it being reported on the web.

I think any reports that Obama is losing in the actual vote is being buried by an avalanche of deflection stories. It's like the way the left tries to flood this board with pro-Obama threads to drown out the anti-Obama shit.


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



You forgot to mention the 47%


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

rightwinger said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...



I guess we can forget them if they're that stupid.

I just keep thinking about the folks that didn't build that.


----------



## idb (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



You read that off a sticker on your bumper, didn't you?


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

idb said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Nope.....some of us can think.


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



And that is why Republicans are having a hard time winning elections.

It is the total dismissal and villianizing of those who don't match their agenda. The 47% are stupid, they are lazy, they are looking for handouts


----------



## edthecynic (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...


Translation: It's completely made up.
Thank you.


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

edthecynic said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > edthecynic said:
> ...



Just like everything else he "believes" in, it's all Bullshit.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

edthecynic said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > edthecynic said:
> ...



Nope......I didn't make it up. 

I'm sure Obama has folks out there watching for this story and doing what they can to white-wash it from the web.


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



It was reported this morning and we'll see if it was worth believing.

However from what I've heard from everyone I've talked to...it makes sense. 

I think Obama has lost much of his support with his lies, his ignorance when it comes to security, and his ideology has turned everyone off that it effects the most.....those who are on the edge. Senior citizens in particular.


----------



## edthecynic (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...


----------



## del (Sep 27, 2012)

romney's toast and he's gonna take down the rest of the ticket with him.


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 27, 2012)

In the end it will come down to who wins the debates! Debates matter and these one will matter more than others.


----------



## Conservative (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> Conservative said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



done. No worries. I have the same exact bet with Candycorn and Salt Jones. You're the only other poster with the nads to accept. Bookmarked.


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

Conservative said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative said:
> ...



At least you have some backbone. I'll give you that. It's a shame you'll have to leave.


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> 
> How confident are you?



I'll take that bet!


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 27, 2012)

candycorn said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



I will take your bet also!


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 27, 2012)

These loser leaves town bets are retarded.  

The right wing nuts are jumping on them now because the know they will lose and it's an excuse not to show themselves here again and have to endure all the mocking and ridicule they deserve.


----------



## Dr.Traveler (Sep 27, 2012)

Article 15 said:


> These loser leaves town bets are retarded.
> 
> The right wing nuts are jumping on them now because the know they will lose and it's an excuse not to show themselves here again and have to endure all the mocking and ridicule they deserve.



"You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Article 15 again."


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

GHook93 said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



Deal! It's official. 

I'm glad to see some people have some backbone.


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

Article 15 said:


> These loser leaves town bets are retarded.
> 
> The right wing nuts are jumping on them now because the know they will lose and it's an excuse not to show themselves here again and have to endure all the mocking and ridicule they deserve.



The funny thing is the only ones accepting the bets are the ones that are more capable of somewhat rational discussion. I'm trying to get rid of nutters but they are too insane to back up their ridiculous shit.


----------



## Dr.Traveler (Sep 27, 2012)

For perspective though:  Here is Rasmussen's electoral map data:  Scroll down to see it.

Rasmussen has Obama at 237 "Safe" Electoral Votes.  Not one on those states are "Leaning."  

Rasmussen has Obama up on Romney in:  Nevada, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, giving him well past the 270 needed.  Electoral Vote, which uses polling averages, actually has Obama at up at the 50% mark in all of those.  The RCP averages has Obama up past Romney in all of those states too (though not quite at the 50% level in some of them).

You can stick your finger in your ears and hope Romney wins, but it isn't going to happen if things don't start changing soon.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Sep 27, 2012)

In polls done by in-state polling organizations show Obama winning by 7-8 percent and your map shows the Socialist Republic of Minnesota going red?


----------



## candycorn (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



I'll give you a ten for creative douche-baggery.  But, alas, you're still a bag o' douche.  The reasoning for not taking the bet...as your logic goes...is that I will not honor my end of it.  Right?  Meaning what exactly?  Isn't that something easy to monitor?  I'm pretty unique in the way I paste both sides (See posts about voter ID laws, Obama's failures, saying both parties are out to lunch fiscally, etc...).  I assure you; I will not (nor do I) have sock puppets.  I will simply stop posting under this or any other screen ID.  And, since I have the same bet now with 7 people, monitoring of my end of the stick is assured if not guarranteed .  

You're the one professing your confidence for Romney.  

*I'll offer you different terms.  

You simply change your sig line to "President Obama was born in the US" when Obama wins (font size 3, blue font, bold typeface) and leave it there until 1/1/13.  You do believe that, right?  So you're risking nothing.  I will, of course, leave forever if Romney wins.  So now you're not even risking your account; just an affirmation of what you already believe--unless you're a birther scumbag of course.  

So how 'bout it?   *


----------



## candycorn (Sep 27, 2012)

kiwiman127 said:


> In polls done by in-state polling organizations show Obama winning by 7-8 percent and your map shows the Socialist Republic of Minnesota going red?



You can also tell the poll is BS because PA is red.  That will not happen either.


----------



## candycorn (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> >
> > Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He cant get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he wont ever get there in the actual vote.
> >
> ...




Best Line Delivery of All Time - YouTube


----------



## RDD_1210 (Sep 27, 2012)

candycorn said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



You're letting him off lightly, yet I somehow think he'll still avoid making this bet.


----------



## bodecea (Sep 27, 2012)

RDD_1210 said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



Mudwhistle is certainly gaining a reputation as a poster not willing to back his own words, isn't he?


----------



## P@triot (Sep 27, 2012)

rightwinger said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...



LOL! Kudos for a very funny line...


----------



## P@triot (Sep 27, 2012)

hazlnut said:


> Welcome to Fantasyland...



Funny thing is - I've stood at the exact spot that photo was taken. So I can verify first hand that your "fantasyland" really exists. Once again, the idiot liberal dumbocrat defeats themself with their own argument...


----------



## auditor0007 (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> >
> > Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He cant get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he wont ever get there in the actual vote.
> >
> ...



And who made up this glass ceiling?  As I see it, Romney has never topped 50% either.  The argument is absurd.  It assumes all undecideds will go to Romney.  Generally, more undecideds do go to the challenger, but I don't think that's going to happen this time around.  Romney is in major trouble right now, no matter how you may want to spin it.  If something drastic doesn't happen in the next three weeks, Obama may win this by more than ten points.


----------



## JimH52 (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> >
> > Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He cant get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he wont ever get there in the actual vote.
> >
> ...



You got to be Kidding!!!

Lush Rimbaugh...is this you?


----------



## Stephanie (Sep 27, 2012)

JimH52 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorate&#8217;s partisan preferences.
> ...



yeah, if I were you ObamaBots I'd wish it wasn't true either..

tsk tsk


----------



## candycorn (Sep 27, 2012)

candycorn said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



 Bump!


----------



## mudwhistle (Sep 27, 2012)

auditor0007 said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> ...



Even according to your polls all Romney has to get is 7% and he's currently leading Obama by 14.


----------



## candycorn (Sep 27, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> auditor0007 said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...




Romney is circling the drain...it's obvious.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Sep 27, 2012)

someone farted in here.


----------



## Lakhota (Sep 27, 2012)

Dick "Toe Sucker" Morris?  Holy shit...


----------



## Lakhota (Sep 27, 2012)

> With Obama&#8217;s lead in several swing states becoming insurmountable, the right has begun to panic&#8212;by denying reality altogether.



Michael Tomasky on the GOP's Self-Delusion Syndrome - The Daily Beast


----------



## Salt Jones (Sep 27, 2012)

Salt Jones said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



This post got me a neg, with a comment of "Go suck a cock monkey" from GHook93.


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 27, 2012)

Lakhota said:


> > With Obamas lead in several swing states becoming insurmountable, the right has begun to panicby denying reality altogether.
> 
> 
> 
> Michael Tomasky on the GOP's Self-Delusion Syndrome - The Daily Beast



_.There are loads of them but the gold medalist of this event by far is Dick Morris, who sits there on the Fox set like a betumored walrus on an ice floe assuring his viewers not to worry. His riff to Sean Hannity Monday night, a night when everyone else saw that Obamas lead was getting comfortable-to-the-point-of-insurmountable, is worth quoting at some length: [Romney] is at the moment in a very strong position. I believe if the election were held today Romney would win by four or five points. I believe he would carry Florida, Ohio, Virginia. I believe he would carry Nevada. I believe he would carry Pennsylvania. Even Hannity at this point interjected, Oh, come on. But on Morris went. He knew of a private poll in Pennsylvania, by a group that Ive hired in the past, that had Romney two points behind.

_

Delusional


----------



## jillian (Sep 27, 2012)

dick morris' electoral predictions?

muddy's lunacy knows no bounds.


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 27, 2012)

jillian said:


> dick morris' electoral predictions?
> 
> muddy's lunacy knows no bounds.



Think Baghdad Bob

We have the US right where we want them....they will be destroyed


----------



## candycorn (Nov 7, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> auditor0007 said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



Gee so that means he lost 16 percent in about a month?  Dumbass.


----------



## Zoom (Nov 7, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> >
> > Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He cant get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he wont ever get there in the actual vote.
> >
> ...


Omg.  You quoted Fick morris and rasmussen.  Good god.man, they were wrong on every level.


----------



## Zoom (Nov 7, 2012)

Lakhota said:


> Dick "Toe Sucker" Morris?  Holy shit...



He was 100% wrong which means he will be credible.on.fox.


----------



## George Costanza (Nov 7, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> RDD_1210 said:
> 
> 
> > So I assume you'd be willing to bet then? Obama wins and you leave this site forever, Romney wins I and I am gone forever.
> ...



No balls, eh Muddy?


----------



## Dick Tuck (Nov 7, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> >
> > Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He cant get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he wont ever get there in the actual vote.
> >
> ...


----------



## bodecea (Nov 8, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> >
> > Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He cant get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he wont ever get there in the actual vote.
> >
> ...



How odd...you were wrong with about 7 states.


----------



## rightwinger (Nov 8, 2012)

Zoom said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> > Dick "Toe Sucker" Morris?  Holy shit...
> ...



He tells Republicans what they want to hear. He has a future with FoxNews


----------



## George Costanza (Nov 8, 2012)

Well, here we are - two days after the election.  How's your boy doing today, Muds?  

Muds?  You ever take that bet?


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 8, 2012)

George Costanza said:


> Well, here we are - two days after the election.  How's your boy doing today, Muds?
> 
> Muds?  You ever take that bet?



Oh, for a second I thought you were trying to be a smart-ass. 

No, I never took the bet. I learned never to bet when I was a kid betting on the Super Bowl. 


Food for thought; 3 million conservative voters sat this one out because of lousy fucken attitudes. 

Don't feel proud about that because 10 million liberals sat this one out because of lack of enthusiasm. 13 million less voted in this election than 08'. 

Wonder where they went?


----------



## George Costanza (Nov 8, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> George Costanza said:
> 
> 
> > Well, here we are - two days after the election.  How's your boy doing today, Muds?
> ...



This just in: I WAS tyrying to be a smart ass.  I see I failed.  Wouldn't be the first time.  

As I have said to more than one of my Republican friends, I feel your pain.  I know how I felt in 2000 and again in 2004.  I REALLY felt bad in 2004.  You'll survive.  I survived.  We'll all survive.  In fact, here's a little exercise for you: Sit back and really think about all of the bad things that you were afraid were going to happen to you and then reflect on how many of them actually did.  If that doesn't work, contemplate just exactly how much impact something any POTUS does, is going to have on your own, personal life.

If none of the above, order a pizza and get drunk . . .


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 8, 2012)

George Costanza said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > George Costanza said:
> ...



One thing didn't happen that I thought would happen. $6 per gal gas. That happened to California. That will happen next year now that Obama has more flexibility. 

The rest of what I thought would happen unfortunately has. 

Oh, and Obama will eventually admit he is a non-practicing Muslim and bi-sexual. 

He won't admit he's still using coke.


----------



## Dick Tuck (Nov 8, 2012)

bodecea said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> ...



Seems that so was Scott Rassmussen.  From the OP article:



> Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.



I just came across this from September, and posted it in another thread:

Meet Dean Chambers, The Virginia Republican Who Is &#8216;Unskewing&#8217; The Polls | TPM2012



> Chambers project started in July after he noticed an ABC News/Washington Post poll that just didnt look right. An ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted this month showed Obama up over Romney 49 percent to 48 percent. Unskewed, however, after applying Rasmussens numbers on party ID, Romney leads Obama 52-45 in the poll. Its like magic. But Chambers insists he isnt changing or making up data. The only thing Im doing is weighting.
> 
> But thats exactly what most pollsters dont do. *We dont have any preconceived notions about the party breakdown of a poll before we conduct it. The only things we make any adjustments for are gender, race, and age, Democratic-leaning Public Policy Pollings Tom Jensen told TPM in an email. It makes sense that as support for Obama increases, more people also identify themselves as Democrats. I know conservatives want to think its more Democrats in the poll causing Obama to do better, but its actually Obama doing better causing more Democrats in the poll.*



I guess this is why PPP was on the top of the accuracy list, and Rasmussen was in the cellar.


----------



## JFK_USA (Nov 8, 2012)

Hahaha Republicans are such suckers


----------



## rightwinger (Nov 8, 2012)

mudwhistle said:


> George Costanza said:
> 
> 
> > Well, here we are - two days after the election.  How's your boy doing today, Muds?
> ...



If so many voters sat this one out. Why were the lines so fucking long?


----------



## rightwinger (Nov 8, 2012)

Dick Tuck said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



Rassmussen and Gallup tied for 24th among polls

Hardly worth all the publicity they receive. They are polling dinosaurs


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 8, 2012)

rightwinger said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > George Costanza said:
> ...



The lines here in TN were smaller btw. At least early voting. Fewer college idiots. 

I think election day in battlegrounds states the lines are always long.


----------



## Dick Tuck (Nov 8, 2012)

rightwinger said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > George Costanza said:
> ...



By design.  Especially in Republican controlled states.

Poll: Democratic Voters Faced Significantly Longer Lines | TPM2012


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 8, 2012)

Dick Tuck said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



Maybe it had something to do with minorities in cities live in more heavily populated areas, you fucking idiot. Most Red-states are more rural while Blue states are more urban.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 8, 2012)

bodecea said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > > Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorates partisan preferences.
> ...



Not that odd...he was wrong about everything else so getting 7 states wrong is nothing for that fool.  

Muddy--how's my ass taste?


----------



## candycorn (Sep 13, 2014)

GHook93 said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > RDD_1210 said:
> ...



Is he still here?


----------



## Statistikhengst (Sep 16, 2014)

Awesome necro!!!!


----------

