The Right is truly, truly terrified of Hillary Clinton

[The Rabbi]

There are a number of opinions on that one, but I accept your argument at face value.

One specific poll - not very interesting.

But one poll in a line of polling over a long time showing consistent results - VERY interesting.

That is the case with the last Quinnipiac poll. It's not an island out there all by itself. That values have a lot of meaning in context of what's happening all around them. Similar story in Virginia.

No, polling this far ahead is always wrong, no matter how many polls are taken.
Smart people like real Jews understand this.

I guess that explains why I understand it.

And you don't.

Eh?

No, you mssed the part where polls taken this far ahread are not really indicative of anything. You're too stupid to know you're stupid.

 

[Derideo_Te]

"Partisan" equals "does not support my viewpoint."
Sorry, jackass. You are a loser. I provided a link. The link supported what was said. You're just a sore loser.

You were requested to provide a credible link. You failed, as always. Have a nice day.

"Credible" equals "supports my opinion" in your mind.
I provided a credible link. You have provided nothing except tushy air.

Your inability to distinguish between partisan and credible links is probably part and parcel of your comprehension shortcoming.

 

[The Rabbi]

You were requested to provide a credible link. You failed, as always. Have a nice day.

"Credible" equals "supports my opinion" in your mind.
I provided a credible link. You have provided nothing except tushy air.

Your inability to distinguish between partisan and credible links is probably part and parcel of your comprehension shortcoming.

Ironic post is ironic.
Where are your links? Where is your proof? Quit farting in this thread and provide something or shut the fuck up.

 

[bedowin62]

You were requested to provide a credible link. You failed, as always. Have a nice day.

"Credible" equals "supports my opinion" in your mind.
I provided a credible link. You have provided nothing except tushy air.

Your inability to distinguish between partisan and credible links is probably part and parcel of your comprehension shortcoming.

i knew you were going to respond the way you did

you're a boring moron and partisan hack. you are everything you're whining about.
why am i not surprised?

 

[Statistikhengst]

No, polling this far ahead is always wrong, no matter how many polls are taken.
Smart people like real Jews understand this.

I guess that explains why I understand it.

And you don't.

Eh?

No, you mssed the part where polls taken this far ahread are not really indicative of anything. You're too stupid to know you're stupid.

It's already been proven that very early polls have often been quite on the mark. I guess you are just too stupid to know that you're really, really stupid, eh?

I graciously accept your concession on this numbers issue.

 

[bendog]

Firstly that was not a credible link since it is obviously partisan and secondly it does not support your allegation.

"Partisan" equals "does not support my viewpoint."
Sorry, jackass. You are a loser. I provided a link. The link supported what was said. You're just a sore loser.

You were requested to provide a credible link. You failed, as always. Have a nice day.

Interesting. I assumed his poll numbers were dropping. But, rising like a big mouth bass to your bait (-:, I went to real clear politics, and looked at the economist polls for about the past year and three quarters, and Obama's poll numbers with moderates were roughly the same. They were under 50%, but still the overall number was pretty steady.

PS, I don't think it really foretells anything. The dems are in trouble with the senate because of an enthusiasm gap.

 

[bedowin62]

it doesnt matter what source you show a left-wing idiot like statistikhengst; if it doesn say what he thinks he will try to ridicule it.

obama and by him the Democrat Party; has lost the Independant voters in droves

 

[Derideo_Te]

"Credible" equals "supports my opinion" in your mind.
I provided a credible link. You have provided nothing except tushy air.

Your inability to distinguish between partisan and credible links is probably part and parcel of your comprehension shortcoming.

Ironic post is ironic.
Where are your links? Where is your proof? Quit farting in this thread and provide something or shut the fuck up.

You made the allegation so the onus is on you to provide credible substantiation when called upon to do so. Failure to provide anything credible is a tacit admission that you are wrong. Have a nice day.

 

[bedowin62]

Infographic of the day: Obama lost independent voters in all swing states minus NC

posted at 2:41 pm on November 14, 2012 by Katie Pavlich

 

[The Rabbi]

I guess that explains why I understand it.

And you don't.

Eh?

No, you mssed the part where polls taken this far ahread are not really indicative of anything. You're too stupid to know you're stupid.

It's already been proven that very early polls have often been quite on the mark. I guess you are just too stupid to know that you're really, really stupid, eh?

I graciously accept your concession on this numbers issue.

Post proof. Or shut the fuck up.

Oops.
Clinton, Giuliani Top 2008 Presidential Nomination Polls

 

[Statistikhengst]

it doesnt matter what source you show a left-wing idiot like statistikhengst; if it doesn say what he thinks he will try to ridicule it.

obama and by him the Democrat Party; has lost the Independant voters in droves

I didn't criticize the link that was provided independent voters, in spite of the fact that it comes from a rabidly right-wing source. Did you notice that?

But you could help your case by providing a neutral source.

You know, right before the 2012 election, there were similar right-wing articles all over the Blogosphere claiming that Obama was losing the black vote. On election night, he got 93-94%% of the black vote. So....

 

[Derideo_Te]

"Partisan" equals "does not support my viewpoint."
Sorry, jackass. You are a loser. I provided a link. The link supported what was said. You're just a sore loser.

You were requested to provide a credible link. You failed, as always. Have a nice day.

Interesting. I assumed his poll numbers were dropping. But, rising like a big mouth bass to your bait (-:, I went to real clear politics, and looked at the economist polls for about the past year and three quarters, and Obama's poll numbers with moderates were roughly the same. They were under 50%, but still the overall number was pretty steady.

Old lawyer trick...never ask a question that you don't already know the answer to!

You are correct that the numbers are pretty static hence the partisan allegations are just there to boost the base rather than anything factual.

 

[The Rabbi]

Your inability to distinguish between partisan and credible links is probably part and parcel of your comprehension shortcoming.

Ironic post is ironic.
Where are your links? Where is your proof? Quit farting in this thread and provide something or shut the fuck up.

You made the allegation so the onus is on you to provide credible substantiation when called upon to do so. Failure to provide anything credible is a tacit admission that you are wrong. Have a nice day.

I didnt make the allegation. So you're wrong there. I provided credible substantiation, so you're wrong there. You have provided nothing, so by your own rules you are tacitly admitting you are wrong.
Thanks for playing. Door's to the right.

 

[bendog]

You were requested to provide a credible link. You failed, as always. Have a nice day.

Interesting. I assumed his poll numbers were dropping. But, rising like a big mouth bass to your bait (-:, I went to real clear politics, and looked at the economist polls for about the past year and three quarters, and Obama's poll numbers with moderates were roughly the same. They were under 50%, but still the overall number was pretty steady.

Old lawyer trick...never ask a question that you don't already know the answer to!

You are correct that the numbers are pretty static hence the partisan allegations are just there to boost the base rather than anything factual.

May I still assume his numbers with moderates or swing voters have fallen since Nov. 2012? It's not that I really lazy, but that the real clear politics site didn't list economist polls going back that far.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Ironic post is ironic.
Where are your links? Where is your proof? Quit farting in this thread and provide something or shut the fuck up.

You made the allegation so the onus is on you to provide credible substantiation when called upon to do so. Failure to provide anything credible is a tacit admission that you are wrong. Have a nice day.

I didnt make the allegation. So you're wrong there. I provided credible substantiation, so you're wrong there. You have provided nothing, so by your own rules you are tacitly admitting you are wrong.
Thanks for playing. Door's to the right.

Your delusions are not a substitute for reality. Your link is partisan and the content failed to support your allegation. Another poster, Bendog, did an independent check at RCP and confirmed that support amongst Independents is more or less stable.

Looks like you are having a problem dealing with the facts, as always.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Obama is not popular among the Independents - who now identify themselves as Independents because they won't identify with the GOP anymore.

But among moderates, he's always held a significant and consistent advantage.

 

[The Rabbi]

You made the allegation so the onus is on you to provide credible substantiation when called upon to do so. Failure to provide anything credible is a tacit admission that you are wrong. Have a nice day.

I didnt make the allegation. So you're wrong there. I provided credible substantiation, so you're wrong there. You have provided nothing, so by your own rules you are tacitly admitting you are wrong.
Thanks for playing. Door's to the right.

Your delusions are not a substitute for reality. Your link is partisan and the content failed to support your allegation. Another poster, Bendog, did an independent check at RCP and confirmed that support amongst Independents is more or less stable.

Looks like you are having a problem dealing with the facts, as always.

You mean Bendog who just posted that he assumes independent support has gone down but doesnt have the data?
You're a flaming loser. A total joke. You couldn't post proof of something if you were asked whether the sky was blue.

 

[bedowin62]

Obama is not popular among the Independents - who now identify themselves as Independents because they won't identify with the GOP anymore.

But among moderates, he's always held a significant and consistent advantage.

what exactly is a "moderate"?
how do you define one?

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama is not popular among the Independents - who now identify themselves as Independents because they won't identify with the GOP anymore.

But among moderates, he's always held a significant and consistent advantage.

what exactly is a "moderate"?
how do you define one?

Moderate: Someone who supports Obama's policies.

 

[Redfish]

Laughable anyone puts any credibility to polling data comparisons now.

polls are political tools, they are designed to influence public opinion, not to report on it.

pay me to do a poll, tell me what answer you want, and I will find a sample that will "prove" what you want to prove.

Its a bullshit game, its about making money for the pollsters and trying to influence potential voters.