That statement sounds to me like an endorsement by the Smartest President Ever and a former university Constitutional law lecturer for a Constitutional Amendment for very short term-limits for Senators and Representatives! I’d vote YES for that!
It can’t possibly be worse than his “lipstick on a pig” remark in 2008. Remember how that had the McCain campaign and right wing media in a tizzy?
Meanwhile, Obama has a bigger polling lead today than four years ago (!). I thought Romney was the strongest of the GOP candidates, and maybe he is, but voters really don’t seem to like him. Pew has him as the only presidential candidate in decades with a negative favorability rating in September.
And the University of Colorado, who’ve successfully predicted the winner in the Presidential election for the past 32 years, says that Romney is going to win. It’s the economy stupid.
That model also predicts that Romney will win Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, New Hampshire, Minnesota and Maine’s second congressional district. If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you.
It isn’t too hard to come up with a model that in hindsight fits the results of the last 8 elections. But the UC model, like many, hasn’t shown any ability to predict results for elections that haven’t happened yet.
If Il Dufe does get re-elected, watch this space for socialist Jim’s rationalizations and justifications as the country turns into Venezuela del Norte and the economy goes totally into the toilet.
No, it isn’t. When you average multiple polls, the sampling margin of error shrinks, because the total sample size is larger. The odds of Obama’s RCP lead reflecting sampling error is vanishingly small.
Note that it’s now been nearly a year since the RCP average showed Romney in the lead: that’s hundreds of polls. You’d have better luck flipping a quarter and getting 100 heads in a row than having sampling error explain Obama’s consistent lead.
You guys are beating your head on the hardest substance known to man. Jim’s steadfastness in covering for BHO and his Admin.
When Romney has the majority of the votes in November it won’t be that Romney WON, it will be that Obama wanted to lose and there’ll be proof that he wanted Romney to win.
When you average multiple polls, you average multiple errors. How many of those polls have disproportionate Democrat verses Republican in their base? How many of them are of adults verses registered voters verses likely voters? A simple average of the polls doesn’t remove the bias.
Any professional pollster (those consultants hired by candidates not by media outlets) would publish two findings for each poll — one using 2004 turnout modeling and the other using 2008 modeling. This would indicate just how dependent on an unusually high turnout of his base the Obama camp really is.
The polls being trumpeted by the media are based on 2008 modeling, and Obama simply isn’t going to have as many enthusiastic voters turning out to vote for him this time.
“It can’t possibly be worse than his “lipstick on a pig” remark in 2008.”
Beats it by a lot.
The lipstick on a pig comment simply tells us that Obama is a mysoginistic fargin’ ice-a-hole.
This statement – that he cannot change Washington from the inside – tells us he admits to being a colossal failure… or that he’s a colossal scam artist.
You notice how much this F’n guy has been saying, “one thing I’ve learned since being President….” I mean, isn’t that pretty much an admission that he doesn’t know what he’s doing? Especially when you add up all those ‘one things’ and discover that there are actually a whole lotta things he’s had to learn while being President. Hate to say it but Hillary was right.
The biggest lie of that statement came in the sentence that followed.
“That’s how I got elected. That’s how the big accomplishments like health care got done.”
Healthcare got done through “outside Washington tactics”?
The behind the scenes arm twisting, deal making, vote buying CRAP (the word I’m really thinking of would be blocked) that resulted in Obamacare was typical Washington, more to the point it was typical DEMOCRAT.
Yo, Jim, did you see that Obumble’s Campaign Manager says the voters shouldn’t pay attention to ‘national polls’. I’m guessing it’s because they are SO far ahead of Romney.
Hmm, worst gaffe? “Shovel ready was not as shovel ready as we expected.”
Notice even here he shifts blame to others. Was this the last time he met with his jobs council?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p4-vPrcDBo
That was the royal “we,” I think.
Well we should all help him get outside of Washington so he can try to change things. I hear November 6th would be a good day to work on that…
That statement sounds to me like an endorsement by the Smartest President Ever and a former university Constitutional law lecturer for a Constitutional Amendment for very short term-limits for Senators and Representatives! I’d vote YES for that!
It’s all about the press finding the right angle.
It can’t possibly be worse than his “lipstick on a pig” remark in 2008. Remember how that had the McCain campaign and right wing media in a tizzy?
Meanwhile, Obama has a bigger polling lead today than four years ago (!). I thought Romney was the strongest of the GOP candidates, and maybe he is, but voters really don’t seem to like him. Pew has him as the only presidential candidate in decades with a negative favorability rating in September.
And the University of Colorado, who’ve successfully predicted the winner in the Presidential election for the past 32 years, says that Romney is going to win. It’s the economy stupid.
That model also predicts that Romney will win Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, New Hampshire, Minnesota and Maine’s second congressional district. If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you.
It isn’t too hard to come up with a model that in hindsight fits the results of the last 8 elections. But the UC model, like many, hasn’t shown any ability to predict results for elections that haven’t happened yet.
Gallup today has B-Ho 47%, Romney 47%. That’s a lead?
That’s one poll. The RCP average is Obama +3.9%.
If Il Dufe does get re-elected, watch this space for socialist Jim’s rationalizations and justifications as the country turns into Venezuela del Norte and the economy goes totally into the toilet.
That is a statistical tie.
No, it isn’t. When you average multiple polls, the sampling margin of error shrinks, because the total sample size is larger. The odds of Obama’s RCP lead reflecting sampling error is vanishingly small.
Note that it’s now been nearly a year since the RCP average showed Romney in the lead: that’s hundreds of polls. You’d have better luck flipping a quarter and getting 100 heads in a row than having sampling error explain Obama’s consistent lead.
You guys are beating your head on the hardest substance known to man. Jim’s steadfastness in covering for BHO and his Admin.
When Romney has the majority of the votes in November it won’t be that Romney WON, it will be that Obama wanted to lose and there’ll be proof that he wanted Romney to win.
When you average multiple polls, you average multiple errors. How many of those polls have disproportionate Democrat verses Republican in their base? How many of them are of adults verses registered voters verses likely voters? A simple average of the polls doesn’t remove the bias.
#waronwomen
Here is an article from Dick Morris that explains why today’s polling is wrong:
http://www.dickmorris.com/why-the-polls-under-state-romney-vote/
Any professional pollster (those consultants hired by candidates not by media outlets) would publish two findings for each poll — one using 2004 turnout modeling and the other using 2008 modeling. This would indicate just how dependent on an unusually high turnout of his base the Obama camp really is.
The polls being trumpeted by the media are based on 2008 modeling, and Obama simply isn’t going to have as many enthusiastic voters turning out to vote for him this time.
“It can’t possibly be worse than his “lipstick on a pig” remark in 2008.”
Beats it by a lot.
The lipstick on a pig comment simply tells us that Obama is a mysoginistic fargin’ ice-a-hole.
This statement – that he cannot change Washington from the inside – tells us he admits to being a colossal failure… or that he’s a colossal scam artist.
I think he’s both.
You notice how much this F’n guy has been saying, “one thing I’ve learned since being President….” I mean, isn’t that pretty much an admission that he doesn’t know what he’s doing? Especially when you add up all those ‘one things’ and discover that there are actually a whole lotta things he’s had to learn while being President. Hate to say it but Hillary was right.
The biggest lie of that statement came in the sentence that followed.
“That’s how I got elected. That’s how the big accomplishments like health care got done.”
Healthcare got done through “outside Washington tactics”?
The behind the scenes arm twisting, deal making, vote buying CRAP (the word I’m really thinking of would be blocked) that resulted in Obamacare was typical Washington, more to the point it was typical DEMOCRAT.
The weighting of the sample is skewed to favoring Dem’s by a +7. Jim can’t see the forest for all the imaginary bridges he wants to sell you.
‘You guys are beating your head on the hardest substance known to man. Jim’s steadfastness in covering for BHO and his Admin.”
As Lincoln once said, “If a man will stand up and assert that two plus two do not make four, I know nothing that will stop him!”
“Two plus two makes three! Do not listen to the reactionaries who say otherwise! Stay loyal to Obamamath!”–Baghdad Jim.
Yo, Jim, did you see that Obumble’s Campaign Manager says the voters shouldn’t pay attention to ‘national polls’. I’m guessing it’s because they are SO far ahead of Romney.
BWAHAHAhahahahaha!!!