Thread: Romney leads by 22 points...

We will see more polls flip flop or show the race tighter as we get closer to the election. The media bias will have to end near election time so they look credible..

^reeled in.

Originally Posted by White Peacock

^reeled in.

^

Originally Posted by White Peacock

^reeled in.

LMAO indeed. He apparently didn't even bother to see who it was. Consider their lead story today is "Dinosaurs played with marbles." LOL

Oh silly people.

Originally Posted by venture79

LMAO indeed. He apparently didn't even bother to see who it was. Consider their lead story today is "Dinosaurs played with marbles." LOL

Oh silly people.

I wonder who Bat Boy will vote for this year.

Mark my words, the polls will get tighter so the MSM looks credible

Originally Posted by venture79

LMAO indeed. He apparently didn't even bother to see who it was. Consider their lead story today is "Dinosaurs played with marbles." LOL

Oh silly people.

but but.. they say they used the same methodology as the NY Times Poll!

Awesome. Next time don't tell the first fish and more will bite.

Here's is something good and more interesting about Romney from a less fake source: Romney Pulls Ahead at DickMorris.com

Originally Posted by Bunty

Here's is something good and more interesting about Romney from a less fake source: Romney Pulls Ahead at DickMorris.com

Dick Morris, the man that brought us the Tea Party

Originally Posted by Bunty

Here's is something good and more interesting about Romney from a less fake source: Romney Pulls Ahead at DickMorris.com

One thing of note is that Rasmussen does not call mobile phones - only landline phones and online surveys. It's been shown that in polls in which mobile phones are included along with landlines, the results tend to favor Obama.

Originally Posted by White Peacock

One thing of note is that Rasmussen does not call mobile phones - only landline phones and online surveys. It's been shown that in polls in which mobile phones are included along with landlines, the results tend to favor Obama.

I've seen that several times. I know many people that are cell phone only. Do you think that including cell phones makes for a more accurate survey? or does it skew it another way. For instance, I won't take surveys on my cell unless it's the weekend, as I don't want to use my minutes. I suspect it makes it more accurate, but not completely accurate.

Originally Posted by White Peacock

One thing of note is that Rasmussen does not call mobile phones - only landline phones and online surveys. It's been shown that in polls in which mobile phones are included along with landlines, the results tend to favor Obama.

That's because all of the Democrats got themselves an Obamaphone!

Originally Posted by Dubya61

I've seen that several times. I know many people that are cell phone only. Do you think that including cell phones makes for a more accurate survey? or does it skew it another way. For instance, I won't take surveys on my cell unless it's the weekend, as I don't want to use my minutes. I suspect it makes it more accurate, but not completely accurate.

I don't think it's possible to have an accurate poll representative of the population as a whole and indicative of potential election outcomes; but if you include mobile lines, which younger people increasingly tend to use as their sole telephone technology, then yes, you get a much more accurate sample than if you call landline subscribers only. It's a no-brainer.

Originally Posted by BlackmoreRulz

That's because all of the Democrats got themselves an Obamaphone!

It's because we typically don't own home phones.

There is no more credible news source than "Weekly World News." Except possibly "The Onion."

Originally Posted by HewenttoJared

It's because we typically don't own home phones.

that's only because with Obama in office, you can't afford to haveboth.

Originally Posted by bmrsnrou

There is no more credible news source than "Weekly World News." Except
possibly "The Onion."

I'm believing the left accept both as factual. I'd like to say "LOL" but I
can't.

Originally Posted by rcjunkie

[/B]

that's only because with Obama in office, you can't afford to haveboth.

No, it's because I'd rather not waste money. At least not on that.

Originally Posted by bmrsnrou

There is no more credible news source than "Weekly World News." Except possibly "The Onion."

I thought it was at least as credible as "The Blaze"

Originally Posted by rcjunkie

[/B]

that's only because with Obama in office, you can't afford to haveboth.

^Here's the imaginary circumstance perception in action. I'm at the same job that I've been with since well before Obama took office, making more money than I ever have (thanks in good part to the Union contract that was agreed upon earlier this year - imagine that, a company agreeing to raise the already good wages of its employees when the economy is a disaster and the country is in ruin!). I opted to no longer have a landline phone because technology no longer requires it.

Everybody I associate with is middle- to lower-middle class, and I know of nobody who is worse off now than they were in 2007. In fact, most are better off. Maybe I'm just lucky enough not to associate with people who would rather become martyrs to the government leadership that they hate, thus putting forth little effort to better their lives.

Originally Posted by Roadhawg

Dick Morris, the man that brought us the Tea Party

Even more credible headlines:

ROMNEY HAS FIRM LEAD AMONG TOESUCKERS

ROMNEY JOKES ABOUT AIRPLANE WINDOWS; NOW LEADS WITH COMA PATIENTS

SMUCKERS BACKS ROMNEY; ALSO LEADS WITH SMIRKERS