Video: Rush on polling

posted at 11:02 am on October 24, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Rush Limbaugh spoke to the Fox & Friends hosts this morning to discuss polling and the state of the race.  Rush argues that pollsters want to shape opinion rather than measuring it, especially media-sponsored polls.  Why?  To produce a steady drumbeat of pessimism for Republicans:

Transcript via TV Eyes:

STEVE DOOCY: let’s ask rush limbaugh. he’s out there somewhere in t.v. land.

RUSH LIMBAUGH: in the sunny climate of florida, good to be with you.

KILMEADE: congratulations on the 20 years a lot of people are saying the distance senator mccain is from senator obama is the same thing al gore was from governor bush at the time. do you see a lot of similarities there?

LIMBAUGH: i heard you talking about the polls just a minute ago with chris wallace. you know me. i have a more cynical view of people than the drive-by media. the drive-by media do these polls and whether it is a presidential poll or an opinion of the american people on anything, we all know these polls are used to shape opinion, not reflect it, but now we’re getting to the point where in all these pollsters have their credibility to be concerned about and they want to be right at the end of the day, and i think that’s why with a couple of exceptions you’re seeing a lot of polls tighten now, because the race is tight. it’s not over. nationally, of course, is one thing. you do have the battleground states to be concerned about. it’s not looking bad for mccain out there. i don’t think this is anywhere near over. there is an onslaught in the media to make it seem like this has been long ago over. i think the purpose of that is to suppress and depress republicans and their vote turnout.

CARLSON: so you talk about shaping voters’ minds and that’s something we were discussing earlier, what the polls actually do, because who wants to go out and vote for a loser, right?

LIMBAUGH: precisely. it’s — the media coverage of obama in this campaign, this is the most irresponsible journalistic exhibition i have seen in my life. i’m 57 years old. they’ve always been liberal and they’ve always been biased but i have never seen them in the tank like this, and i think the purpose of that, they’re doing two things. they know there is a new media out there and there is a competition and they are trying to show themselves they can still move public opinion and get the country they want. now they’re not even hiding the bias. they’re profoundly in the tank, and the purpose is, i think, to really depress people into thinking this is over, that mccain has no prayer.

DOOCY: when you talk about shaping opinion, historically, newspapers do it on the opinion page, well, today in the pages of “”the new york times”” the old gray lady, she is endorsing barack obama, the same day a poll comes out from the times where they have got barack obama up by 13 points. we have talked to pollsters that say you can effectively drive a poll toward the answer you want, the result you want, you think “”the new york times”” is doing something like that here?

LIMBAUGH: two things about the times. it’s classic that yesterday standard & poor’s officially proclaimed “”the new york times”” as junk on the day they endorsed the messiah, the lord barack obama the most merciful. number two, why is “”the new york times”” junk? why is their advertising revenue down? why is their pages down, their circulation down? it’s because they’re no longer “”the new york times””. they are the public relations department for the public relations department of the barack obama campaign and the democratic party.

KILMEADE: if john mccain was to have two themes in the final 11 days, what would they be?

LIMBAUGH: this is about the economy right now, guys. people do not care about the ancillary things about obama. it’s sad. i wish we could make them care about wright and william ayers. i think obama is the radical in this group. i think obama moved to chicago and found those people. he didn’t arrive as a waif and these people found him. he is a radical and he has a lot of bitterness about race in this country, but this is about the economy, and the thing that really frustrates me, you guys, is this economy is directly traceable to the democrat party. they can find a republican that is responsible for this, they would have strung him up and had him in congressional hearings for the last two months. this fannie mae and freddie mac thing is directly traceable to bill clinton and barney frank. mccain will not criticize democrats because he is afraid it will make independents mad. that’s maddening. the idea that independents get mad at partisanship on the republican side and defect to the most partisan, mean-spirited extremist democratic party in my lifetime is just absurd. if he can’t tie the democrats to this economic mass, because right now bush is being blamed for it, that means the republicans and it is a sitting duck, you guys. he could have done this a month ago, six weeks ago, but he just for some reason doesn’t want to go. he wants to go pop list and blame wall street greed, which is what obama’s doing, so big difference.

CARLSON: mccain gave an interview yesterday where he did pretty much president bush and try to distance himself. finally, during the third debate, he turned to barack obama and said i am not george bush. if you wanted to run against him, you should have run four years ago.

LIMBAUGH: gretchen, you keep mentioning things that frustrate me. there is no reason to run around yesterday and talk about how, you know, the bush administration goofed things up. that’s just agreeing with obama. obama is the opponent here, not george w. bush. mccain’s problem is consistency. when he finally named dodd and barney frank at one of these cam aign appearances in waukesha, wisconsin, everyone thought he was on message, and the next day he is dissing bush. he hasn’t been consistent. he has to get consistent. we can drag him across the finish line, guys. we can do this.

KILMEADE: rush, let’s go back to the new york times who has a big article about acorn. yeah, we told you we registered 1.3 million but that was exaggerated, closer to a half a million. it sounds like spin coming out of the new york times to explain, hey, a lot of people have been worried about voter fraud. don’t worry about it.

LIMBAUGH: of course they’re going to say don’t worry about democrat vote are fraud and they’re going to try to downplay this, but i think, look, my reaction to this is why does obama have cheat? if this is in the bag, why does he have to spend any more ad money? why does he have to go to the battleground states? if this is in the bag, why does this stuff have to happen? it is no, sir what it appears to be. there is a false reality being presented and people have got to get a grip.

DOOCY: congratulations on 20 years, rush.

LIMBAUGH: thanks, guys.

KILMEADE: rush limbaugh, thank you very much for joining us.

Rush nails two points solidly in this interview. First, McCain needs to abandon the Ayers line of attack right now, not because it’s somehow out of bounds, but because right now people just don’t care.  He has ten days to make his message resonate, and he has to speak to voter concerns.  Thankfully, that’s exactly what McCain has done, with ads on Joe the Plumber and hammering Obama on his tax-and-spend proclivities.  He’s also been given a gift from Joe the Gaffemaster on national security, and both McCain and Palin have made that a strong theme in the closing days.

On polls and pessimism, Rush is dead on target.  Those of us who watched the Star Tribune’s MinnPoll noticed this same dynamic every race.  It would run heavily towards the Democrats until the last two iterations, when suddenly the race “tightened”.  That’s why the Times and CBS (and others) publish polls with ridiculous gaps of 14 and 16 points in party identification — because most people won’t check the samples or the methodology.  They want to create a story line that generates pessimism in Republicans and depress turnout, which then makes the polls a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Without exception, polls “tighten” in the final days of an election.  Is that a true indication of voter loyalty transitioning — or just an attempt by pollsters to get their last polls close enough to claim better accuracy afterwards?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

PALIN/LIMBAUGH 12

No, that would be a big pay cut for him.

hawkdriver on October 24, 2008 at 11:04 AM

Is that a true indication of voter loyalty transitioning — or just an attempt by pollsters to get their last polls close enough to claim better accuracy afterwards?

In this case I suspect it is both. A lot of independents and PUMAs are beginning to gravitate towrd McCain at a time when the serious pollsters (Rasmussen, Gallup, Zogby) are becoming concerned with the accuracy of their polling methods. Either way, McCain will benefit.

ManlyRash on October 24, 2008 at 11:07 AM

just go back and find the Bush Opinion Polls which sampled Dems heavily, which the MSM lead off with Front Page stories from to persuade people to dissaprove of Bush since it was “Popular”.

We need a conservative media to step up, and if need be use the same type of tactics to get them to be more honest. How to get this, I don’t know.

all through 2005 up to 2006 elections there were b.s. Bush Approval polls like this, then they went away as lead news stories after that election.

jp on October 24, 2008 at 11:08 AM

hawkdriver on October 24, 2008 at 11:04 AM

And I believe the Salem witch hunts will be nothing in comparison.

Cindy Munford on October 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM

the obvious risk here is promoting apathy on the democratic side….they are already vicitims of lazy welfare mongers so when they see 14% leads, many of them just stay in bed all day…..that traffic they see out their windows are the republicans stopping to vote on the way to work…..

SDarchitect on October 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM

I’m just following IBD poll, which has the race within a couple points…they got ’04 right within .4 points, unlike the others.

hippie_chucker on October 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM

Canned response: OMG Rush didn’t say McCain has it all wrapped up, therefore he is in the tank for Obama RINO GRRRRR!!!!!

Anyway, he is sharp as a tack. I think he’s absolutely right and I think McCain has to pick up on this immediately, because there are a lot of disheartened Republicans out there who are unimpressed with McCain for a number of reasons. He needs to shift into overdrive about maximizing that energy that Palin brought out seven weeks ago, because I’m getting more and more convinced that a ton of Obama voters are all talk and no walk.

MadisonConservative on October 24, 2008 at 11:10 AM

there is probably an old post here at HA about some b.s. Bush approval polls. I remember one that was CBS/NYT where they over sampled Dems like 42 to 28 or something…

jp on October 24, 2008 at 11:10 AM

Is that a true indication of voter loyalty transitioning — or just an attempt by pollsters to get their last polls close enough to claim better accuracy afterwards?

Ask Kathleen Parker.

Connie on October 24, 2008 at 11:11 AM

Cindy Munford on October 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM

LOL, What was I thinking Cindy?

Is that a true indication of voter loyalty transitioning — or just an attempt by pollsters to get their last polls close enough to claim better accuracy afterwards?

That is a moment of rare sagacity huh, Manly? People much malign Rush, but he does always seem to have the insights politically and the pulse of current events. I will tell you one thing, except for John McCain, he knows and understands foreign policy better than any of the other candidates.

hawkdriver on October 24, 2008 at 11:14 AM

Geraghty has a similar post up over at The Campaign Spot. He thinks a 6% advantage for Dems sounds about right but alot of the state polling in battleground states is done with gaps in the double digits.

Queasy on October 24, 2008 at 11:14 AM

Connie on October 24, 2008 at 11:11 AM

I sent Katie an e-mail today. Yep!

hawkdriver on October 24, 2008 at 11:14 AM

that traffic they see out their windows are the republicans stopping to vote on the way to work…..

SDarchitect on October 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM

I love it!

BuckeyeSam on October 24, 2008 at 11:16 AM

I sent Katie an e-mail today. Yep!

hawkdriver on October 24, 2008 at 11:14 AM

I complained to NRO about carrying her. Evidently, NRO got so much criticism that the online editor offered a post that they were committed to their current list of contributors through the election.

In short, I don’t think Parker will be seen on NRO after the election. I know I won’t read her ever again.

BuckeyeSam on October 24, 2008 at 11:18 AM

Dittos.

CP on October 24, 2008 at 11:20 AM

Without exception, polls “tighten” in the final days of an election. Is that a true indication of voter loyalty transitioning — or just an attempt by pollsters to get their last polls close enough to claim better accuracy afterwards?

In every election since 1948, with the lone exception of Reagan/Carter in 1980, the candidate with a statistically significant lead in the Gallup daily tracking poll in early October won the general. Whining about national poll bias isn’t helpful.

WHAT IS HELPFUL is focusing on the state-level polls. The national polls aren’t as important as state polls in battleground states. Remember, Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 but won because he won Florida. Likewise, despite a huge popular vote lead in 2004, Bush only won re-election by 110,000 votes in Ohio.

Right now, the ONLY polls that matter are those in: CO, FL, OH, NC, PA, and VA. And those polls, I think, are generally more erratic and of lesser quality. Rasmussen does the best job IMO and unfortunately, Rasmussen is showing Obama with 284 electoral votes in his back pocket because he won CO and VA.

Outlander on October 24, 2008 at 11:22 AM

To produce a steady drumbeat of pessimism for Republicans:

Sounds like Allah.

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 11:27 AM

I complained to NRO about carrying her. Evidently, NRO got so much criticism that the online editor offered a post that they were committed to their current list of contributors through the election.

In short, I don’t think Parker will be seen on NRO after the election. I know I won’t read her ever again.

BuckeyeSam on October 24, 2008 at 11:18 AM

Buckeye — I hate to tell you, but a good chunk of the NRO people are in Parker’s camp, although in a much more understated way. They don’t have much nice to say about her other than she’s energized the race, has alot of personality and is a formidable campaigner.

She is not their type, and I doubt she has much use for them, either.

BigD on October 24, 2008 at 11:28 AM

that traffic they see out their windows are the republicans stopping to vote on the way to work…..

SDarchitect on October 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM
I love it!

BuckeyeSam on October 24, 2008 at 11:16 AM

And the youth vote are still trying to decide if they should smoke one more for the road.

Rovin on October 24, 2008 at 11:30 AM

Rush is Right!

HawaiiLwyr on October 24, 2008 at 11:31 AM

Wouldn’t a sudden movement towards the Republican in the week or so before the election end up encouraging Republicans and discouraging Democrats at the most critical time. When they are about to vote?

MarkTheGreat on October 24, 2008 at 11:34 AM

We knew this, and should have known this all along. The exit polls from 2004 should have been the strongest indicator yet, as well as the historical error that always seems to favor Democrats. Yet every election cycle, nervous nellies forget it again and again.

Charlie Brown … Lucy … football.

thirteen28 on October 24, 2008 at 11:35 AM

I’ve doubted the polls all along. Earlier on Fox & Friends Michael Barrone was on, and he said the pollsters are getting a 60 percent REJECTION rate. That’s worse than the exit polls of 2004, which were 50 percent.

These polls are crap because:

* Republicans have been beaten up and cowed in this election cycle — “racist!” They simply go silent.
* Ego-driven Democrats want to express their political opinions to anyone who will listen, even anonymous pollsters. They RUN to the phone when a pollster calls.
* Liberals tend to lie and say they’re Republican or Independent or moderate, or just not know what those terms mean.
* Caller ID? I never answer an out-of-state phone call.
* Conservatives don’t answer the phone because they’re too busy putting food on the table and taking care of their family.
* Pollsters don’t call CELL phones. Half of my friends don’t even bother with land lines anymore.

John the Libertarian on October 24, 2008 at 11:35 AM

BigD on October 24, 2008 at 11:28 AM

Maybe so, but I’ll offer this:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OWMyOGU5MjU0NjE0ZDdkYTlkMzRmZDM0YTVlODgwZTE=

Switching subjects, from Fred Thompson:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDQzMzhkNTA3MjU4N2U4MzBlMjNmMmQ4YmI4NDNmMWY=

BuckeyeSam on October 24, 2008 at 11:37 AM

If McCain were ahead, Rush wouldn’t be complaining.

Dave Rywall on October 24, 2008 at 11:37 AM

Without exception, polls “tighten” in the final days of an election. Is that a true indication of voter loyalty transitioning — or just an attempt by pollsters to get their last polls close enough to claim better accuracy afterwards?

I can’t believe you’re willing to make that statement and then ask this question. It’s true that without exception they tighten. So which is a more probable explanation: that every single pollster (including Republican-sponsored ones) in every single election on all levels of government has been in on a decades-long conspiracy, or that this is a real phenomenon of voting behavior?

This particular accusation goes beyond the normal “this specific organization is biased” accusation. There are some polls that have a leftward lean and some that have a rightward lean, and it’s reasonable to accuse one side of having a bias (in fact, that’s what it is, mathematically speaking). But what you and Rush are doing here is much closer to conspiracy theory land.

tneloms on October 24, 2008 at 11:38 AM

My beloved Ann Coulter agrees:

In 1976, Jimmy Carter narrowly beat Gerald Ford 50.1 percent to 48 percent. And yet, on Sept. 1, Carter led Ford by 15 points. Just weeks before the election, on Oct. 16, 1976, Carter led Ford in the Gallup Poll by 6 percentage points — down from his 33-point Gallup Poll lead in August.

Ann Coulter

Anybody who has paid attention to polling data for more than a few election cycles has got to notice that the mainstream polls ALWAYS, ALWAYS ALWAYS have the Democrats way out in front. But the fact is, they seldom win. Polls are electioneering tools of the left, ignore them and go VOTE!! Especially pay NO ATTENTION to exit polls on election day, THEY ARE NOT THE LEAST BIT RELIABLE. GO VOTE !!

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 11:39 AM

McCain’s already given up on Iowa and Colorado, so it’s impossible for him to win 270 electoral votes unless he overcomes a double-digit Obama lead in Pennsylvania, which with only eleven days to go is practically impossible.

Wiser Republican heads are probably now working on a strategy to limit the damage done down the ticket, but they’re probably not happy that some of their own, like Bachmann, are doing further damage to the GOP brand.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 11:45 AM

SDarchitect

I agree. This attempt to demoralize Republicans and try and get them to stay home is a double-edged sword. This works both ways. If the Dems think Obama is up by 12, then they may not even get outta bed on Nov. 4. Especially that “all important” youth vote that they have been touting.

“Dude, let’s go vote! Obama is like, winning or something!”
‘Nah, it’s in the bag, dude. Look there’s Ashley goin’ to the Ratskeller, I’m gonna go hang and see if I can buy her a beer and you know…later dude!”

JAM on October 24, 2008 at 11:47 AM

If McCain were ahead, Rush wouldn’t be complaining.

+1

cornfedbubba on October 24, 2008 at 11:47 AM

But what you and Rush are doing here is much closer to conspiracy theory land.

tneloms on October 24, 2008 at 11:38 AM

Name calling is all you’ve got. Please provide me a link to any so called “right-leaning” presidential poll of the last 20 years that was NOT correct in the outcome.

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 11:47 AM

Without exception, polls “tighten” in the final days of an election. Is that a true indication of voter loyalty transitioning — or just an attempt by pollsters to get their last polls close enough to claim better accuracy afterwards?

The answer is not that the polls can be more trusted as the election day appears.

They are still biased even if they look more accurate and in alignment with anecdotal evidence of a greater McCain support.

The real question is will you doubters and pessimists quit asking us how the polls can be right now, when they weren’t last week?

The answer is: they are still wrong…. just not as much.

So, SHUT UP ALREADY!!

Mcguyver on October 24, 2008 at 11:48 AM

Polls are electioneering tools of the left

But..but…Fox NEWS has a poll showing Obama up by 9!

I guess Fox is leftist now.

cornfedbubba on October 24, 2008 at 11:48 AM

Oh by the way………..

I just received notice that my Intrade wire transfer came through(took 2 days, flat fee cost of $65.00 for transfer).

So I’m headed over there and putting all my money on the McCain/Republican ticket………..

……and you pessimists can all go to hell.

Mcguyver on October 24, 2008 at 11:48 AM

Here is an example of skewed polling: A woman in CO was called by a pollster, the first question was did she agree taxes should not be raised, and the second question was should we have gone into Iraq? The woman answered, “Yes” she did agree with not raising taxes and said “Yes” she did think we should not have gone into Iraq, but thought Bush had faulty intelligence info. She told the pollster that she was voting for McCain, BUT the pollster told her because of how she answered the questions she would be placed in the OBAMA category. The CO woman then said she did not want her vote recorded for Obama, and the pollster said she would have to check with her SUPERVISOR in order for her vote to be switched to McCain.

PUMAS have said they are lying to the poll callers because they want to give Obama an over inflated sense of winning. Looks like it is working according to the new Barakopolis being built in Chicago.

And these idiot pollsters are actually saying more Republicans will vote for Obama than McCain. The Fox/Rassmussen poll about a week ago said that 7% of Dems are going to vote McCain in the swing states and 9% of Republicans were going to vote for Obama. That is total dog pooh! There are more than 7% Democrats that are going to vote McCain and it is not just PUMAS that are ticked at the DNC, Pelosi, Reid and Obama.

Last night on Brit Hume’s show Mara Liason dropped this little bit of info, and I about fell out on the floor. NPR had a poll that asked would people rather have a Republican President to balance out the Democrat controlled Congress than have a total Democrat controlled Washington. Mara said the response by a large margin was YES! Keep in mind WHO the NPR audience is mostly made up of. Then she said they plugged in McCain’s name and Obama’s name, and Obama won, but only by a small margin. HOLY COW! I expected Obama to win, but to win by a small margin via an NPR audience speaks volumes to me, and I could not believe NPR actually asked the question in the first place. Might get to many minds a thinking me thinks.

freeus on October 24, 2008 at 11:52 AM

But..but…Fox NEWS has a poll showing Obama up by 9!

I guess Fox is leftist now.

cornfedbubba on October 24, 2008 at 11:48 AM

Who did their poll? Karl Rove’s polling data was done by the mainstream pollsters too. You miss the point. The data is only as good as the pollster.

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 11:53 AM

Dave Rywall

Didn’t I flush you this morning?

DaveC on October 24, 2008 at 11:53 AM

If McCain were ahead, Rush wouldn’t be complaining.

Dave Rywall on October 24, 2008 at 11:37 AM

If McCain were ahead, there would only be a few morons in this room complaining Dave. What’s your point? And do ya have all your talking points lined up when Obama loses?

Rovin on October 24, 2008 at 11:54 AM

They want to create a story line that generates pessimism in Republicans and depress turnout, which then makes the polls a self-fulfilling prophecy.

this really makes no sense. If that is the goal than liberals are defeating them selves. A poll with Obama up 13 will depress democratic turnout more than REP. If you are winning by 13pts why bother to vote. You have the election why stand in line for an hour? On the flip side if you are behjind 13pts you redouble your efforts, you give more money and time to your team.

Then when the polls tighten it looks like the dems are losing steam, that something bad is happening if the polls tighten at the same time something like Biden gaffe appears then your troops are even more demoralized. Thus impacting your early voter turnout and impacting your late voter turnout. The underdog rep on the other hand gets the early voter turnout (because every vote counts) and in the late vote people are energized because we are “gaining” in the polls and we could win it.

So to me the fake polls do the exact opposite of what the dems want to happen. They should show a close race until the final week and then show a massive move at the tail end of the race as their guy “moves away” that would be how you demoralize the base.

unseen on October 24, 2008 at 11:56 AM

When I first read the communist Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals back in college, what struck me as the book’s greatest offense was it’s advice that radicals should above all strive to demoralize mainstream Americans, to create a spirit of hopelessness. This is an essential step in the revolution.

The familiar manifestation of this attack is when leftists seize on moral hypocrisy of conservatives. It’s effective. When some clown on the conservative side starts behaving exactly like the creeps on the left, it stings. It makes us look pitiful.

Rush and Ed are absolutely correct to point out that polls are just another demoralization tactic; these crappy polls are not constructed to disseminate information; they’re tailor made to sow despair and pessimism in the mainstream of America, to give us a sense of hopelessness and disbelief.

This dark, gloomy climate is what communists strive for.

Right now, Barack Obama is smiling that communist smirk of his, nodding approvingly at his useful idiots who read the teleprompters on CBS/ABC/CNN/ETC.

This is a crime of profound injustice. It is pure evil to intentionally break the spirit of another man. But communists will do it in a heartbeat because they’re soul-less bastards.

jeff_from_mpls on October 24, 2008 at 11:59 AM

If McCain were ahead, Rush wouldn’t be complaining.

+1

cornfedbubba on October 24, 2008 at 11:47 AM

And that is totally NOT true and apparently you do not listen to Rush either. He said over a month ago the polls were going to be tilted towards Obama in order to depress us, BUT he also cautioned us that if they had McCain up by any large margins, not to be over confident, because if they were wrong for Obama the pollsters could also be wrong for McCain. He said they could, and would over inflate the polls for McCain just to get us to think we did not need to vote because McCain had it won. So, you are dead wrong.

Besides, I did not look at this as Rush complaining, but instead stating the facts. I have been looking at the internals where I could, and have attempted to find the questions asked. If you spent 15 minutes doing any sort of research on this polling thing, you would find not only over sampling of Dems, but some very skewed questions and under reporting on McCain support.

freeus on October 24, 2008 at 11:59 AM

Last night on Brit Hume’s show Mara Liason dropped this little bit of info, and I about fell out on the floor. NPR had a poll that asked would people rather have a Republican President to balance out the Democrat controlled Congress than have a total Democrat controlled Washington. Mara said the response by a large margin was YES! Keep in mind WHO the NPR audience is mostly made up of. Then she said they

plugged in McCain’s name and Obama’s name, and Obama won, but only by a small margin. HOLY COW! I expected Obama to win, but to win by a small margin via an NPR audience speaks volumes to me, and I could not believe NPR actually asked the question in the first place. Might get to many minds a thinking me thinks.

freeus on October 24, 2008 at 11:52 AM

Very interesting freeus. Throw in the Puma’s and the “Bradly effect” and McCain should win by 4-6 points.

Rovin on October 24, 2008 at 12:00 PM

If McCain were ahead, Rush wouldn’t be complaining.

+1

cornfedbubba on October 24, 2008 at 11:47 AM

Dip stick, if McCain were ahead, polls wouldn’t be reported.

jeff_from_mpls on October 24, 2008 at 12:02 PM

Name calling is all you’ve got. Please provide me a link to any so called “right-leaning” presidential poll of the last 20 years that was NOT correct in the outcome.

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 11:47 AM

Name calling is all I’ve got? I think I wrote a reasoned analysis and didn’t call anybody a conspiracy theorist, but just said that it’s close to that (and explained why) than another more reasonable type of complaint against pollsters.

Anyway, to answer your request, Strategic Vision is run by Republicans and has exhibited this tightening behavior (along with all the other polls) in this current election.

tneloms on October 24, 2008 at 12:03 PM

Dip stick, if McCain were ahead, polls wouldn’t be reported.

jeff_from_mpls on October 24, 2008 at 12:02 PM
——–
Yeah, the polls would not be reported. Yeah, that’s what would happen. For sure. 100%.

Dave Rywall on October 24, 2008 at 12:06 PM

Yeah, the polls would not be reported. Yeah, that’s what would happen. For sure. 100%. – Dave Rywall on October 24, 2008 at 12:06 PM

So how confident are you of an Obama victory, Dave? C’mon, bet on it. Or are you chicken?

ManlyRash on October 24, 2008 at 12:11 PM

Divided government isn’t the only issue in the voters minds, and it isn’t as if they haven’t had time to think about it over the past year. So I wouldn’t pin my hopes on that slender reed.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:12 PM

No! If McCain were ahead, the polls would still show Obama as leading!

Vince on October 24, 2008 at 12:16 PM

Elway’s on the stump endorsing McCain in COLORADO!!

THIS IS GOOD NEWS!

Rovin on October 24, 2008 at 12:20 PM

this really makes no sense. If that is the goal than liberals are defeating them selves.
unseen on October 24, 2008 at 11:56 AM

Yes it does when you consider they are all rooting for McCain to win (wink wink).

This must all be Karl Rove’s strategy, you see.

OT here (sort of)

I’ve been bidding 14.0 cents on the dollar for McCain on Intrade and so far I only got 2 contracts (of 10 each). I’m asking for 200.

Damn you Rush!!

Yesterday McCain had a huge intra day spike of almost 17.0 cents. And now they are mostly asking around 14.5 average.

I was hoping for cheaper, but my guess is I’m going to have to raise my bid.

Mcguyver on October 24, 2008 at 12:20 PM

Great. Now there are tow trolls. Anyone know how they multiply?

If either of the trolls have ever listened to Rush for more than 30 minutes, i’d be amazed.

PappaMac on October 24, 2008 at 12:21 PM

the obvious risk here is promoting apathy on the democratic side….they are already vicitims of lazy welfare mongers so when they see 14% leads, many of them just stay in bed all day…..that traffic they see out their windows are the republicans stopping to vote on the way to work…..

SDarchitect on October 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM

(Shhh! Don’t tell anyone!)

You’re racist for saying that! (just kidding, don’t let the Dems know our plan to depress their vote)

skatz51 on October 24, 2008 at 12:25 PM

Most of the problems with modern polling is related to problems with sampling. The truth is that the error bands that pollsters report are statistical manifestations of the mathematical models. Pollsters have no way of quantifying unknown and perhaps unknowable problems with the sampling. In the current political environment, sampling problems have dramatically increased and leave pollsters with the dilemma having to accept the potential existence of relatively large unknowns that could invalidate their results. The bottom line is that these unknown sampling errors make the polls a lot less capable of predicting the correct result.

Some polls are showing that Obama supporters may be more likely to participate in polls, but there is no way to quantify this effect, so none of the models attempt to do it. So, all we really know is that polls with unknown sampling errors of the people willing to be polled appear to favor Obama. Does that mean that he will win on election day…maybe or maybe not. When one considers the potential sampling errors and the large percentage of undecideds that many polls are showing, the actual result could be the exact opposite.

That being said, I think that the Republican base is energized this year. They are not making a lot of public noise about it, but I believe that they will show up in record numbers, vote for McCain and preserve the status quot in Congress. In the last Presidential Election, Republicans showed up in percentages that equaled or exceeded Democrats. If that happens again, McCain has a very good chance of winning this election. So, lets all vote and show the rest of the world what the silent majority can really do!

NuclearPhysicist on October 24, 2008 at 12:29 PM

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:12 PM

Dude! When did you get checked out of the coma ward?

Rovin on October 24, 2008 at 12:30 PM

Well I got 12 more contracts (at 10 each that’s 120) at 14.2 cents on the dollar.

Crap! The next ones are all asking 14.4

Damn!
Now they won’t even accept 14.4

Mcguyver on October 24, 2008 at 12:30 PM

Anyway, to answer your request, Strategic Vision is run by Republicans and has exhibited this tightening behavior (along with all the other polls) in this current election.

tneloms on October 24, 2008 at 12:03 PM

Just like a liberal that only hears what they want to hear. Where is the link I ask for? And how do you know this Strategic Vision poll is going to be wrong when the election is not over? You said:

There are some polls that have a leftward lean and some that have a rightward lean, and it’s reasonable to accuse one side of having a bias (in fact, that’s what it is, mathematically speaking). But what you and Rush are doing here is much closer to conspiracy theory land.

tneloms on October 24, 2008 at 11:38 AM

Where is one of these rightward leaning polls you are talking about? Link me to a poll of the past, where the election is finished and the results are known. That’s the second time I’ve ask you to show me one of these polls, where are they? Surely if you are going to say there are “rightward leaning polls” you know of one, lets see it.

And for your information a “conspiracy” is a plot by two or more person to do an illegal act. That definition does not apply here, skewed polls are just politics as usual.

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 12:31 PM

Well I got most of my funds locked up in bids, so I’ll have to see how it all shakes out.

Mcguyver on October 24, 2008 at 12:34 PM

Great. Now there are two trolls. Anyone know how they multiply?

Asexual reproduction. No-one wants to shag DRywall.

Fortunata on October 24, 2008 at 12:44 PM

Polls are nothing more than snapshots in time and of course the only one that’s important is the one taken on Election Day. That said, polls are taken because they provide information to the campaigns about what voters are thinking and they are very useful in illustrating any trends in the election. Unfortunately for McCain, the trends have been against him for a month now and it’s pretty hard to see how he can reverse this downward direction in just eleven days.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:46 PM

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:46 PM

And yet…he will win on election day. Imagine that!

ManlyRash on October 24, 2008 at 12:48 PM

Make all of this moot. Drag some people to vote WITH you.

marklmail on October 24, 2008 at 12:49 PM

Hot Damn!!!!!!!!

Just checked my email inbox and I did get 80% of my trades at 14.2 and then 10% of them at 14.4 and another 10% of my contracts at 14.5

Alright baby!!!

…The race is on..

Let’s win this thing already. I have a financial interest in winning this thing now!!!!!!

Screw all you pessimists, doubters, quip mongers, gaffe mongers, clothes mongers, speech mongers and just all around mongrels…..

Get lost.

We’re winning this thing Jack!!!

Mcguyver on October 24, 2008 at 12:49 PM

I have been calling it “agenda polling” the last two cycles.

This one is no different. THe pollsters get to construct everything about the poll and now they will construct them so that the results show a tie or a slight McCain lead right down to election day.

Elizabetty on October 24, 2008 at 12:50 PM

And yet…he will win on election day. Imagine that!

How? Giving up on Iowa and pretty much abandoning Colorado means McCain somehow has to overcome a ten point Obama lead in Pennsylvania in just over ten days. That’s a hell of a lot of movement to ask for this late in the campaign.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:53 PM

As to the question of why college kids would bother to turn out if polls show Obama winning handily, don’t underestimate the human desire to “be part of history”. Bragging rights to the “overthrow of the Republican machine” and the coronation of the first black President are compelling reasons for some to actually go vote for the first time.

Then they can play along in the self-affirming way of youth that they run the show. Think of the old anthem “We Built This City on Rock n Roll” being shouted in a stadium by minimum wage workers and drunks to get the idea.

in_awe on October 24, 2008 at 12:53 PM

Unfortunately for McCain, the trends have been against him for a month now and it’s pretty hard to see how he can reverse this downward direction in just eleven days.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:46 PM

Yes, unfortunately the polls were against Ronald Reagan too, but we all know how that turned out.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan beat Carter by nearly 10 points, 51 percent to 41 percent. In a Gallup Poll released days before the election on Oct. 27, it was Carter who led Reagan 45 percent to 42 percent.

In 1984, Reagan walloped Walter Mondale 58.8 percent to 40 percent, — the largest electoral landslide in U.S. history. But on Oct. 15, The New York Daily News published a poll showing Mondale with only a 4-point deficit to Reagan, 45 percent to 41 percent. A Harris Poll about the same time showed Reagan with only a 9-point lead. The Oct. 19 New York Times/CBS News Poll had Mr. Reagan ahead of Mondale by 13 points. All these polls underestimated Reagan’s actual margin of victory by 6 to 15 points.

Ann Coulter

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 12:54 PM

Well the price is staying right around 14.5 now for the last while.

O.K. ManlyRash (and the rest of the gang), it’s time to man up and put your money where your mouth is!!

Mcguyver on October 24, 2008 at 12:56 PM

Hey first, and foremost to all of you confident and giddy trolls, you never listen to a minute of Rush so don’t quote him in generalities. He, more than anyone else I have ever listened to, says to take all polling with a grain of salt whether it appears to be in your guys favor or not. Secondly, if you’re so damned confident, why do you feel the need to come to HA and engage the folks here? Or is it gloating? I hope you all appreciate your moment in time if that’s what it manifests itself to be. I’m sure all you Alinsky types are going to love the changes. All you Conservative Democrats who are just voting legacy, I think probably not so much.

Got 1st Amendment? Conservatives won’t. Will that make the country better when the Fairness Doctrine passes? Do you really only want to live by the kind of Free Speech that’s afforded here where anyone can blog in an unfiltered manner or is it better at MSNBC, CNN, DU and KOS where my comments immediately go into a moderator and are never posted.

Got 2nd Amendment? If we dismiss his campaign rhetoric and go to his voting record I think all gun owners have a lot to worry about. Will it be better in this nation where only criminals are armed.

Got 401K? The government said you need to save for your golden years. We’re going to help you with these tax deferred and exempt programs. Do you hear what they want to change with these programs. have you watched the news and seen the involvement of Franks, Dobb and Waters (just to name a few) with Fannie MAe Freddie MAC, AIG and LEMAN BROs (To name a few) and then honestly believe you can completely trust your party with no restrain whatsoever to run the economy of this nation?

Got santity of life? Why couldn’t Barack Obama sign vote yes for a bill that across state and US Senators was passed above the 90 percent mark to protect the lives of babies who had the misfortune of survivng a blotched abortion?

Careful what you wish or vote for.

And if you want to talk about the last eight years, save your breath, because I believe in the war at all costs, I think the ecomony was sound until three years ago when Republicans were sounding the alarm about the housing lending practices. And I think president Bush while not perfect was a sound chief executive in difficult times.

hawkdriver on October 24, 2008 at 12:58 PM

In 1980, Reagan was the candidate of change and once voters were reassured about him they supported him over Carter. That same dynamic is now playing out, with Obama however being the one in Reagan’s position. It’s one thing to cite historical example, but it’s also necessary to look at the current situation too and judge accordingly. Right now it doesn’t look good for McCain, unless Obama makes some huge gaffe. Given that Obama’s been avoiding that for months now, that’s not at all likely.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:58 PM

As to the question of why college kids would bother to turn out if polls show Obama winning handily hopey and changyly, don’t underestimate the human desire to “be part of history”. Bragging rights to the “overthrow continued confirmation of the Republican machine” and the coronation epic election loss of the first attempted black President are compelling reasons for some to actually go vote for the first time.

in_awe on October 24, 2008 at 12:53 PM

There. Fixed that for you. Don’t ever say I didn’t do anything for you.

Mcguyver on October 24, 2008 at 1:02 PM

Right now it doesn’t look good for McCain, unless Obama makes some huge gaffe. Given that Obama’s been avoiddoing that for months now, that’s not at all likely.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Fix that for you. You’re welcome.

Which of course he (Obama) has so that explains the current scenario.

Doesn’t make sense? Well that explains you.

Mcguyver on October 24, 2008 at 1:07 PM

Given that Obama’s been avoiding that media has been covering for him for months now, that’s not at all likely.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:58 PM

FIFY

hawkdriver on October 24, 2008 at 1:10 PM

God, The Republican Machine???

What the hell do you call George Soros and Hollywood and the Media with industry giants like liberal Bill Gates and MicroSoft and all of Academia and Unions and every tin horn liberal ass from Europe pounding conservatives every day? STFU with all that BS about you guys raging against the man. You are the man! And your oppession is ten times worse than anything you imagined us doing.

hawkdriver on October 24, 2008 at 1:15 PM

Still haven’t heard from anyone here a plausible scenario for how McCain pulls it out on Election Day. Not that McCain’s own campaign staff has one either, of course.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 1:20 PM

In 1980, Reagan was the candidate of change and once voters were reassured about him they supported him over Carter. That same dynamic is now playing out, with Obama however being the one in Reagan’s position. It’s one thing to cite historical example, but it’s also necessary to look at the current situation too and judge accordingly. Right now it doesn’t look good for McCain, unless Obama makes some huge gaffe. Given that Obama’s been avoiding that for months now, that’s not at all likely.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Oh, I see. So in your estimation the fact that the vast majority of polls in presidential races show huge leads for Democrats, but ONLY at the last moment switching to favor Republicans, is perfectly normal? It must be some kind of syndrome in America, maybe we could call it the Polls Democrat but votes Republican at the Last Moment Syndrome (PDBVRATLMS).

Gee maybe I will set up and institute and collect a million dollars from congress to study it.

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Still haven’t heard from anyone here a plausible scenario for how McCain pulls it out on Election Day. – starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Beats the hell outta me. All I know is that McCain is going to win.

ManlyRash on October 24, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Just like a liberal that only hears what they want to hear. Where is the link I ask for?

Talk about name calling. Challenging an analysis of polling practices means I’m a liberal?

Where is one of these rightward leaning polls you are talking about?

I don’t mean that they’re incorrectly leaning right, just that there are some polls that are to the right of the average and some that are to the left of average. I hope this isn’t a contentious point; here’s a partial list of tracking polls: http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm. The IBD/TIPP seems to consistently be toward the McCain side of the average, and the Reuters poll seems to lean toward the Obama side. I’m not making a judgment about which is right or wrong, I’m just calling the former right-leaning and the latter left-leaning. My point is that it’s a fair criticism to claim that a left-leaning poll is biased for political, rather than statistical, reasons, but the criticism offered here by Rush and Ed is not fair.

That’s the second time I’ve ask you to show me one of these polls, where are they?

I didn’t provide a link the first time because historical polling data isn’t easily accessible. If you have a good resource, let me know. But more importantly, it wasn’t *my* claim that all polls (including Republican-sponsored ones) tighten toward the end of a race. It was Rush’s and Ed’s. That’s what I was commenting on — that they stated this fact, and then drew the assumption that everyone is fixing their polls to affect the outcome rather than just reporting an actual phenomenon.

But I did some more digging now, and this is the best resource I found: http://www.pollingreport.com/2000.htm#TRIAL and http://pollingreport2.com/2004track.htm. Interestingly, in both 2000 and 2004 there was a tightening, but it was the Democrat catching up with the Republican. So now I don’t understand Rush’s claim at all. Tightening seems to be a real phenomenon, and in the past two elections the opposite of what he said was true.

tneloms on October 24, 2008 at 1:32 PM

Still haven’t heard from anyone here a plausible scenario for how McCain pulls it out on Election Day. Not that McCain’s own campaign staff has one either, of course.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 1:20 PM

We haven’t heard any plausible explanation from you as to why anyone should trust the polls.

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 1:34 PM

We haven’t heard any plausible explanation from you as to why anyone should trust the polls.

There’s a reason why McCain’s campaign has given up on Iowa, Wisconsin and Colorado, and you can be sure it was their own internal polling that helped inform that decision. So it’s no surprise that several polls released to the public from those and other states are also in line with what McCain’s campaign is doing on the ground.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 1:39 PM

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Then come back on Nov 5th and gloat your ass off but in the mean time go blog with people you share political ideology with.

hawkdriver on October 24, 2008 at 1:49 PM

Polling is the new refuse of the parasite.

Polls become the news versus actual news. Newsies and pundits can’t get enough of it.

Polls Polls Polls. Everywhere a poll. People pontificating on polls, people performing polls, people bemoaning polls, people using polls as content.

Comments on web blogs berating polls.

Montana on October 24, 2008 at 1:59 PM

Polling is the pornography of elections, to be sure!

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 2:06 PM

There’s a reason why McCain’s campaign has given up on Iowa, Wisconsin and Colorado, and you can be sure it was their own internal polling that helped inform that decision.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Perhaps so, but how does that lend credibility to any of the mainstream polling? Republicans haven’t won Wisconsin since before 1992. Iowa was barely won in 2004 by only one percent and McCain’s camp says they ARE NOT PULLING OUT OF COLORADO.

Yet we have bizarre polling data that indicates Obama is far ahead in traditional Republican strongholds like Virgina and North Carolina. Tied in states like North Dakota and Montana. Please!! If that doesn’t tell you there is something wrong with the polls, then you have your eyes closed to it. How do you justify that? Is Obama REALLY that popular even in state that voted for Bob Dole?

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 2:07 PM

Will President McCain, have the good sense to fire ALL the DOJ’s lefty lawyers, if he assumes office?

Will he show, he’s really different, from Bush?

It’s about the only thing, Clinton did, that the Republicans should follow in goose-step.

Madame DeFarge

luvstotango on October 24, 2008 at 2:11 PM

There’s a reason why McCain’s campaign has given up on Iowa, Wisconsin and Colorado, and you can be sure it was their own internal polling that helped inform that decision.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Ummm….

10/24/2008 3:00:00 PM – Durango , CO
Road to Victory Rally in Durango, CO
Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally in Durango, CO on Friday October 24th.

10/25/2008 12:30:00 PM – Des Moines, IA
Road to Victory Rally in Des Moines, IA
Join Sarah Palin for a Road to Victory Rally in Des Moines, IA on Saturday, October 25th. Doors open at 12:30pm.

10/26/2008 11:01:00 AM – Cedar Falls , IA
Road to Victory Rally in Cedar Falls, IA
Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally Sunday October 26th in Cedar Falls, IA.

McCain was in Wisconsin a couple of weeks ago.

As an Obama supporter even you should realize that it is difficult to travel to all 57 states simultaneously.

Keep clinging to those polls and the belief that mainstream Democrats and Hillary supporters are all in lock-step with a guy whose vision for this country is to emulate the failed socialistic policies of old Europe.

Y-not on October 24, 2008 at 2:39 PM

All I know is what McCain’s own operatives have to say about his campaign’s strategy:

John King – October 20th, 2008 (CNN) — The McCain campaign is looking at an Electoral College strategy heading into the final two weeks that has virtually no room for error and depends heavily on a dramatic comeback in Pennsylvania, which hasn’t backed a Republican for president in 20 years.

While Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado are still officially listed as McCain target states, two top strategists and advisers tell CNN that the situation in those states looks increasingly bleak. Iowa and New Mexico always have been viewed as difficult races, but the similar assessment of Colorado reflects a dramatic shift for a campaign that had long counted on the state.

“Gone,” was the word one top McCain insider used to describe those three states.

This source said while the polls in Colorado remain close, he and most others in the operation were of the opinion that the Obama campaign and its allies have a far superior ground/turnout operation and “most of us have a hard time counting on Colorado.”

Campaign manager Rick Davis is among the dissenters, believing the state remains within reach, several sources in and close to the McCain campaign say.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 2:59 PM

They want to create a story line that generates pessimism in Republicans and depress turnout, which then makes the polls a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Which makes the Progressives’ carping about Republicans “suppressing voter turnout among the poor” to be so much blatant hypocrisy.

How can intelligent people be taken in by such incredible nonsense? I seriously don’t get it.

philwynk on October 24, 2008 at 3:05 PM

All I know is what McCain’s own operatives have to say about his campaign’s strategy:

John King – October 20th, 2008 (CNN)…

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 2:59 PM

No… all you know is what CNN claims McCain’s operatives have to say.

It’s all crap, son. They’re playing you.

philwynk on October 24, 2008 at 3:06 PM

Or perhaps, you’re trying to play us. Which is it?

philwynk on October 24, 2008 at 3:08 PM

Rush was strongly against McCain in the primary season.

Now he is trumpeting for McCain.

This man has no principles and is just a GOP loudspeaker.

Xolom on October 24, 2008 at 3:13 PM

While I’m a skeptic, I’m not a conspiracy theorist either:

WASHINGTON (AP) 10-16-2008 – The Republican National Committee is halting presidential ads in Wisconsin and Maine, turning much of its attention to usually Republican states where GOP nominee John McCain shows signs of faltering.

The party’s independent ad operation is doubling its budget to about $10 million and focusing on crucial states such as Colorado, Missouri, Indiana and Virginia, where Democrat Barack Obama has established a foothold, according to a Republican strategist familiar with presidential ad placements.

Of course such ad buy plans can and do change constantly, but McCain’s operation has scaled back in Wisconsin as well as Iowa. Does that mean they’re entirely giving up? Not for the sake of appearances, no (and Palin going to Iowa is, obviously, self-serving with an eye to 2012) but practically speaking, it’s a retreat in an attempt to hold on in other states.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 3:13 PM

Unfortunately for McCain, the trends have been against him for a month now and it’s pretty hard to see how he can reverse this downward direction in just eleven days.

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 12:46 PM

I just saw this. Wow, dude, how do you live with yourself, telling outright lies like this? McCain’s numbers have been trending upward for at least the last week. I think you know this.

Seriously, I’d like some Obama campaigner to become serious for just a moment and do some genuine inner reflection, and recite for me how you guys manage to reconcile “We’re the change the world has been waiting for” with “We can’t accomplish a damned thing without lying through our teeth, misleading large masses of people, and massive voter fraud.” Don’t you realize that if Obama is a fraud before the election, he will also be a fraud after the election?

Of course, this sort of candid inner reflection is probably impossible for the damned… (which, to be frank, I hope you’re not.)

philwynk on October 24, 2008 at 3:18 PM

Rush was strongly against McCain in the primary season.

Now he is trumpeting for McCain.

This man has no principles and is just a GOP loudspeaker.

Xolom on October 24, 2008 at 3:13 PM

Rush is supporting the lessor of two evils, nothing wrong with that. And yes, Rush is a conservative, wow, did you just wake up to that information? Was that a big revelation to you? Next you will be telling us that water flows downhill.

Maxx on October 24, 2008 at 3:20 PM

Rush was strongly against McCain in the primary season.

Now he is trumpeting for McCain.

This man has no principles and is just a GOP loudspeaker.

Xolom on October 24, 2008 at 3:13 PM

Like Limbaugh, I was strongly against McCain in the primary season, but now hope he wins. I have strong principles, and I am not just a GOP loudspeaker. However, I know what an utter disaster an Obama presidency will be, and I hope the nation I love and call my home does not fall for that infantile, neo-Stalinist fraud.

Now, the fact that I am not what you claim, does not necessarily prove that Rush Limbaugh is not what you claim. However, I stand as an example of how an individual can oppose McCain in the primary but support him in the general, without being merely a mouthpiece for the party.

Just out of curiosity, do you likewise disdain those Democrats who supported other candidates during the primary, but today speak and support Obama? Seems to me one of those is running for Vice President on the D ticket…

philwynk on October 24, 2008 at 3:23 PM

I just saw this. Wow, dude, how do you live with yourself, telling outright lies like this? McCain’s numbers have been trending upward for at least the last week. I think you know this.

What little change I’ve seen this week is more noise than signal at this point, and McCain has a long way to go if he hopes to reverse the decline in his numbers over the past month. Too little, too late…

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 3:29 PM

I just saw this. Wow, dude, how do you live with yourself, telling outright lies like this? McCain’s numbers have been trending upward for at least the last week. I think you know this.

What little change I’ve seen this week is more noise than signal at this point, and McCain has a long way to go if he hopes to reverse the decline in his numbers over the past month. Too little, too late…

starfleet_dude on October 24, 2008 at 3:29 PM

In support of starfleet_dude, just look at the RCP average over the past month: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html. If you think claiming the trend has been against McCain for the past month is lying through your teeth, I don’t know what to tell you.

tneloms on October 24, 2008 at 4:21 PM