Is DoJ suit against Gallup retaliation for bad Obama poll numbers?

posted at 10:41 am on September 6, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

So says the Daily Caller, which questions the timing of a lawsuit brought against Gallup by Eric Holder and the Department of Justice over claims of overbilling for services.  Matthew Boyle does his best to connect dots after the release of e-mails show Gallup’s response to a request from “the White House” to explain their methodology and David Axelrod’s attempt to publicly wheedle the venerable polling service into changing its modeling to improve Barack Obama’s standing:

Internal emails between senior officials at The Gallup Organization, obtained by The Daily Caller, show senior Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod attempting to subtly intimidate the respected polling firm when its numbers were unfavorable to the president.

After Gallup declined to change its polling methodology, Obama’s Department of Justice hit it with an unrelated lawsuit that appears damning on its face.

Appears is the operative word, but we’ll get back to that in a moment.  First, Boyle reports on internal e-mails at Gallup after Axelrod publicly questioned Gallup’s modeling of the 2012 electorate:

Internally, Gallup officials discussed via email how to respond Axelrod’s accusations. One suggested that it “seems like a pretty good time for a blog response,” and named a potential writer.

In response to that suggestion, another senior Gallup official wrote — in an email chain titled “Axelrod vs. Gallup” — that the White House “has asked” a senior Gallup staffer “to come over and explain our methodology too.”

That Gallup official, the email continued, “has a plan that includes blogging and telling WH [the White House] he would love to have them come over here etc. This could be a very good moment for us to [show] our super rigorous methods compared to weak samples etc. …”

The writer named several news organizations with their own polling methodologies, all of which resulted in numbers more favorable to President Obama at the time.

In response to that email, a third senior Gallup official said he thought Axelrod’s pressure “sounds a little like a Godfather situation.”

“Imagine Axel[rod] with Brando’s voice: ‘[Name redacted], I’d like you to come over and explain your methodology…You got a nice poll there….would be a shame if anything happened to it…’”

In a second email chain titled “slanderous link about Gallup methodology,” another senior Gallup official noted that a Washington Examiner story on Axelrod’s anti-Gallup tweet was “on [the] Drudge [Report] right now,” before writing that the episode was “[s]o politically motivated, it’s laughable.”

“As they say in b-ball: he’s trying to work the refs,” that official wrote to other senior Gallup staffers. “What a joke. Axel’s had a bad week. He got in the middle of the Ann Romney thing. Then said the country is going in the wrong direction. (Oops!) Now he’s swinging at us….”

This exchange took place in the spring of this year.  The problem with the “retaliation” theory is that the dispute between Gallup and the DoJ goes back to 2009.  Boyle reports that long after the jump.  In fact, the DoJ served subpoenas on Gallup in early 2010, although it took another 18 months to the fall of 2011 to get a meeting between Gallup and the DoJ.  The whistleblower filed the initial lawsuit, which the DoJ joined last month, four months after Axelrod’s public complaint about modeling in the electoral polls.

Could this be retaliation?  It’s possible, I suppose, but it’s not terribly rational, with no upside and lots of downside over a nearly-meaningless issue.  People complain about polling models all the time; heck, I do it nearly every week, including Gallup’s occasionally.  Polls arguably have some impact on elections, but Axelrod and Obama have far more influence on elections than Gallup or any other pollster, so intimidation and retaliation won’t do anything to improve their prospects that they couldn’t do for themselves.

And even if one thinks it might, why wait so long to retaliate?  The worst possible time for retaliation against a pollster is two months before an election, when their results get the maximum amount of attention.  It’s the investigation that intimidates, not the lawsuit, which is the other shoe dropping.  If one was inclined to think that Gallup might skew results to a favored outcome, wouldn’t it now be in their interest to work against Obama to change the AG and end the lawsuit?

Gabriel Malor is equally skeptical:

I wouldn’t go that far.  Boyle’s piece is more analysis than journalism, and the stories of Axelrod’s gripe and the DoJ lawsuit against Gallup are both interesting.  This just looks like an effort to connect dots that simply aren’t connectable.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

…yepper!

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 10:41 AM

…from the bible of JugEars religion!

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 10:42 AM

…there is no DOJ!…it’s the Gestopo arm of the White House

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 10:44 AM

…just think what will go on in this country when JugEars has “more flexibility”!

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 10:45 AM

…because this administration would NEVER file lawsuits of retaliation! Never!

search4truth on September 6, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Didn’t Obama do the same thing to the organization (can’t recall name) that downgraded America’s credit rating?

tommyboy on September 6, 2012 at 10:46 AM

in an email chain titled “Axelrod vs. Gallup” — that the White House “has asked” a senior Gallup staffer “to come over and explain our methodology too.”

So what is this all about? Nothing there I suppose, because private companies always get invited to the White House to explain how they lawfully do business.

Bishop on September 6, 2012 at 10:46 AM

“Imagine Axel[rod] with Brando’s voice: ‘[Name redacted], I’d like you to come over and explain your methodology…You got a nice poll there….would be a shame if anything happened to it…’”

…this is a daily routine!

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Wait until after the conventions when Gallup will switch to a LV model vs. the RV model they have been using to date……..Dem heads will explode when they see that.

Tater Salad on September 6, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Why does Gallup need to “explain their model” to anyone at the WH?

Tater Salad on September 6, 2012 at 10:52 AM

This is the worst time to intimidate Gallup? When their influence is at its apex? I think you need to check your logic on that one, Ed.

besser tot als rot on September 6, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Ask Gibson Guitar if the Obama administration is capable of petty, partisan politics like this?

HumpBot Salvation on September 6, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Maybe it didn’t start out that way but it sure seems like retaliation now. Is it impossible that retaliation is now part of the equation even if it wasn’t at the beginning?

Capitalist Infidel on September 6, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Hey Ed can you show this explanation of how Axelrod intimidates polling services to Allahpundit so he CAN FINALLY understand what is going on with the polls outside Rasmussen!!!

As an explanation to the board. The polls are VERY important to Axelrod. He USES THEM FOR FUNDRAISING!! Crony capitalism only works if you can kickback and you can kickback ONLY IF ELECTED. The democrats including Pelosi know that their fundraising goes up when the polls go up and down when the polls go down. They ALL on the left love to tweak the pollsters when their numbers are bad. Does anyone remember that when Obama’s numbers started to get to 42% approval they suddenly went back up with NO positive news? Second reason is their lazy and easily disappointed base will NOT show up if they think it is a losing cause so doing well in the polls raises their turnout.

Finally please everyone note that the polls are VERY important to the dems and they DON’T just let the chips fall where they may.

DON’T TRUST THE POLLS EXCEPT RASMUSSEN (Who isn’t in the tank and would tell Axelrod to f- off if he ever tried it)! WE ARE PROBABLY WINNING BIG AND DON’T EVEN KNOW IT!

Conan on September 6, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Since August 28 the gallup 7 day tracking has it Obama 47 Romney 46. How does a poll stay the same for that long? Statistical noise should make it move.

tbrickert on September 6, 2012 at 10:56 AM

DOJ is suing Gallup to recover taxpayer money that it’s owed due to Gallup’s (alleged) overbilling.

Hmm… looks like somebody (-ies?) over at Gallup didn’t cut enough kick-back [checks] donations to the DNC & Obozo.

Would it have helped?

Dunno… but it apparently worked for Solyndra.

CPT. Charles on September 6, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Could this be retaliation? It’s possible, I suppose, but it’s not terribly rational, with no upside and lots of downside over a nearly-meaningless issue.

And precisely why should we assume the Obama administration is rational. You must think at their level, Ed.

rplat on September 6, 2012 at 10:58 AM

We are pretty safe to always assume the very worst of little Bammie and his malicious administration.

slickwillie2001 on September 6, 2012 at 10:59 AM

OT: Hackers stealing Romney’s tax returns is kind of a big deal, isn’t it? Blog post? Headline post? Bueller?

NotCoach on September 6, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Not wise to cross Politburo, no?

HoustonRight on September 6, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Why does Gallup need to “explain their model” to anyone at the WH?

Tater Salad on September 6, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Exactly! I am long, long, LONG past giving this White House the benefit of the doubt. Axelrod would manipulate middle school newspapers if he could get away with it.

BettyRuth on September 6, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Is the Gallup lawsuit related to Axelrod anger against Gallup, probably not… However this tells you something about the delusional world that Axelrod and liberals live in… The man simply refuses to accept polling data that are not good for his boss… I am certain that the Obama campaign are lying to themselves within their own internal polling and they are making up their own internal polling to look for Obama even though the reality is totally opposite to that… In their own internal polls they are assuming a 2008 party ID breakdown if not even a higher Democrat over Republican ratio than that of 2008, that is how delusional these fools are… So when you see some liberal pundits referring to internal polling showing Obama ahead just know that these polls are as utterly inaccurate as the liberal media polls…

mnjg on September 6, 2012 at 11:01 AM

so is this another case of bad optics?

workingclass artist on September 6, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Since August 28 the gallup 7 day tracking has it Obama 47 Romney 46. How does a poll stay the same for that long? Statistical noise should make it move.
tbrickert on September 6, 2012 at 10:56 AM

Good observation and one explanation is Gallup doesn’t want to overstate Obama’s support past 47% or they will have to WAY overcorrect at some point or be way off at the end.

Romney is at 46% so they can say he is behind and blame any final vote of 53-47% Romney on the “undecided” all breaking Romney’s way. Great way to keep your reputation for accuracy and please the Obama people at the same time.

Conan on September 6, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Especially interesting given that Gallup has leaned left for years and has always done its part for The Party in trying to shape opinion with its polls prior to elections. It only shifts to actually measuring opinion a few weeks before the election (unless it is going to be close, then they continue to the opinion shaping business) so that they appear credible for future opinion shaping operations.

AZfederalist on September 6, 2012 at 11:09 AM

I am certain that the Obama campaign are lying to themselves within their own internal polling and they are making up their own internal polling to look for Obama even though the reality is totally opposite to that
mnjg on September 6, 2012 at 11:01 AM

I don’t think they are lying to themselves they are trying to rebuild the mythology that Obama is popular.

I heard an explanation of Axelrod’s strategy against Hillary back in 2008. It was to make his candidate seem like the popular thing to do and a foregone conclusion that he was going to win. It is based on marketing like for Nike where you build momentum by saying your brand is one everyone is buying and then flakes just start getting on the bandwagon to be accepted. Worked pretty well in 2008 in defeating the Clinton Machine and Axelrod is very sensitive to making sure the public feels his “brand” is popular.

Conan on September 6, 2012 at 11:09 AM

The lawsuit could have been used as leverage. Leave it hanging like a sword of Damocles hanging over their head. If they “fix” the polling, the suit just sits there, if they don’t, it falls in their heads.

This might explain some of the idiotic sampling we are seeing out of other pollsters, though, if Axelrod is prodding them to make the samples more 2008-like.

crosspatch on September 6, 2012 at 11:12 AM

It only shifts to actually measuring opinion a few weeks before the election (unless it is going to be close, then they continue to the opinion shaping business) so that they appear credible for future opinion shaping operations.
AZfederalist on September 6, 2012 at 11:09 AM

I think that is exactly what I posted above.

Gallup is showing a 47% number for Obama should tell you that the max number they can get away with a last minute shift from and be credible. He must be way below that if they use a 36/36/28 turnout.

Conan on September 6, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Perhaps a review of All the many prior lawsuits brought against polling companies by other administrations might help, all of them. I’m waiting.
And what’s “overbilling for services”? Only Gallup, & whose businees is that of the DOJ? The time lag may be explained by the godawful incompetence of the WH, note the idiocy over the God and Israel fumbles at the convention. I think it’s at least probable, after all they’re thugs.

arand on September 6, 2012 at 11:14 AM

…there is no DOJ!…it’s the Gestopo arm of the White House

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 10:44 AM

PLEASE! No more Nazi references!!

Khun Joe on September 6, 2012 at 11:15 AM

ANYTHING, to keep them busy from looking into fast & furious……

This would allow Carnhole to bemoan that they can say they’ve had a lot on their “plate”……… and can’t get to the non-serious issues. /

FlaMurph on September 6, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Didn’t Obama do the same thing to the organization (can’t recall name) that downgraded America’s credit rating?

tommyboy on September 6, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Yes, they did. It was Standard & Poor’s. There is a reason why Moody’s and Fitch, the other two big ratings agencies, have declined to cut our credit rating. The SEC is also suing Egan-Jones, a smaller alternative ratings firm, also likely in retaliation for lowering the US’ credit rating. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/sec-emerges-carbonite-deep-freeze-sues-sec

Ed, to be honest, occam’s razor should be followed in cases like this, and given this administration’s willingness to use the DOJ and other agencies as thugs to harass private businesses that do things they don’t like, it is highly likely that this is in fact retaliation against Gallup for unfavorable polling.

I don’t know why you and Malor are tying yourselves into knots trying to find a “reasonable” explanation for why Obama would sue a polling firm that’s making him look bad.”

Doomberg on September 6, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Its just sweet Chicago politics ………..Nothing more………..

angrymike on September 6, 2012 at 11:19 AM

“Hey !! We gotta sue those Gallop folks for these numbers !!”
“oh, we can just join in this old suit.. No BFD”

My frst thought on this ??
WhyTH is this suit still ongoing ???
Can’t they win/lose/settle and get it over with ??
Good grief.

pambi on September 6, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Chicago on the Potomac

rjoco1 on September 6, 2012 at 11:21 AM

DoJ is playing the long game. If you’re working the refs it has to be more than just an investigation. In this case,it’s start the investigation then put out the word you don’t like their methodology, with perhaps a hint that the investigation could go away if they change it.

bflat879 on September 6, 2012 at 11:22 AM

PLEASE! No more Nazi references!!

Khun Joe on September 6, 2012 at 11:15 AM

…can’t help it!…not as familiar with how the KGB operated!

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 11:25 AM

It’s true that Axelrod criticized Gallup and that DOJ is suing Gallup, but there’s no evidence – not even the timing- that they’re related.

And this kind of thumb sucking is why conservatives regularly lose politically.

Is the Obama administration trying to pressure Gallup? It sure looks like it.

Is this particular suit being driven in any part by the administration’s animus? It isn’t clear.

Now you can argue in an ideal world then that we should leave the issue be – a President and his retainers should be above this kind of action. But the Obama administration has not been in other cases, and more to the point this kind of Marquis of Queensborough fighting is exactly the road to defeat.

Journalists and legislators should be “asking questions”, demanding to see every document related to this action, and putting pressure on the administration to prove the suit is not politically motivated.

Do we want to win or do we want to lose graciously?

18-1 on September 6, 2012 at 11:27 AM

DOJ is suing Gallup to recover taxpayer money that it’s owed due to Gallup’s (alleged) overbilling.
Hmm… looks like somebody (-ies?) over at Gallup didn’t cut enough kick-back [checks] donations to the DNC & Obozo.

Would it have helped?

Dunno… but it apparently worked for Solyndra.

CPT. Charles on September 6, 2012 at 10:58 AM

…MF Global?…QUICK!…make Jon Corzine your CEO!

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Conan on September 6, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Yep, saying the same thing. That’s why it is surprising they would go after Gallup as opposed to Rasmussen or someone else. Gallup has pretty much always been loyal to The Party, why try to make an example of it?

AZfederalist on September 6, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Is DoJ suit against Gallup retaliation for bad Obama poll numbers?
POSTED AT 10:41 AM ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2012 BY ED MORRISSEY

No.

verbaluce on September 6, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Squishy.

FlatFoot on September 6, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Do we want to win or do we want to lose graciously?
18-1 on September 6, 2012 at 11:27 AM

I agree with your sentiments but do you really think this thing would be worth it 60 days before election? You probably can’t get a hearing set up in 60 days. Second let say you win this. This is the last election for Obama. What does he care after Nov 6th and the purpose of influencing voters and donors is past..

Conan on September 6, 2012 at 11:32 AM

And this kind of thumb sucking is why conservatives regularly lose politically.

Is the Obama administration trying to pressure Gallup? It sure looks like it.

Is this particular suit being driven in any part by the administration’s animus? It isn’t clear.

Now you can argue in an ideal world then that we should leave the issue be – a President and his retainers should be above this kind of action. But the Obama administration has not been in other cases, and more to the point this kind of Marquis of Queensborough fighting is exactly the road to defeat.

Journalists and legislators should be “asking questions”, demanding to see every document related to this action, and putting pressure on the administration to prove the suit is not politically motivated.

Do we want to win or do we want to lose graciously?

18-1 on September 6, 2012 at 11:27 AM

I think it has to do with a continuing fear among conservative bloggers and journalists of appearing too “extremist.” The message seems to be “We’re not one of those crazies. We’re the ‘reasonable’ conservatives.” The problem is it actually appears less reasonable in this case to give the government the benefit of the doubt given their substantial history of using their various arms to harass businesses they don’t like, such as Standard & Poor’s.

Doomberg on September 6, 2012 at 11:33 AM

In the 30 second newsbite world, this is bad optics for the Democrats.

SouthernRoots on September 6, 2012 at 11:33 AM

That’s why it is surprising they would go after Gallup as opposed to Rasmussen or someone else. Gallup has pretty much always been loyal to The Party, why try to make an example of it?
AZfederalist on September 6, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Rasmussen doesn’t get his money from the Dems. I posted above that if Axelrod complained to Rasmussen who gets his bread buttered on the right he would laugh and Axelrod knows this. Gallup on the other hand is getting money from dems.

Conan on September 6, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I think it has to do with a continuing fear among conservative bloggers and journalists of appearing too “extremist.”
Doomberg on September 6, 2012 at 11:33 AM

How about the fact we are too close to the election to make it worth your while if you won. Ed did the thing you can do in the present which is put out the word Axelrod is tweaking Gallup.

Conan on September 6, 2012 at 11:39 AM

This just looks like an effort to connect dots that simply aren’t connectable.

Doesn’t that also pretty well describe the joint Democrat/Media witch hunt against the White House that lasted from 2001 to 2008? Why, yes, yes it does.

drunyan8315 on September 6, 2012 at 11:39 AM

No.

verbaluce on September 6, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Denial is a river in Egypt.
beadunce on September 6, 2012 at 11:70 AM

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 11:46 AM

No Doubt.

verbaluce on September 6, 2012 at 11:31 AM

VegasRick on September 6, 2012 at 11:57 AM

This exchange took place in the spring of this year. The problem with the “retaliation” theory is that the dispute between Gallup and the DoJ goes back to 2009. Boyle reports that long after the jump.

The problem with this view is that DOJ has the discretion to sit on it or pursue it. Also, isn’t this already in court and would be settled in any event and is there a difference in deep pockets by DOJ entering the suit? Depending on the answers to these question, then add this to a problem with this view.

It’s possible, I suppose, but it’s not terribly rational, with no upside and lots of downside over a nearly-meaningless issue.

Potential criminal prosecution is not a meaningless issue. Defense costs is not a meaningless issue. What’s not terribly rational is thinking that your estimation of upside and downside is the same as the WH’s estimation in deciding whether to do something or not.

The point is not that complaints about polls are a dime a dozen and your example that you complain about polls all the time is a non sequitur; you have no stake in the poll.

The point is that the issue of DOJ action could have been dropped down the DOJ memory hole, like so many others have been. And it’s not necessarily about intimidation of Gallup, but of others. It’s about dirt and the uses of it, since ‘everyone, on average, commits three felonies a day’.

I don’t mean to be harsh about your argument, Ed. It’s possible you are right. What animates my commenting is the substitution of your yardsticks for measuring rational, timing, holding grudges, weighing consequences, etc, for the Administration’s. I admire your desire to be fair, a yardstick you employ frequently but has black and blue marks all over it from the Obama Administration touching it with a 20-foot pole.

Dusty on September 6, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Is DoJ suit against Gallup retaliation for bad Obama poll numbers?

.
.
Is the Pope Catholic?

.
.
Better question:

Is Valerie Jarrett behind the DoJ suit against Gallup?

listens2glenn on September 6, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Yes Ed, your points are well taken in a rational world. However, we’re talking about Chicago politics. In the world of axelrod, it’s totally logical to leverage an existing lawsuit of three years and go heavy on Gallup. Why else would the internal emails speculate the godfather maneuver? Let’s call a spade a shovel that Don wants Gallup to change their methodology. Anyhoo, it should all be for naught, Oboobi is going to be landslided.

AH_C on September 6, 2012 at 12:09 PM

I don’t know why you and Malor are tying yourselves into knots trying to find a “reasonable” explanation for why Obama would sue a polling firm that’s making him look bad.”

Doomberg on September 6, 2012 at 11:17 AM

It’s a good career move to always give little Bammie the BOTD. It’s the BOR model.

slickwillie2001 on September 6, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Obama has proven time and again that he’s amazingly obtuse about public perceptions. I’m thinking of Moochelle’s vacations in particular. Or the fact that the country is experiencing high gas prices while he’s turning down Keystone P/L. So it’s not wrong for us to question the motivation of the DOJ lawsuit. At this stage I don’t care if there’s no connecting of the dots. I like the idea that the appearance of Chicago thuggery at work is here. 60 days before election. I can handle this. Just as good as Harry’s imaginary friend telling him Romney hasn’t paid taxes.

COgirl on September 6, 2012 at 12:14 PM

I realize Ed’s erring on the side of caution.. however.. what this story does, is raise some serious concerns because the Obama White House has not once let little things like legality bother it before..

Matthew Boyle does his best to connect dots

The fact that the dots exist at all.. in a near linear line,… from a WH prone to intimidation and thuggery..

Why do the stupid thing of calling a polling agency to the WH and demanding they explain their methodology at all…

It’s clear Gallop’s executives feel it IS politically motivated, or why say so in e-mails they never thought would be made public?

Holder is absolutely fine with the raging destruction he caused in Mexico with his fast and furious program.. what are 300 dead potential undocumented democrats to the cause after all….. That he might attempt to bully a polling company seems small potatoes compared to what he’s already been willing to do.

mark81150 on September 6, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Fighting unemployment.

Who may I call at Gallup to discuss the facts of life?

I do bag man/ lobby work for a tithe off the top.

And I never snitch.

IlikedAUH2O on September 6, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Gabe Malor is a wet noodle. He was the weakest blogger at AOSHQ.

echosyst on September 6, 2012 at 12:34 PM

I agree with your sentiments but do you really think this thing would be worth it 60 days before election?

Why not? It looks bad, and it might well be criminality.

There is no reason to presume that this effort is wholly legitimate, and this is the standard of the modern politically game.

In WWII, we didn’t defeat the Germans be refusing to use blitzkrieg – we won by doing it better then they did.

18-1 on September 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM

When in doubt, always apply rule #1:

Never underestimate the dishonesty of a democrat.

BruthaMan on September 6, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Seems like the entire Conservative media is now WND-replicas. Then again, what would conservatives be without their petty conspiracy theories?

lester on September 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM

It’s possible, I suppose, but it’s not terribly rational, with no upside and lots of downside over a nearly-meaningless issue.

You’ve just described President Choom’s administration in a nutshell.

RoadRunner on September 6, 2012 at 1:58 PM

DOJ should adopt the FIFO method of accounting. Let’s get Fast and Furious out of the way, then those pesky voter fraud things, then this one.

teejk on September 6, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Actually this happens every day.

After people buy a product and don’t “like it” they sue the vendor. When I see these suits, I know they haven’t paid the bill and want to get off the hook.

To the Marxists, the numbers need to be tweeked to reflect the utopian ideology and not rely on reality.

Gallup needs to be sent to re-education camp or number cooking school.

seven on September 7, 2012 at 11:23 AM