Reply With Quote
Good to know.
Hopefully Rasmussen and others come out with stuff later.
Im so cynical now a days I don't know who to believe.
Sucks.
What I find interesting is that people SAY they want the candidates to be more specific and point out the weaknesses of the other candidate; but then we hear that the independents are turned off by the angry tone, etc.
You can't have it both ways - maybe that's why they're independents - because they can't really take a stand and they just want everyone to play nicely together in the sandbox.
Me - I want them to take the gloves off and really go at it. I would love for McCain to look Obama in the eye and say "your own running mate said you weren't qualified to be President", so why should the american people think any differently?
Good to know.
Hopefully Rasmussen and others come out with stuff later.
Im so cynical now a days I don't know who to believe.
Sucks.
Like Zogby?
Also, polls are conducted in a myriad of ways with all results given back to the customer (CBS) for them to present in any manner they want. That's why the internals are important.
I think TPark is worried that Dan Rather is personally calling the poll participants and trying to sway the results of the polls.
[QUOTE=Crookshanks;2792156]What I find interesting is that people SAY they want the candidates to be more specific and point out the weaknesses of the other candidate; but then we hear that the independents are turned off by the angry tone, etc.
You can't have it both ways - maybe that's why they're independents - because they can't really take a stand and they just want everyone to play nicely together in the sandbox.
Me - I want them to take the gloves off and really go at it. I would love for McCain to look Obama in the eye and say "your own running mate said you weren't qualified to be President", so why should the american people think any differently?[/QUOTE]
God depending on the reaction, that could gain McCain some serious votes IMO.
But he won't do it. It might "anger" some people.
No I'm worried about any media en y swaying the poll results.
As is the fact that they edited out the previous 2 times she was asked that question.
Just like ABC chopped off the first part of her anwer to the foreign policy question to get the sound bit they wanted.
Don't tell me they do that Obama...
Why should she give interviews to corrupt new sources?
Why? It only costs them the stupid vote every time they do it.
She should do only Fox interviews until the media stop smearing her.
Sorry but they are biased and dishonest and deliberately trying to manipulate the perception of her.
It would be one thing if the American public was aware of it and saw through, but evidentally a great many of them are too ignorant to do.
IF they did that to Obama, I guarantee you he wouldn't be doing interviews with them either.
I'm pretty cynical myself, particularly when it comes to partisan politics, but I feel better about both candidates after this debate. I may be in the minority here, but I am content with either of them as President.
Now, where I begin to get angry again is when I watch the post-debate analysis shows on various networks parading party yes-men out for analysis on the debate, all ting out the same talking points as evidence that their guy won. And I get damn near homicidal lately when I see Giuliani's smug lying face.
They're not going to edit a LIVE 2 minute post debate interview.
I don't care who you are, this is funny:
She needs to be protected from the big, bad media!
But she's tough and ready to be president!
No, in those they ambush.
Where'd Shasta go? Still googling Kissinger?
I know what you were saying. I was just joking. I actually find the Fox News polls (not the internet polls, but their real election polls) to be fairly accurate (and obviously, I don't care for Fox News). Very rarely is a Fox News poll an outlier.
I don't trust The Daily Kos/Research 2000 Poll (again, not an internet poll, an actual poll) because it was an outlier when they first started posting it. Now it is in line with other polls.
"Oh yeah? I've got TWO bracelets!" Troop scoreboard !
I have not heard poeple say they want the candidates to point out the weaknesses of the other person. People do not like all that mudslinging. I hear people say they want to hear from the candidate what he or she will do specifically. That is an entirely different thing.
Why wouldn't they? They are doing everything in their power to destroy her, and they've already proven it to anyone with an objective mind.
They don't want her in Washington...that right there is reason enough to put her there.
They will!
They're corrupt!
You have no idea the lengths they will go to to make my delicate flower look bad!
She must be protected!
Battle of the Bracelets was ing ridiculous.
Thanks.
She's doing everything she can to ruin herself. Bush has set the bar INCREDIBLY low for future presidential/VP candidates. You really have to try hard to go lower than that, and Palin has done so in exquisite fashion.
Battle of the Bracelets was ing ridiculous.
The best part was they both got in "Kenyan immigrant father" and "Prisoner of War" in the last couple of minutes. Whew, that was close!
Particularly when Obama had to read the name on his.Battle of the Bracelets was ing ridiculous.
Reminded me of when we all got those MIA/POW bracelets after Vietnam.
She needs to be protected from the big, bad media!
But she's tough and ready to be president!
The dishonesty is stunning.
It's pretty much exactly what you said, so yes, I am parroting your dishonesty.
You're pissed you picked such a horrible candidate.
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 09-26-2008 at 11:48 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
