... reverses direction.
And the approval/disapproval tips back toward approval.
The same-sex marriage and born-in-Kenya distractions are working?
Another new Rasmussen poll: "51% Predict U.S. Government Will Go Bankrupt Before Budget Is Balanced."
Relax!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
32 comments:
Is it really ethical to allow someone so stupid that they would bounce back and forth between Obama and Romney to vote?
Isn't it a little like allowing someone who's profoundly mentally disabled to drive a car?
Who are these 5 or 6% of the population that just can't decide between these two candidates, and support one this week, and the other the next?
Who are these people that yo yo back and forth? They must be the real deep thinkers.
Weekend poll...yawn.
But, Rasmussen is biased! What is happening?
"The same-sex marriage and born-in-Kenya distractions are working?"
This is what scientists call "noise". You do not analyze the "reason" for noise. Noise has no "reason".
I am relaxed.
The United States might go bankrupt but Walmart will be selling helium by then.
If most of the US wants the entire nation to go the way of California, Michigan, and Illinois, we'll get it, good and hard.
Decades of indoctrination by our schools and media have had an enormous effect; very few people understand basic economics, we're balkanized by race/sex/class, and a majority are reflexively leftist in thinking.
But the laws of economics are like gravity, and cannot be avoided or changed.
The reckoning will come, as it always does, polls decrying it notwithstanding. Might as well protest death.
I've gotta question the sampling techniques. The range of responses suggests too much sampling error.
Give me poll results starting in October.
Zero always does better on the weekends.
Check back around Wednesday.
PS What's Zero's Approval Index?
The same-sex marriage and born-in-Kenya distractions are working?
Only if you think the media narrative is the only force at work on the public, which is silly and gives them waaay more power than they deserve. I despise both of these candidates, no matter what the media (or anyone else) says. It's called thinking for yourself. You should try it sometime.
Yesterday, as the eclipse was happening, a small crowd gathered in front of my house and watched. My (liberal) roommate was going nuts, calling them stupid and repeating what he'd heard on the news about everyone's retinas burning away. The moron didn't have enough sense to notice nobody was listening to the warnings, nobody got hurt, and he was the laughingstock of the neighborhood by "believing" what he was told about some guy, some where, who had some thing happen to him at some time. Eclipses have been happening for thousands of years and there's been no case of mass blindness reported, just as there's no major die-off from the obesity epidemic, or the world coming to an end from whatever these Cassandras are afraid of now.
There is such a thing as reality - and many people know it.
I don't know who's going to win this election (I'm for ditching both of these losers) but the idea Romney's a shoe-in was a bad calculation, as far as I can tell, because enthusiasm can't be manufactured. I won't be voting for him and I haven't spoken with anyone, personally, who will either. And I'm in Utah. I met a lot of people in Texas who hate Rick Perry, too.
Will reality ever be a part of your calculations?
Will you ever even try?
The reality is, polls don't matter this early in the race. It's just manufactured news.
On the working theory that elections are about the incumbent, I've been following the top line Barack Obama vs. Mitt Romney election number on realclearpolitics and the number of those polled who intend to vote for the President was around 49% in early March, and is now around 46%. It used to be common to see a poll where 50% were ready to vote Obama, now realclearpolitics only lists one such poll in there recent window, an AP poll of two weeks ago.
Does this mean, the election would be 54-46 Romney? Well probably not, but the lower that number goes the harder it is to get to 50% in swing states.
I guess some days you are a racist independent voter, other days not so much.
If they can keep the smoke and mirrors act going without setting fire to the draperies until November, it will be a close election.
But there is so much that can go wrong - and disastrously wrong - on all sides, and so little that can go right, that we may well have another blow-out and a sea-change in our national politics.
Alex,
No doubt the story of Romney's bullying a gay kid had an impact. Most Americans don't like bullies.
Ain't that the truth. Oh, wait - you do. My bad.
Or was that my "bigotry"?
Maybe they need to poll some catholics after today's multiple lawsuits
I guess Zero claiming to be part Cherokee, just like Lizzie Warren, paid off.
@Crack, if I may ask: should you favor neither candidate, do you recommend abstaining - or would you advise choosing what you perceive "the lesser evil" to be?
What would your criteria for "lesser evils" look like?
Honestly curious, not trolling.
I believe they'll be a slow erosion of support for BO between now and November.
@Crack, if I may ask: should you favor neither candidate, do you recommend abstaining - or would you advise choosing what you perceive "the lesser evil" to be?
What would your criteria for "lesser evils" look like?
Honestly curious, not trolling.
You realize, he has his own blog, which he never fails to link to.
By the way, I remember a post by Ann a few weeks ago, showing several issues all at 60% on Intrade. One was Mr. Obama's re-election, another was Walker's recall election, and a third was the Supreme Court decision on ACA. (I think.)
Mr. Obama has been creeping (slowly) downward; he's now at 56%. And the Supreme Court's overturning ACA, even slower to 58%. Scott Walker has zipped up to 90%.
Another issue, not mentioned there, is the Scott Brown vs. Warren election. Despite everyone's feeling that Warren has been fatally compromised, she has been blissfully up at 60% to win for a while now. In the last day or two, she dropped below 50%.
As for Rasmussen, the sampling error is as big as this swing. Meaningless. I think it's better to look at the rcp poll of polls to get an overview (and even that is a little early in the election season for it to mean much.)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html
Note though how Romney consistently does much better in Likely Voter polls (LV) than Registered Voter (RV). That has been true for weeks - the Rasmussen result is an outlier. That is so even though the various polls calculate Likely Voter in many different ways.
Meanwhile Gallup has Romney at 47 and Obama at 44. I don't think the polls tell us much at this point.
Lauderdale Vet,
@Crack, if I may ask: should you favor neither candidate, do you recommend abstaining - or would you advise choosing what you perceive "the lesser evil" to be?
This will be the first election I can't participate in, but I'm not using that to say what anyone else should do. I've made my point, that the American people don't have to carry out this election as dictated, but they will ("Here we go!") so my focus has stayed on illuminating reality as all the spin and assorted political posturing continues.
All I can tell you is we've been backed into a corner. This choice - between a NewAger, hellbent on more economic destruction, or spreading the influence and power of a notorious cult to the White House - is one that's so horrendous I think it calls for a halt to the religious "experiment" portion of our show so we can start over. The super-smart sheep won't though, and I'm vastly outnumbered, so sorry, you're on your own.
I've washed my hands of it.
EMD, You realize, he has his own blog, which he never fails to link to.
Ah, jealousy, such a useful emotion over something as trivial as this. Funny comment, too, considering this is now my third post on this thread and none of them have a link to my blog.
If you need some help with your delusional nature, just ask. You've seen my blog, so you know:
I'm Althouse's resident expert.
So Crack, why aren't you participating? Are you sitting it out because Sarah Palin refused to run? She had her chance.
Terrye,
So Crack, why aren't you participating?
How is it you can write but can't read?
Maybe it depends on which cult is more dangerous to the country's future.
walter,
Maybe it depends on which cult is more dangerous to the country's future.
That's a distinction without a difference. Wipe out cultism and the country's safe, period.
It is interesting how you guys think, though:
One cult was allowed power because they were fronted by black people, fooling the followers into believing they're post-racial.
Now you want another cult allowed power because it's fronted by someone who went to business school, fooling the followers into believing they're responsible.
The problem isn't your ambitions, which are always noble, but the fact you keep handing them over to cults, which aren't. They exist only to exploit your good intentions for their own ends.
Why y'all can't figure that out - when the evidence throughout history is clear - is a disturbing puzzle to me,...
Ah.."a distinction without a difference"
Saves you the effort of choosing..but it's a cop out.
Post a Comment