I can't believe I beat Desh to this....

ib1yysguy said:
Why isn't SF complaining about the fact that Ted Stevens was polling 22 points behind before the election, has seven felony convictions, and still managed to get reelected? That doesn't strike him as suspicious?
Click to expand...

Please provide those polls you speak of, because the polls I saw had them damn near even going into the election.

Side note... nice attempt at a diversion.

Second... I already stated, I think people voted for Stevens assuming he was going to step down and be replaced by another Rep, rather than voting for a Dem with whom they do not agree politically.
 
The first place I looked (and the most right-leaning) Rassmussen had him eight points behind just before the election.

Polls don't lie, despite your stupid explanation.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Why isn't SF complaining about the fact that Ted Stevens was polling 22 points behind before the election, has seven felony convictions, and still managed to get reelected? That doesn't strike him as suspicious?
Click to expand...

Since you are a little slow we'll give you a pass this one time. Go read previous threads where SF called Alaskans idiots for re-electing him.
 
cawacko said:
Since you are a little slow we'll give you a pass this one time. Go read previous threads where SF called Alaskans idiots for re-electing him.
Click to expand...

Alaska probably didn't reelect him. That's the problem. If he's going to claim a couple hundred found votes in Minnesota is evidence of fraud, then he can't ignore a (minimum of) 8 point discrepancy in polling vs vote tabulation.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Alaska probably didn't reelect him. That's the problem. If he's going to claim a couple hundred found votes in Minnesota is evidence of fraud, then he can't ignore a (minimum of) 8 point discrepancy in polling vs vote tabulation.
Click to expand...

You really are a tool. I didn't say it was fraud you moron... I said it was suspicious that all of the adjustments were in Frankens favor.


As for AK...

1) The Rasmussen poll in AK was done almost a week before the election and included approx. 4% undecided which coupled with the margin of error could explain the result.

2) I think the more likely reason is that once convicted (which occured one day before this poll was released) people assumed Stevens would be stepping down if elected and replaced by another Rep. Given that AK leans right, it is not that tough to jusitify that people would rather be represented by a Rep (other than Stevens) than by a Dem (who doesn't share their political views)

3) The only poll that had Stevens down 20% was the one conducted by the shills for Dailykos.
 
leaningright said:
Translation of bolded: Most accurate ;)
Click to expand...

It wasn't the most accurate this time. One of them got the presidential election spot on, and it wasn't Rass.

By the way, assuming it was accurate, you still have an 8 point discrepancy to explain away.

Oh, and eat glass fascist cocksucker.
 
ib1yysguy said:
The first place I looked (and the most right-leaning) Rassmussen had him eight points behind just before the election.

Polls don't lie, despite your stupid explanation.
Click to expand...

Polls do not lie? Is that to imply that all the various pre-election polls that had Obama leading anywhere from 3 - 12 points were all accurate?
 
Oh jesus. So you think all 100 percent of the undecideds voted for the felon and the poll was off by the ENTIRE margin of error? That still doesn't explain an 8 point jump, considering the guy won by a few points.
 
Superfreak said:
You really are a tool. I didn't say it was fraud you moron... I said it was suspicious that all of the adjustments were in Frankens favor.


As for AK...

1) The Rasmussen poll in AK was done almost a week before the election and included approx. 4% undecided which coupled with the margin of error could explain the result.

2) I think the more likely reason is that once convicted (which occured one day before this poll was released) people assumed Stevens would be stepping down if elected and replaced by another Rep. Given that AK leans right, it is not that tough to jusitify that people would rather be represented by a Rep (other than Stevens) than by a Dem (who doesn't share their political views)

3) The only poll that had Stevens down 20% was the one conducted by the shills for Dailykos.
Click to expand...


Hilarious. "[T]he Dems are trying to steal a seat . . ." but not claiming fraud?

And I think its quite funny that you question the polling done for "the shills for Dailykos" but get all huffy when I question the veracity of the horseshit in your original post.

Consistency is not your strong suit.
 
ib1yysguy said:
It wasn't the most accurate this time. One of them got the presidential election spot on, and it wasn't Rass.

By the way, assuming it was accurate, you still have an 8 point discrepancy to explain away.
Click to expand...

"The final Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Election 2008 showed Barack Obama leading John McCain 52% to 46%. We are pleased to report that those figures precisely matched the actual election returns."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...0082/2008_presidential_election/how_did_we_do

I don't discount the discrepency in the Alaskan senate race....you are right. Either the polls were way off or someone cheated. Rassmussen had Minnesota right on though. It will all come out in the wash.

I responded because I love it :rolleyes: when people call Rassmussen "right-leaning." They have been more accurate than anyone in the last 3 presidential elections.

It's kind of like calling me fascist.....among other things. ;)
 
ib1yysguy said:
It wasn't the most accurate this time. One of them got the presidential election spot on, and it wasn't Rass.

By the way, assuming it was accurate, you still have an 8 point discrepancy to explain away.

Oh, and eat glass fascist cocksucker.
Click to expand...

Dumbshit.... Rasmussen's final poll had Obama by 6%... he won by 6.5%... no one was closer than that. (though several others had him at 6 or 7 and were thus just as close)

As for the 8 points, again... the poll was done a week before the election, it contained 4% undecided, and was released the day after the conviction, which means it likely that most people did not know of the conviction prior to the poll.

But again, great attempt to divert from the discrepancies in MN.
 
I have no idea what happened in Alaska, but I believe we will probably find out the truth soon enough. Unfortunately as they keep "finding" absentee ballots in cars, etc. We may never know what really happened in Minnesota.
 
Damocles said:
I have no idea what happened in Alaska, but I believe we will probably find out the truth soon enough. Unfortunately as they keep "finding" absentee ballots in cars, etc. We may never know what really happened in Minnesota.
Click to expand...

We wont know shit until the new justice department is instated. Until then, there's zero chance it'll get investigated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top