Fox News Joins Pro-Obama Polling Conspiracy ;)

Post Reply New Topic

The original clip:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcY2TvMbb_Q[/youtube]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/2 ... 22393.html

I call liberal bias on Fox News!

They're just doing it to cover up the poll numbers of Dr. Ron Paul.


Everyone knows Ron Paul is going to win.


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igQlbesF0zA[/youtube]

Give him money and he'll go make the zoo!

Almost all the polls oversample people that identify as democrats. What's interesting though is that Obama's lead is less than the oversampling (in percentage points) of democrats. In other words, Romney is probably neck-and-neck. With Obama.

Oh, so you agree that Fox News is skewing its polling to give Obama an advantage due to liberal bias?

How else could this man be behind?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5i3F0YnkP0&[/youtube]

Behold! A pale schmuck.

ruveyn

They can keep denying the truth, but it only means reality will hurt all the more come election day.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

All I see is someone (you), rooting for the destruction of this country. We are projected to have a debt of over $20 trillion dollars by 2016 if Obama's spending binge continues.

Hopefully we see another situation like the 1980 election in which the polls all said Carter was ahead, but Reagan won by a landslide.

And we're supposed to bring ourselves back to prosperity at the expense of our most vulnerable citizens, while sparing the affluent the least amount of pain, though they could easily afford it?
Guess what - we of the 47% clearly out number the 1%, which means we have more votes. The Republicans can't suppress all of us in November.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Here's a suggestion, if you want a socialist country, move to Greece! Oh that's right Greece is collapsing due to socialist policies.

Have those "social programs" helped people lift themselves out of poverty? No, it's kept them in poverty.

You have no understanding about how this country works, which demonstrates the quality of teachers you had (rather lack of quality). People can be born dirt poor in this country and through hard work they can become rich. Rich people can choose to be irresponsible and end up dirt poor.

Capitalism is based on merit, not what "class" you were born into. We left the concept of nobility behind after we Declared Independence from Britain, if you had real teachers you would know that fact.

You have no clue how much work it takes to create a small business, you just think that a small business owner is some crook that must have somehow victimized others and should be punished.

You buy into the notion of getting revenge or 'sticking it to the man,' problem is all you are causing is just someone else being thrown into poverty and everything being made even worse, while the real crook that you were stupid enough to believe is laughing at what they consider to be a bunch of "stupid peasants." You see what is happening in New York with the soda size ban, that's what the politicians you support really think of you Kraichgauer, they think you are too stupid to make your own decisions.

You need to wise up!

Quite a bit of assumptions you've jumped to about me, which you have no basis of making. When have I ever said businessmen were crooked? My best man (who, by the way is also gay) had taken over the business with his roommate where they had formerly worked. I don't think of him as crooked by any means. There are people at my church who I like and respect who own their own businesses. I'd never call them crooked. You have no idea what the hell you're talking about.
And the notion that taxing the affluent is "sticking it to the man" is nothing but right wing Republican propaganda to justify getting the rich out of paying taxes. Taxation is not punishment when those taxed can afford it. But as a matter of fact, Romney wants to tax those of us exempt from paying income tax - even though such a move could leave my family destitute. Now, that's a real case of using taxation as punishment.
Is it possible for dirt poor people to become rich in America? Absolutely. But it's getting rarer and rarer, as banks are less likely to help small business people - regardless of what the Republican party claims. And what's wrong with being just a regular citizen who works for a business, rather than owning it? Why can't a regular employee have the same esteem and be of the same worth as a business owner?
And as for nobility no longer being in America - don't kid yourself. Our nobles have been about money, not blood. And from Romney's dismissing of half the country on that secretly recorded tape, and how he isn't going to represent them as president, it's obvious that the American nobility hold those of us living with much less material wealth with disdain. Your notion that America is a classless society is how things are supposed to be, but the Republican elite who have propagandized you have created a reality where there is in fact a huge economic and social disparity. And if anyone dares complain, they're tarred and feathered with the charge that they're waging class warfare.
And as for the Mayor of New york, Bloomberg, enforcing that rule about the size of pop cups - do you seriously think I agree with that idiocy? In fact, the very liberal Jon Stewart on The Daily Show ripped into Bloomberg's plan with merciless humor.
As for being considered an idiot - I can easily make the same charge toward you, as the leadership of the Republican party gets a huge percentage of Americans to vote against their own economic interest by playing up on people's prejudices against gays, Muslims, the poor, and racial minorities.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Because Dubya certainly didn't increase the size and scope of the government with such organizations as the TSA (which has yet to actually catch a SINGLE terrorist, but has succeeded in an appalling degree of groping); the TSA having this year had a budged of 8.1 Billion. He overall increased the scope of Government spending, even though he was a Republican poster child: http://mercatus.org/uploadedFiles/Merca ... 20Bush.pdf

To say nothing of the total cost of the Wars on Terror, Drugs, and the Bailouts. Yep. Entirely Obama's fault.



You're using extremely general terminology. Greece isn't a Socialist country. In fact, Norway and Sweden aren't even Socialist countries. Those two are countries that espouse Social Democracy. I won't say that these kinds of finer details are over your head, but it might be best to actually read up on these nations for yourself instead of using Fox News as an encyclopedic resource.

Greece isn't under a huge amount of debt because of its purported 'socialism', it's in debt because it was badly hit by the worldwide economic recession/crash several years ago. Its economy was actually quite strong before then, but it's primary industries, Shipping and Tourism, are more easily affected with the aforementioned bad crash.

I think it's also rather un-socialistic for a 'socialistic' country to impose austerity measures on its population, instead of holding the blameless rich people who got them into that mess in the first place, responsible. Reminds me of a certain bastion of capitalism that I live in, actually.

Last edited by LunaticOnTheGrass on 29 Sep 2012, 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Very good points.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I didn't absolve Bush of anything, however to claim all of this is Bush's fault is flat out dishonest, to the level of Bill Clinton's claims that he didn't have sex with Monica.



In case you have forgotten, we were attacked on 9/11/2001.

Further if you look at when everything hit the fan, the Democrats controlled congress...





Greece is in serious trouble to their socialist policies. They simply ran out of other people's money and are in a mess of their own making. Now you make a good counter-argument later in your post which I will address.

Norway is a petroleum rich country with a low population, it also has enormous mineral wealth, and can afford those policies due to their petroleum generated wealth. Norway has been more fiscally responsible than Greece and is according to what I'm reading in wikipedia they are also a net creditor (meaning people owe them more money than they owe other people money). Norway is also supposedly the 5th largest oil exporter in world (and is not a member of OPEC).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway

Also I find it hysterical that you use Sweden as an example. In fact Sweden ran into Greece-like problems back in the late 1980s. While it is considered a very competitive country now, it looks as though it is an energy producing country. Further while I think they have a tax rate that is rather high, I do like the fact that they allow for private schools which means they have competition in when it comes to education.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden

While wikipedia claims Sweden is a very competitive country, it seems Norway is significantly more stable from an economic standpoint at this time.



That is a good counter-argument, you are correct in pointing out that Greece's economy is more vulnerable to the economic situation in other countries due to their dependency on tourism.

However, there are other countries that are heavily dependent on Tourism as well that are not in the fiscal mess that Greece is in.



How are the rich responsible? What did they do to get them into the mess?

This looks more like you are just looking for someone to blame, and the rich are just a conveinent scapegoat.

That would be a very compelling point if anything remotely like that had happened....ever.

This site gives polls for the whole period leading up to the election.

http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/08/0 ... -campaign/

Reagan started leading substantially in the polls in June, Romney is not making that schedule by a long shot.

As for polls right before election day? Well...



http://www.thenation.com/blog/170230/an ... agan-1980#

I'm afraid you're just plain wrong on this one Inuyasha.

I think it was the daily caller that originally posted this graph, but the diagonal red line was added by me. Here's a plot of the percentage the polls are skewed in favor of the democratic voters vs. the percentage Obama leads in the polls. The red line is where the oversampling of democrats would be equal to Obama's lead, and as you can see, the percentage that democrats were oversampled is greater than the percentage Obama leads. On the other hand, Rasmussen slightly oversampled Republicans, but shows a Romney lead greater than the oversampling. As for Fox News specifically, they show a 6% oversampling and about a 5.5% Obama lead.

I'm not going to call this rock-solid proof that Romney is winning, but I do think it is cause to re-examine more closely how well Obama is fairing in the polls.