She would have to be paying the johns. there are several nutjobs on the
Arkansas ballot. Hmmm. All of them are nutjobs.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Zebnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I heard McKinney is turning tricks for votes.
>
> On Oct 16, 12:29 pm, Travis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm voting for Cynthia McKinney.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Zebnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Well, I'll satisfy you all and ask you the CBS poll question:
> >
> > > In the upcoming Presidential election, will you be voting for the
> > > bright, young, fresh American, Barack Obama or will you be wasting
> > > your vote on the dour, hateful, nearly dead John McSame?
> >
> > > On Oct 16, 11:39 am, Travis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > i would love to be asked by a polster on the street. LOL
> >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 9:40 AM, Cold Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > EIGHTY-FOUR PERCENT SAY THEY'D NEVER LIE TO A POLLSTER
> >
> > > > > October 15, 2008
> > > > > Ann Coulter
> >
> > > > > With an African-American running for president this year, there has
> > > been a
> > > > > lot of chatter about the "Bradley effect," allowing the media to
> wail
> > > about
> > > > > institutional racism in America.
> >
> > > > > Named after Tom Bradley, who lost his election for California
> governor
> > > in
> > > > > 1982 despite a substantial lead in the polls, the Bradley effect
> says
> > > that
> > > > > black candidates will poll much stronger than the actual election
> > > results.
> >
> > > > > First of all, if true, this is the opposite of racism: It is fear
> of
> > > being
> > > > > accused of racism. For most Americans, there is nothing more
> terrifying
> > > than
> > > > > the prospect of being called a racist. It's scarier than flood or
> > > famine,
> > > > > terrorist attacks or flesh-eating bacteria. To some, it's even
> scarier
> > > than
> > > > > "food insecurity."
> >
> > > > > Political correctness has taught people to lie to pollsters rather
> than
> > > be
> > > > > forced to explain why they're not voting for the African-American.
> >
> > > > > This is how two typical voters might answer a pollster's question:
> > > "Whom do
> > > > > you support for president?"
> >
> > > > > Average Obama voter: "Obama." (Name of average Obama voter: "Mickey
> > > > > Mouse.")
> >
> > > > > Average McCain voter: "I'm voting for McCain, but I swear it's just
> > > about
> > > > > the issues. It's not because Obama's black. If Barack Obama were a
> > > little
> > > > > more moderate -- hey, I'd vote for Colin Powell. But my convictions
> > > force me
> > > > > to vote for the candidate who just happens to be white. Say, do you
> > > know
> > > > > where I can get Patti LaBelle tickets?"
> >
> > > > > In addition to the social pressure to constantly prove you're not a
> > > racist,
> > > > > apparently there is massive social pressure to prove you're not a
> > > > > Republican. No one is lying about voting for McCain just to sound
> cool.
> >
> > > > > Reviewing the polls printed in The New York Times and The
> Washington
> > > Post
> > > > > in the last month of every presidential election since 1976, I
> found
> > > the
> > > > > polls were never wrong in a friendly way to Republicans. When the
> polls
> > > were
> > > > > wrong, which was often, they overestimated support for the
> Democrat,
> > > usually
> > > > > by about 6 to 10 points.
> >
> > > > > In 1976, Jimmy Carter narrowly beat Gerald Ford 50.1 percent to 48
> > > percent.
> > > > > And yet, on Sept. 1, Carter led Ford by 15 points. Just weeks
> before
> > > the
> > > > > election, on Oct. 16, 1976, Carter led Ford in the Gallup Poll by 6
> > > > > percentage points -- down from his 33-point Gallup Poll lead in
> August.
> >
> > > > > Reading newspaper coverage of presidential elections in 1980 and
> 1984,
> > > I
> > > > > found myself paralyzed by the fear that Reagan was going to lose.
> >
> > > > > In 1980, Ronald Reagan beat Carter by nearly 10 points, 51 percent
> to
> > > 41
> > > > > percent. In a Gallup Poll released days before the election on Oct.
> 27,
> > > it
> > > > > was Carter who led Reagan 45 percent to 42 percent.
> >
> > > > > In 1984, Reagan walloped Walter Mondale 58.8 percent to 40 percent,
> --
> > > the
> > > > > largest electoral landslide in U.S. history. But on Oct. 15, The
> New
> > > York
> > > > > Daily News published a poll showing Mondale with only a 4-point
> deficit
> > > to
> > > > > Reagan, 45 percent to 41 percent. A Harris Poll about the same time
> > > showed
> > > > > Reagan with only a 9-point lead. The Oct. 19 New York Times/CBS
> News
> > > Poll
> > > > > had Mr. Reagan ahead of Mondale by 13 points. All these polls
> > > underestimated
> > > > > Reagan's actual margin of victory by 6 to 15 points.
> >
> > > > > In 1988, George H.W. Bush beat Michael Dukakis by a whopping 53.4
> > > percent
> > > > > to 45.6 percent. A New York Times/CBS News Poll on Oct. 5 had Bush
> > > leading
> > > > > the Greek homunculus by a statistically insignificant 2 points --
> 45
> > > percent
> > > > > to 43 percent. (For the kids out there: Before it became a
> > > clearinghouse for
> > > > > anti-Bush conspiracy theories, CBS News was considered a credible
> > > > > journalistic entity.)
> >
> > > > > A week later -- or one tank ride later, depending on who's telling
> the
> > > > > story -- on Oct. 13, Bush was leading Dukakis in The New York Times
> > > Poll by
> > > > > a mere 5 points.
> >
> > > > > Admittedly, a 3- to 6-point error is not as crazily wrong as the 6-
> to
> > > > > 15-point error in 1984. But it's striking that even small "margin
> of
> > > error"
> > > > > mistakes never seem to benefit Republicans.
> >
> > > > > In 1992, Bill Clinton beat the first President Bush 43 percent to
> 37.7
> > > > > percent. (Ross Perot got 18.9 percent of Bush's voters that year.)
> On
> > > Oct.
> > > > > 18, a Newsweek Poll had Clinton winning 46 percent to 31 percent,
> and a
> > > CBS
> > > > > News Poll showed Clinton winning 47 percent to 35 percent.
> >
> > > > > So in 1992, the polls had Clinton 12 to 15 points ahead, but he won
> by
> > > only
> > > > > 5.3 points.
> >
> > > > > In 1996, Bill Clinton beat Bob Dole 49 percent to 40 percent. And
> yet
> > > on
> > > > > Oct. 22, 1996, The New York Times/CBS News Poll showed Clinton
> leading
> > > by a
> > > > > massive 22 points, 55 percent to 33 percent.
> >
> > > > > In 2000, which I seem to recall as being fairly close, the October
> > > polls
> > > > > accurately described the election as a virtual tie, with either
> Bush or
> > > Al
> > > > > Gore 1 or 2 points ahead in various polls. But in one of the latest
> > > polls to
> > > > > give either candidate a clear advantage, The New York Times/CBS
> News
> > > Poll on
> > > > > Oct. 3, 2000, showed Gore winning by 45 percent to 39 percent.
> >
> > > > > In the last presidential election the polls were surprisingly
> accurate
> > > --
> > > > > not including the massively inaccurate Election Day exit poll. In
> the
> > > end,
> > > > > Bush beat John Kerry 50.7 percent to 48.3 percent in 2004. Most of
> the
> > > > > October polls showed the candidates in a dead-heat, with Bush 1 to
> 3
> > > points
> > > > > ahead. So either pollsters got a whole lot better starting in 2004,
> or
> > > > > Democrats stole more votes in that election than we even realized.
> >
> > > > > *www.anncoulter.com*
> >
> > > > --
> > > > *~@):~{>- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > --
> > *~@):~{>- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
> >
>
--
*~@):~{>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
