With how easy it is to get the results you 'want' out of a poll, there is really only one poll that matters ...
| Timmah! said: Palin has a record of corruption. |
Fixed. The Republican led investigation into the unethical firing of ther ex-brother in law should clear things up for us.
ManusJustus said:
Fixed. The Republican led investigation into the unethical firing of ther ex-brother in law should clear things up for us. |
Yeah, the investigation that SHE ORDERED to answer questions, and that she is cooperating fully with. I would hardly call firing somebody over a personal issue 'corruption'. If that's the best you've got, you're just reaching. She has a great record of going after wasteful spending (example, the 'bridge to nowhere' project), corruption (real corruption, such as money issues and back room deals, including those in her own party). You are such a blind partisan that you can't even recognize ANY positive facts about somebody you disagree with. I recognize that Obama has done some great things, seems to have good moral character, and has some really good points on certain social issues. I just disagree with his policies, so I can't vote for him. You on the other hand, can't see anything positive about anybody you disagree with. This is not condusive to real debate.
There was already an investigation.
She ordered an additional investigation of her own to show her cooperation.
Not a bad idea.
However, she and her staff made 24 phone calls to the guy to pressure him to fire Wooten. They used to like him, but as soon as the divorce hit, it was suddenly "He's an abusive drunk AND HE TAZERED OUR BABY!" time.
| The Ghost of RubangB said: There was already an investigation. She ordered an additional investigation of her own to show her cooperation. Not a bad idea. However, she and her staff made 24 phone calls to the guy to pressure him to fire Wooten. They used to like him, but as soon as the divorce hit, it was suddenly "He's an abusive drunk AND HE TAZERED OUR BABY!" time. |
First let me say, you crack me up, even if I do disagree with you 99.999% of the time, you're still one of the most creative posters of all times, kudos to you on that.
And like you wouldn't fire the guy if you thought he was a big fat jerk to your sister (I know I would). I'm not saying it was right, just that it's not quite as bad as some people are making it out to be. It could be concidered an ethics issue, but not corruption. I would say the same thing if republicans were blowing something similar out of proportion about a democrat. It's overblown. The best argument against her is lack of experience, not this and that her husband got a DWI 24 years ago. They are just reaching at this point.
New CBS poll with the same timeframe as CNN vote (but slightly smaller asking pool) has Obama up by 8 points.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
CBS News 08/29 - 08/31 781 RV 48 40 Obama +8
We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls. The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke
It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...." Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson
Polls are so useless. How can they supposedly have a 3% margin of error, but differ by 8% or more? Doesn't make sense.
Argh, delete post.
Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/
| Timmah! said: Polls are so useless. How can they supposedly have a 3% margin of error, but differ by 8% or more? Doesn't make sense. |
QFT sir.
We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls. The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke
It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...." Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson
It means they can be %3 off, no? So that 8% is a 5-11%?
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
