Skip to comments.The ‘Unskewed Polls’ guy who fooled a nation tries again [Grifter Not Quite Done Grifting Yet]
Posted on 11/20/2012 8:32:45 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
When last we left Dean Chambers, the Duffield, Va., resident was licking his wounds in Virginias coal fields, trying to figure out how hed fooled himself and much of a nation into believing the Mitt Romney would win the election.
Chambers, 45, the founder of UnskewedPolls.com, ultimately decided he had incorrectly forecast that too few Democrats would vote. He admitted this mistake. Now, it appears hes reconsidering.
Recently he launched a new website, BarackOFraudo.com. It seeks to understand how four states that he had incorrectly predicted would go to Romney Virginia, Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania actually went to Obama.
Hes decided that was due to voter suppression and yes, voter fraud:
That millions of potential Republican voters, that vote for McCain in 2008 while far less enthused about doing so, did not turn out to vote for Romney in 2012 clearly proves the voter suppression campaign waged by the mainstream media and to some extent by the Democrat Party, worked quite well.
While the overall strategy was voter suppression, it is clear from viewing these stats that boosting the turnout in key swing states (the ones in yellow above) was taking place as well.
Without further or more detailed proof, there is objectively two ways to increase voter turnout on the side of those supporting Obama, as it clearly did happen in some key swing states: either get more real people out to vote who will vote for Obama, or stuff the ballot boxes and engage in a variety of vote fraud and vote scamming methods. Odds are quite likely, to maximize their odds of succeeding in getting President Obama elected, that they engaged in all of the above to make it happen.
I wrote a column about Chambers the Sunday after the election, when it appeared he was taking stock of the problem with believing the news he had created. Then, he was coming around to the idea that hed been helping the emperor pick out his new clothes.
But Chambers seems to have switched horses, and is now arguing that he wasnt wrong that suppression and fraud handed the president a win.
The chief danger here is that hell fool himself and others again, which will not serve GOP interests in future elections.
On the other hand, he made some good money unskewing those polls and fooling Republicans before. Perhaps hes simply up to his old tricks again, and writing stuff he knows people want to hear.
That's adorable. ;)
I'll leave you to your Progressive leather & "other" fantasies now. I've got real stuff to do.
You can go nuts on me & heap scorn on me while I'm gone, but it'll be just you, your friends and that cookie in the center.
Perhaps I'll be back in several days. :-)
Toodles, twink. ;)
i believe that KentTrapped in Liberal Seattle has been trapped there for so long that the liberal air they breathe up in the Pacific Northwest has infected his brain.
sure Romney wasn’t the ideal comservative candidate, but i don’t think whomever that ideal candidate might have been would have beat Obama either. Newt might have fought a better fight, but i don’t believe the outcome would have been any different. the MSM would have had a field day reminding voters of Newt’s past mistreatment of his wives, and otherwise painting him as some rabid extremist
with the MSM Obama propaganda organ covering for him 24/7, and the known propensity for Demoncratic treachery and voter fraud, with Obama’s obfuscation about any of his vital records, with Obama’s penchant for using every underhanded trick in the book to win elected office—for Kent to suggest that vote fraud was not somehow part of the reason Romney lost is buying into the MSM meme that this was an honest election. when have the Chicago thugs every fought fairly?
i think that America is beyond redemption, as we sink into some 3rd world socialist cesspool where the takers are after every last taxpayer penny that they can get hold of, and the Demoncrats can’t wait to offer every illegal as many tax-funded freebies as possible to get their vote next election.
so, if a conservative Republican, were ever to run and win another election nationwide, it will take a miracle for that to happen. and i don’t want the Republicans to become a Democrat-lite party as the only way to win another election, because what choice would that offer any us? none.
I believe that only liberal trolls don't automatically PING others whenever discussing them by name, as per JimRob's rules.
How amusing! ObamaZed has apparently got The Kent convinced that he loves his little box in Seattle. ;-)
Oh, and that ObamaZed loves him...
I'm pretty sure The Kent is fantasizing about that, too...
Apparently, I've been a "liberal troll" since March of 1997...
They got ash, billypaul & Eschoir, but they'll never get me, heeheehee!!!
Seriously??? For weeks you couldn’t read a thread here on FR where this wasn’t touted as gospel. Now when they, and most everyone here on FR were shown to be wrong, they are mocked?
That’s throwing under the bus worthy of Obama.
I never once, even remotely, treated the "UnSkewedPolls.com" craziness as anything but that: an unfortunately virulent online pathogen, wafted from hysteric to well-meaning hysteric.
How any/all other loonies hereabouts may have handled things, in comparison, is scarcely my fault, is it? ;)
Sayeth the n00b. LOL!
“...Romney was a MA liberal playing conservative and moderate at the same time,...”
A man who tries to be all things to all people is ultimately nothing to anyone.
Truer words have never been spoken.
Swing states which Romney lost FL, OH and WI all have Republican governors and yet the WI house and Senate picked up R seats under Walker at the same time.
So please don't equate him or OH gov Kasich to Stalin. That is ridiculous.
Careful. This lot tends to piddle. ;)
” Romney was a MA liberal playing conservative and moderate at the same time, something he he had little chance of pulling off.
But he was also a living caricature of how Dems portray Republicans: Super rich, out of touch, elite, detached, only thinking of their rich elitist friends and pretty bland.
He was a perfect choice to help O get out the Dem vote and yes suppress some of the R vote.”
Well done, SOL. This turned out to be a big F’n deal !
Where did I say anything about any Republican governor?
Auto correct spell checkers do some funny things. Then factor in age related dementia and the early morning hour. Plus the fact that I can barely read the text anymore because of warped retinas, makes mistake very easy.
So color me as I don't give a cr@p what you think.
Your own Governor was elected by fraud and you don't seem to know that.
Elections have been manipulated professionally since voting machines were first put in play, and that will only improve with more powerful data collection that the government is implementing.
Did you vote for your Governor?
Dunce. Of course I know that. There was actual hard, demonstrable PROOF, in Gregoire's case... something sadly lacking, self-evidently, in the course of your own twitchy, overheated fantasies, re: Mittens. Strike Two.
So color me as I don't give a cr@p what you think.
Now you're simply pouting -- both unattractive and grotesquely inappropriate, in an (ostensibly) grown man. Third whiff, and it's the long, slow shamble back to the long pine for you.
Sober up. Take a long walk around the block. Breathe into a paper bag. Whatever it takes, ultimately.
"Fine. Then, by that knock-kneed 'logic': it shouldn't matter one whit whom we nominate in 2016, or how conservative they are; and, therefore, we can run Sarah Palin, or Allen West, or anybody the conservative voting base damned well wants, with no b!tching or kvetching from the party's squishy, socially liberal 'moderates' and suchlike... right?"
You've stated that elections are not honest. Either you honestly believe that, or you're simply beating your gums, for no good or intelligent purpose. Which is it?
There is always massive fraud. But enough to have made the margin of difference?
At best it would have been a very narrow win, there is no getting around that the rat polls were on the money.
The reason why all these ‘Romney could have lost only by voter fraud because I was SO sure that he would win’ claims don’t move me is because I could see Romney losing the campaign as it was happening. It was pretty obvious and now you can see where all the wishful thinking leads to,total delusion.
If they wan’t to look for election funny-business the best place to start would be the Republican primary. How do losers like McCain and Romney keep getting nominated as the ‘most electable’ when they are hated by conservatives? Maybe RINOs are double or triple voting in those early state primaries. Same idea.
I liked the freeper who said that the only reason Romney could of lost was voter fraud, when a month or two ago he posted here that he would not (never) vote for Romney.
People like to forget that most every single poll but Gallup & Ras showed Romney behind in every swing state all summer & fall. And we now know what trash Gallup & Ras turned out to be.
And Dick Morris.
This goes back to my theory about how many people are lured to those who tell them that things really are as they really wish them to be, resulting in a huge shook.
While Republicans were living in this ‘we are winning, the polls are all rigged fantasy:
Obama campaign was running a successful ‘get out the vote’ campaign in SWING STATES that including going from door to door and a phone app that helped them get Dem leaning names off face book to contact to urge them to vote.
Alternatively Romney campaign paid a scam organization to round up worthless voter registrations of people who didn't exist(and naturally didn't vote) , they paid twice what Obama did for TV ads due to poor planning and they paid big $$$ to create a computer center to locate Republicans to contact that kept crashing and didnt work.
Romney campaign wasted their donors money and then he told his donors it was all the moocher voters fault that he lost, not his.
And....somehow Freeper jackmercer called the election out here weeks before the vote by using real data & looking at the stats like Nate Silver did. It looks like Romney’s own internal polls were wrong. You can’t excuse that kind of stupid. But the GOP is the stupid party:(
To me they look totally dysfunctional as a party.
They look like they completely misread 2010 by behaving like the fight was over (against Dems) and that they would just be swept into office on wishful thinking. 2010 was a free-bee they couldn't lose but they acted like they thought it was the final battle and most would just naturally vote R without a struggle. Obama sure didnt assume that.
This silly voter fraud stuff fits right into this, notice Dems didn't steal 2010?
It looked bad to me in September and it looks bad to me now.
It’s complicated. The GOP is facing demographic replacement & they don’t know what to do: fight it & face the racism charge...or just go along to get along. The GOP has not kept up with the new voter technology. And IMO the democratic party is now so lawless & criminal that the GOP is at a loss in how to deal with them.
I agree with you that it is a very difficult fight but the Rs making believe they are winning when they are losing isn't helping at all.
Their endless screw-ups and lost opportunities are not that complicated.
See : Letting Us Down: GOP Losing Susan Rice Debate comment #14
No doubt the GOP is killing itself. I would like to see the GOP become more populist & go for the voters in the upper mid-west. That means immigration reform & job protection. They need to somehow get Iowa & WI & ohio & Penn along with VA if they want to remain a national party.
And I didn’t...
noun A branch of a tree, especially one of the larger or main branches.
Rasmussen had Obama 237 EVs, Romney 206 EVs, 95 tossup. Hardly a favorable prediction for Romney. It was a pretty close election. While I found it hard to believe that there weer that many idiots who would vote for Obama, it seemed apparent that Romney would not have an easy win.
BTW : that first comment above('most every single poll') was not mine but I agreed with the general idea in my reply to it.
I remember all the teeth gnashing and whining whenever Rasmussen would show a poll of his with Obama ahead of Romney. Then the other ones of his that showed Romney ahead of O would be cited as gospel.
One Republican I know personally repeated to me :”Even Rasmussen admits he over-samples Dems in his polls” which made no sense why he would say his own polling methods were wrong.
Like I pointed out above, the Romney campaign was inept and many Republicans (certainly here) are prone to overoptimism every four years.
If someone has no health insurance and no or little money and Obama promises to DIRECTLY have the gubment give it to them for free (expanded medicaid) and he says he will pay for it by ‘asking those greedy rich white males to pay a little more’ that probably sounds pretty alluring to them.
Romney replied that tax cuts for ‘job creators’ (who appeared to be everyone who pays Federal taxes) would provide more jobs, maybe not for him though.
So if the election is a contest of who is the biggest Santa then Obama is going to win.
Don't forget those free abortion pills.
Then I hear the tape of Romney telling rich donors :”47% of this country are a bunch of freeloaders who will never vote for me anyway so I don’t give a crap about them”.
Well the result should not have been the surprise that it was to so many here. I could have told you that this would not work.
If Mitt cant even get a majority of Asians you know he had a problem. Republicans need to do better than this.
Lets say the polls were really all rigged as were the election boxes, and the country was set up so there are so many freeloaders that it was impossible to win the election (two popular frustration narratives here), well then it would be better than this if we had a great nominee who we were proud of who lost for those reasons.
If things get worse under O and his popularity dives (our best hope now) I still cant say ‘If Romney won things would be great because....”
Don’t get me wrong, I have no doubt there was voter fraud. That’s the Dems stock & trade. But that was just one of many things that added up to the fiasco. I think we got about the minimum we could get, however. I was ringing the bell for over 6 years with this guy, so the ultimate conclusion was what I predicted.
Had he “gotten” the votes, I don’t expect that the outcome with him as President would’ve been significantly altered. In the short term, the stock market would’ve jumped, unemployment would’ve eased, but for the long term, it’s questionable. The things that would need to be done run counter to his instincts as a liberal.
It would’ve been more of the same-old we’ve seen since Eisenhower, no dismantling of the Democrat-Socialist welfare state bureaucratic complex, but merely “managing” it. There hasn’t been any bonafide trimming since Harding/Coolidge. Willard is more like Hoover, a liberal 1910s Progressive who largely was in ideological opposition to his two excellent Conservative predecessors. For that matter, so was Dubya. Both left a mess and a template to allow their Dem successors to expand government beyond all proportion (in Dubya’s case, the bailout).
Willard, too, had no credibility on healthcare, as it was he who also provided yet another template for Zero to push his monster. How could anyone truly see him dismantling something for which he served as the inspiration for ? Ultimately, because no really sweeping changes, so absolutely necessary at this point, would’ve been made under him, whatever economic turnaround would be brief indeed before the coming economic calamity. He would’ve cost us Congress by 2014 (had we won the Senate, as we should’ve) and probably, too, would’ve lost to whomever the Dem nominee would be in 2016 (be it Hillary, Andrew Cuomo or Martin O’Malley).
Sadly, we’re left with the likes of the ballless Boehner, whom I have no faith in to play hardball with Zero. Too bad we can’t take a lesson from Democrats on Congressional leadership. Dingy Harry may be worthless as a human being, but that little bastard is a vicious, ruthless and relentless. Pelosi was no shrinking violet, either, when she served under Dubya during her first term as Speaker. I don’t want kind-hearted marshmallows, we need a Lee Atwater type. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead. The Democrats are so used to us folding like cheap suits, they wouldn’t know what to do with a Republican who actually fought back. Too bad the establishment would never allow a fighter, that might cause them embarrassment while making their rounds on the chablis & brie party circuit in DC.
a person who pries into or meddles in the affairs of others.
152030; busy + body
snoop, pry, meddler, Nosy Parker; gossip, blabbermouth. Concern Troll, grammar police, spelling police.
I am concerned about you LOL
My sincere thanks.
Sincerity is everything. If you can fake that, youve got it made.
I thought I told you to quit using that picture. I was drunk, geez. Did I post that drunk dial voice mail you left me when you crashed at Catwoman’s? Dang billionaires think they run everything.