Posted on 10/05/2008 9:40:26 AM PDT by steve-b
Or C) recognize this poll as the steaming pile of feces that it is.
Ohio has one of the most corrupt Secretary of State’s in the nation. She’s directly responsibly for all of the fraud here.
Exactly. And to add some historical context, in 2004 the breakdown in Ohio was 35D, 40R, and 25I. And in 2004, the Independents went for Kerry, while in this poll they are evenly split.
This is yet another in an endless line of national and state-by-state polls that is clearly oversampling Democrats.
I can’t speak to the 15% without crunching numbers, but it’s absolute nonsense to expect this poll is representative of the state of Ohio. Yet the drama queens show no sign of slowing down.
Hyperbole is fun, but it also relieves us of our real responsibilities. If you create an end of the world gloom and doom scenario we won’t be vigilant against the small steps it takes to get there.
That and find a way to counter the economic message that Odumbo is hammering. In a state with an unemployment rate of 7%+ and rising, McCain hasn't been able to do that effectively. Trying to sell the globalist outsoucing-is-good message that isn't playing very well isn't going to get it done.
The 'Rats are running the same plays from their '06 game plan. And why not? It won them a blowout victory in the state then, and may do likewise this time around if the McCain camp doesn't come up with something. Promising laid-off fiftysomethings "retraining" or financial assistance to buy books for classes at their local community college in how to empty bedpans is probably not going to win many votes.
...you saved me the trouble. Thanks.
Liberal rag in a liberal town.
Fair and accurate.
I haven’t looked at the poll but with the numbers of undecideds so high none of these polls will be accurate till election day. Also this polls does not have numbers from after the VP Debate. Watching and arguing over the accuracy of the polls doesn’t help anything, we need to get out there and work. I was at the local Chesterfield office here in VA and there was a black woman supporting McCain. She said she didn’t trust Obama and she was picking up information to argue with her friends in support of McCain. If she can do that then we can do more. This country would not be here if George Washington had quit when the polls were against him and they weren’t polls taken by statisticians. They were polls counted in battles lost and human lives. The same could be said for Abraham Lincoln, if he’d given into the polls the Civil war would’ve been lost. John McCain needs to do a better job that is certain. He has not lost yet. Check the polls again on Monday and Tuesday.
Bush carried Ohio by two points in 2004 and by four points four years earlier.
It’s not safe to assume that the inner city turnout for BHS will be enormouts? I’m just raising the question.
Nice try steve-b.
PS: In the primaries Clinton won the white democrats vote by 70% to Obama 27%.
Florida 9/28-30, 770 LV, 3.5%Note that responses for both Nader and Barr come mostly out of McCain's share in the two-option poll. About the only rational explanation for someone to say "McCain" given two options and "Nader" given the additional option is that the respondent is a liberal but won't vote for the black guy.
Obama 51, McCain 47
Obama 51, McCain 43, Nader 3, Barr 1, McKinney 1Minnesota 9/28-30, 849 LV, 3.5%
Obama 54, McCain 43
Obama 53, McCain 41, Nader 2, Barr 1, McKinney 0Missouri 9/28-30, 744 LV, 3.5%
Obama 49, McCain 48
Obama 47, McCain 46, Nader 2, Barr 2Nevada 9/28-30, 684 LV, 4%
Obama 51, McCain 47
Obama 49, McCain 44, Nader 4, Barr 1, McKinney 0Virginia 9/28-30, 684 LV, 4%
Obama 53, McCain 44
Obama 52, McCain 42, Nader 2, Barr 2, McKinney 0
The fact that this poll shows a total considerably below 100% indicates that the "Bradley Effect" is already accounted for -- people who would have voted for Obama but for the fact that he's black must have selected some other option (apparently "Undecided" -- the only indication I can find in the original story is a really blurry pic of the detailed results printout).
you’re welcome...his website describes his firm as “a general practice law firm”...so it makes sense that the Dispatch describes him as a “real-estate investment manager” (eyes rolling).
The reputed "Tom Bradley" effect? That was then, this is now. We're a generation removed from that election, and too much has changed in the electorate. I don't think we can count on it.
We can always count on you, catowner, ublausuasu#$%$% and a few others to make sure we all know the bad news of the polls.
Thank you soooo much for keeping us all informed.
you’re talking about going for the 3rd GOP victory in a row and the incumbent, who always had low approval ratings, botched up the economy only to follow up with an extremely unpopular bailout.
Yes, I would say winning in those conditions completely defies all the laws of politics.
It was enormous for Kerry four years ago. There is only one candidate in US history who won more votes in a Presidential election than John F. Kerry.
And besides, that inner city turnout that everyone thinks will help Obama -- how well did that work for him in the OH and PA primaries earlier this year?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.