BIDEN'S ASS-KICKING OF 3333 CONTINUES...destroys Ryan in VP debate

[flipper5470]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/mood_of_america_archive/partisan_trends/summary_of_party_affiliation

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/mood_of_america_archive/partisan_trends/summary_of_party_affiliation

This is why the polls are not rapidly going to romney.  The fake polls the media was using a few weeks ago used ridiculous sampling data.  Now they have to use likly voters and realistic models. 

[Straw Man]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/mood_of_america_archive/partisan_trends/summary_of_party_affiliation

and 29% "other" most of whom will eventually vote for one of the two major parties which kind of makes the claim of either party having the majority of members murky at best

I've never seen any proof that pollster seek out or skew their data toward one party of the other although Rassmussen does have allegations of a conservative bias as do others for the left

Personally, I don't know of any group that has the full facts on which party has more members

The most definitive poll I know is the nation election that we have every 4 years

We'll know the answer to that question in a little less than a month

[Soul Crusher]

 

[Straw Man]

jesus christ can you be any more of a desperate moron

I'm sure we'll discover that the answer to that question is yes

[MCWAY]

hey..I'm just happy that you have finally come around and that you see CNN as a credible source......I'll remember this when you next rail against the "left wing media"

Again, you have NOT answered the question as to why the polls DO NOT agree with your assertion of yesterday's debate (which is the topic of your thread).

And, I've already explained the CNN thing.

That poll is not oversampling Republicans...it's consistent with party affiliation in America today.  In comparison to other CNN polls, it has more Republican representation...but that simply means that CNN usually oversamples Democrats.  How is this so hard for some of you to get?

EXACTLY!!

[andreisdaman]

yep, didn't see it

also wanted to point out how right wingers like to pretend a fertilized egg is the same thing as a fully formed "child"

QFT,,,,,they also believe the earth is 6000 years old and was created in 6 days.....

[andreisdaman]

This is why the polls are not rapidly going to romney.  The fake polls the media was using a few weeks ago used ridiculous sampling data.  Now they have to use likly voters and realistic models. 

it is really amazing on this board how you right-wingers discredit polls when they favor Obama and then cheer the same polls given by the same organizations when they favor Romney......you guys say CNN and other news organizations are garbage and biased...then when they agree with you, you cite them as sources.....when the UE is going up, you guys cite this as proof Obama's policies aren't working...but when the UE rate favors Obama, all of a sudden the numbers are faked

and the worse thing is that you guys don't see the hypocrisy in all this and deny that you are biased...INCREDIBLE

[andreisdaman]

Again, you have NOT answered the question as to why the polls DO NOT agree with your assertion of yesterday's debate (which is the topic of your thread).

And, I've already explained the CNN thing.

EXACTLY!!

I don't have to answer that question because I DO NOT challenge the accuracy of the polls.....Saying that Biden won is MY ASSERTION......I accept the CNN polls......I am not like you who only agrees with CNN when they agree with you....but then rails against them when they don't...I ACCEPT THE NUMBERS.....just as I accept the UE numbers which you DON'T of course because they don't back up your opinion....

its amazing you don't see your own hypocrisy

[AbrahamG]

I don't have to answer that question because I DO NOT challenge the accuracy of the polls.....Saying that Biden won is MY ASSERTION......I accept the CNN polls......I am not like you who only agrees with CNN when they agree with you....but then rails against them when they don't...I ACCEPT THE NUMBERS.....just as I accept the UE numbers which you DON'T of course because they don't back up your opinion....

its amazing you don't see your own hypocrisy

Nothing amazing, it's called par for the course.

[MCWAY]

it is really amazing on this board how you right-wingers discredit polls when they favor Obama and then cheer the same polls given by the same organizations when they favor Romney......you guys say CNN and other news organizations are garbage and biased...then when they agree with you, you cite them as sources.....when the UE is going up, you guys cite this as proof Obama's policies aren't working...but when the UE rate favors Obama, all of a sudden the numbers are faked

and the worse thing is that you guys don't see the hypocrisy in all this and deny that you are biased...INCREDIBLE

We've been saying for MONTHS (some of us for YEARS) that the UE numbers don't reflect the entire story of people struggling for work.

For you to play dumb and pretend that we only brought it up, when unemployment went under 8% is downright laughable.

The story's the same: The real scenario is FAR WORSE than what the UE numbers paint. And, since Obama and his crew claimed unemployment WAS NEVER SUPPOSED TO EXCEED 8% IN THE FIRST PLACE, the only thing "amazing" is how you left-wingers want to break out the party favors, when the number stopped being over a mark it was never to exceed....after a mere 44 months.

Your own threads betray you. You were jumping around, doing cartwheels, and poking at 333386 when the job numbers were HIGHER (in the 200,000s), even when UE was higher.

Yet, you're delusional enough to think that a measley 141,000 jobs in August and 114,000 jobs in September is enough to bring unemployment from 8.3 to 7.8? That's kneepadding personified.

As for the polls reflecting Romney's lead, that should have TK members like you guzzling Maalox by the gallon. If these polls are oversampling Democrats in certain states yet still giving Romney the lead, that means, if the state's demographics are close to being even, Obama's going to get KILLED (especially when you factor the independents, who almost always break away from the incumbent to the challenger).

[MCWAY]

I don't have to answer that question because I DO NOT challenge the accuracy of the polls.....Saying that Biden won is MY ASSERTION......I accept the CNN polls......I am not like you who only agrees with CNN when they agree with you....but then rails against them when they don't...I ACCEPT THE NUMBERS.....just as I accept the UE numbers which you DON'T of course because they don't back up your opinion....

its amazing you don't see your own hypocrisy

When you advertise that unemployment won't exceed 8%, if your policies are enacted, yet it stays over 8% for over THREE AND A HALF YEARS, that means your policies HAVE FAILED.

What part of that don't you understand?

When you advertised that you need a certain amount of jobs just to keep the UE numbers static, yet the number gets lower DESPITE the job additions not coming anywhere NEAR that minimum threshold, you KNOW that something else is responsible for the UE number dropping.

If the rate dropped from 8.2 to 8.1 after August adding 141,000 jobs, with nearly ALL the news sources stating that it's due mainly to people giving up looking for work, what are we to make of a drop from 8.1 to 7.8 with FEWER JOBS added in September than in August?

Of course, I've only asked you that question at least TWICE; yet you make excuses for not answering it.

[George Whorewell]

Let's get right down to it-- Liberalism has been proven; not argued, not debated-- but proven to be a failure in terms of practical, real world application.

Higher taxes do not create jobs.

More regulation does not create jobs.

More spending does not create jobs.

Central planning by the government over the private sector does not grow the economy or create jobs.

Forcing the private sectors hand through veiled threats about government intervention-- IE The housing market, backwards EPA regulations and class warfare rhetoric will ONLY lead to economic disaster.

Government meddling in the private sector by bailout, takeover, tax payer subsidy or otherwise does not help the economy.

Printing more money does not strengthen the economy.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ These are all facts. Not opinions, but FACTS.

What does Osama and his mentally unbalanced buffoon of a VP want to do for four more years? More of the same garbage.

[flipper5470]

To add...the "Bush tax cuts" did not tank the economy. 

Obama didn't "save" General Motors.  The company is worth less than half what we put into it.

Barney Frank had more to do with the housing collapse than "Wall Street"

[andreisdaman]

When you advertise that unemployment won't exceed 8%, if your policies are enacted, yet it stays over 8% for over THREE AND A HALF YEARS, that means your policies HAVE FAILED.

What part of that don't you understand?

When you advertised that you need a certain amount of jobs just to keep the UE numbers static, yet the number gets lower DESPITE the job additions not coming anywhere NEAR that minimum threshold, you KNOW that something else is responsible for the UE number dropping.

If the rate dropped from 8.2 to 8.1 after August adding 141,000 jobs, with nearly ALL the news sources stating that it's due mainly to people giving up looking for work, what are we to make of a drop from 8.1 to 7.8 with FEWER JOBS added in September than in August?

Of course, I've only asked you that question at least TWICE; yet you make excuses for not answering it.

I don't answer it because as I have said you never admit when you are wrong and so that means no answer will ever satisfy you and I don't feel like going in circles....you stick to your assertion and I will stick to mine..lets leave it at that...there is no true debate on this board since you conservatives never ever admit that you are wrong about anything...so lets just leave it at that....

I win anyway because anyone associated with 3333 is a loser and the fact that you guys NEVER EVER criticize his facts even when they are wacky and way out there is proof that this isn't serious debate on this board....and that you guys are just willing to jump on board of anything that is critical of Obama

[Soul Crusher]

I don't answer it because as I have said you never admit when you are wrong and so that means no answer will ever satisfy you and I don't feel like going in circles....you stick to your assertion and I will stick to mine..lets leave it at that...there is no true debate on this board since you conservatives never ever admit that you are wrong about anything...so lets just leave it at that....

I win anyway because anyone associated with 3333 is a loser and the fact that you guys NEVER EVER criticize his facts even when they are wacky and way out there is proof that this isn't serious debate on this board....and that you guys are just willing to jump on board of anything that is critical of Obama

STFU.   You know ZILCH about polling methods. 

[MCWAY]

I don't answer it because as I have said you never admit when you are wrong and so that means no answer will ever satisfy you and I don't feel like going in circles....you stick to your assertion and I will stick to mine..lets leave it at that...there is no true debate on this board since you conservatives never ever admit that you are wrong about anything...so lets just leave it at that....

I win anyway because anyone associated with 3333 is a loser and the fact that you guys NEVER EVER criticize his facts even when they are wacky and way out there is proof that this isn't serious debate on this board....and that you guys are just willing to jump on board of anything that is critical of Obama

Lame excuses flow from your pathetic posts, yet again, Andre. Do you think I actually care whether someone admits to being wrong, when I post stuff that clearly counters their claims? There are people who won't admit that Obama got the taste slapped out his mouth in Denver. That doesn't stop me from posting that such occurred.

You're running from the question, as too many of the TK members here do, because YOU can't admit when you're wrong.

Your whimpering also shows that you don't keep up here. 333386 and I don't agree on every subject or on every candidate. But, we know abject failure when we see it and it's oozing out of Obama.

Have YOU admitted you're wrong, about our not criticizing the unemployment number, until it went under 8% (despite all the evidence, we've shown stating that we've been doing such for MONTHS)?

Have YOU admitted you're wrong, about the way we criticize the polls, even though we've shown exactly where the bias lies and actually LOOK INTO THE METHODOLOGY, before we give them any credence?

The bottom line is you're afraid to answer my question, because it implodes that hopey-changey bubble of yours, showing that Obama isn't kicking anyone's backside. If anything, Obama is getting the first-class trip to the woodshed. It started October 3rd and may continue through November 6.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

Let's get right down to it-- Liberalism has been proven; not argued, not debated-- but proven to be a failure in terms of practical, real world application.

Higher taxes do not create jobs.

More regulation does not create jobs.

More spending does not create jobs.

Central planning by the government over the private sector does not grow the economy or create jobs.

Forcing the private sectors hand through veiled threats about government intervention-- IE The housing market, backwards EPA regulations and class warfare rhetoric will ONLY lead to economic disaster.

Government meddling in the private sector by bailout, takeover, tax payer subsidy or otherwise does not help the economy.

Printing more money does not strengthen the economy.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ These are all facts. Not opinions, but FACTS.

What does Osama and his mentally unbalanced buffoon of a VP want to do for four more years? More of the same garbage.

Well we had conservatism for 8 years and we went from a surplus to a freefall deficit. 


Ideology has nothing to do with the economy, shithead.

[MCWAY]

This is why the polls are not rapidly going to romney.  The fake polls the media was using a few weeks ago used ridiculous sampling data.  Now they have to use likly voters and realistic models. 

Look at the numbers from 2008. That's where the huge gap, favoring Democrats from 5 to 10 points, was. The media has been assuming that such will be the case this year, despite the numbers from 2010 and 2011, saying otherwise.

[MCWAY]

and 29% "other" most of whom will eventually vote for one of the two major parties which kind of makes the claim of either party having the majority of members murky at best

I've never seen any proof that pollster seek out or skew their data toward one party of the other although Rassmussen does have allegations of a conservative bias as do others for the left

Personally, I don't know of any group that has the full facts on which party has more members

The most definitive poll I know is the nation election that we have every 4 years

We'll know the answer to that question in a little less than a month

But, if that 29% sits out or (as has been the case in other elections) breaks for the challenger, Obama is in BIG trouble.

[flipper5470]

Well we had conservatism for 8 years and we went from a surplus to a freefall deficit. 


Ideology has nothing to do with the economy, shithead.

You had a surplus thanks to demographics....tax and welfare reform in 96/97....and a Republican Congress.   Bill Clinton didn'ty have shit to do with anything in the 90's...not one fucking thing other than ramming through a tax increase that crippled the recovery underway in late 1992.  Oh...and he fucked around with fat girls.  Yeah...let's put him on Mt. Rushmore for that...

[George Whorewell]

Well we had conservatism for 8 years and we went from a surplus to a freefall deficit.  


Ideology has nothing to do with the economy, shithead.

GW Bush was not a Conservative.

And the "freefall deficit" after 8 years of Bush is exponentially higher after 4 years of Obama.

As to your last comment, I don't waste my time arguing with uneducated queers. If you don't think the ideology of a President influences his decisions via economic policy, you are too stupid to warrant a response from me in this thread. Go play somewhere Jamal. The adults are busy talking.

[tonymctones]

Well we had conservatism for 8 years and we went from a surplus to a freefall deficit. 


Ideology has nothing to do with the economy, shithead.

Surplus?

you democrats and your funny math...

at any rate you really think the stimulus had nothing to do with ideology?

you really think obamacare had nothing to do with ideology?

you really think that obama cutting the number of public drilling permits in half has nothing to do with ideology?

you really think denying/delaying the keystone pipeline has nothing to do with ideology?

or the green investments?

youre the biggest fuking idiot on here, congrats jackass

[Fury]

Let's get right down to it-- Liberalism has been proven; not argued, not debated-- but proven to be a failure in terms of practical, real world application.

Higher taxes do not create jobs.

More regulation does not create jobs.

More spending does not create jobs.

Central planning by the government over the private sector does not grow the economy or create jobs.

Forcing the private sectors hand through veiled threats about government intervention-- IE The housing market, backwards EPA regulations and class warfare rhetoric will ONLY lead to economic disaster.

Government meddling in the private sector by bailout, takeover, tax payer subsidy or otherwise does not help the economy.

Printing more money does not strengthen the economy.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ These are all facts. Not opinions, but FACTS.

What does Osama and his mentally unbalanced buffoon of a VP want to do for four more years? More of the same garbage.

Great post.

[andreisdaman]

Lame excuses flow from your pathetic posts, yet again, Andre. Do you think I actually care whether someone admits to being wrong, when I post stuff that clearly counters their claims? There are people who won't admit that Obama got the taste slapped out his mouth in Denver. That doesn't stop me from posting that such occurred.

You're running from the question, as too many of the TK members here do, because YOU can't admit when you're wrong.

Your whimpering also shows that you don't keep up here. 333386 and I don't agree on every subject or on every candidate. But, we know abject failure when we see it and it's oozing out of Obama.

Have YOU admitted you're wrong, about our not criticizing the unemployment number, until it went under 8% (despite all the evidence, we've shown stating that we've been doing such for MONTHS)?

Have YOU admitted you're wrong, about the way we criticize the polls, even though we've shown exactly where the bias lies and actually LOOK INTO THE METHODOLOGY, before we give them any credence?

The bottom line is you're afraid to answer my question, because it implodes that hopey-changey bubble of yours, showing that Obama isn't kicking anyone's backside. If anything, Obama is getting the first-class trip to the woodshed. It started October 3rd and may continue through November 6.

No hopey changey bubble here although thats the picture you want to paint...I have already stated for the record that I think Obama is gonna lose....I am not a shill for Obama..but you seem to be a shill for anything going against Obama......

As for your claim that you don't see eye to eye on some things that 3333 says..I personally have never seen you refute anything he has written