Advertisement

Previous   Next

How much faith do you have in the accuracy of political polls?

Asked at Massachusetts Street on October 24, 2008

Browse the archives

Photo of Jamey Garner

“I think the polls are fairly accurate, but you have to look at the internals to decide which ones are legitimate. As a fearful Democrat, I’m more concerned about the issues on voting day that might skew the exit polls.”

Photo of Nora Burt

“Not much. I’ve participated in some on the CBS Web site where results were tied at 49 percent and 49 percent, which led me to question its accuracy. I just think you have to take each one with a grain of salt.”

Photo of Brad Johnson

“They seem fairly accurate. But I don’t put a lot of stock in them, because so much can change before election day.”

Photo of Lindsay Schaefer

“I’d say they do a pretty good job of accurately representing people’s opinion and what’s going to happen.”

Related story

Comments

notajayhawk 5 years, 5 months ago

I just noticed that the final RCP average was pretty much right on the money - now that's a change. Not too surprisingly, the CBS and ABC/Washington Post polls were high at 9%. Somewhat surprisingly, the ones that overestimated the victory the most were Gallup and Reuters/Zogby at 11%. And guess what - two of the polls that most people would have thought biased one way or the other, CNN and Fox, were dead on at 7%.I'm not sure if this is good news or bad news. People will have more faith in the polls from now on, and if there's another big discrepancy between polls and vote totals next time, people will once again assume vote tampering.

0

storm 5 years, 5 months ago

I think they're more accurate than Diebold voting machines.

0

jaywalker 5 years, 5 months ago

Logic,You may be right, I just figured 'elitist' was coming out because the McCain's have money. I've only heard the term tossed at the Obama's a couple times(though as divisive as this race has been it was probably alot), but dismissed them immediately as well for being similarly as ignorant. I also agree with you on the term 'elitist', one def for derision, the other complimentary. Go figure.And I have every confidence I'll never have to argue with you on the same myopic definitions of the term or the labeling of such as I have with bea. You're easily one of the most intelligent posters on these boards, always happy to peruse your views.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

Well, jaywalker, I guess you and I will just have to agree to disagree on whether or not it's "harmful" to allow the Palin family to enjoy some ritzy shopping on the RNC's dime....at any rate:"What I bristled at is beatrice' ignorant claims of 'elitistism', as if shopping at a specific store or spending a specific amount of money automatically infers that a person holds such a world view." -jaywalkerNow, I can't speak to or against beatrice's opinions, as I'm sure she knows them far better than do I. However, I can say that it seems to me like a lot of the references to McCain as "elitist" are somewaht of a backlash against the original source of accusations of "elitism"--the Obama detractors. In fact, it seems to me like the "elitist" tag was at one point a cornerstone of the McCain campaign against Obama.I guess to a certain extent, I'm not even really sure what "elitist" means. Obviously, in political elections, it is intended as a derision. However, in reality, elitism merely means that people with outstanding abilities/skills are to be regarded as "higher" in their field of expertise than others.The medical profession is "elitist". Professional athletics leagues are "elitist". Universities are "elitist".

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

"Pretty much everything that contibutes to the appearence of a public figure can be considered advertising"-----------First of all, that is an astoudingly expansive view of "advertising". While I can agree that clothing, along with advertising, personal relationships, associations, and every other aspect of a politician's life contributes to their image, to generalize it all as "advertising" lacks subtlety. An advertisement is money spent to convey a specific and pointed message to an audience. Clothing merely contributes to an overall personal image. Let's be honest--if clothing and advertising are synonymous, then what is it that Palin's $150,000 wardrobe message that cannot be conveyed with a $20,000 wardrobe? That's an 87% discount from her actual expenditure, and I guarantee that $20,000 is enough to by a respectable, professional, sharp-looking wardrobe for 2 months of political campaigning.Second, my main issue with the wardrobe is that $150,000 for clothes seems to be precisely contradictory of the message of being an "everywoman". Do you honestly want to sit here and say that spending $150,000 was absolutely necessary for Palin to give her personal appearance a professional, sharp, intelligent look? You don't think it could have been done for a far more moderate price tag?If that's the case, then I have some information about clothing prices that you will find positively relevatory.Lastly, you should really look into the history of the people you support before making uninformed statements defending them. The idea that the Palin's would have had to shop at stores like Wal-Mart is laughable and shows that if you say "I'm just like you" enough times, there are bound to be people who believe it.http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/03/palin_reports_six-figure_incom.htmlFrom the link: "Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her husband, Todd, have assets worth up to $2.1 million and they paid $24,738 in 2007 income taxes on total income of $166,495, documents released today by her campaign show.......The couple's 2006 return, which was also made public today, was not filed until Aug. 8, 2007, after they sought an automatic extension. They paid taxes of $19,951 on total income of $128,005. That year the bulk of the family income came from Todd Palin's job as an oil worker, which paid him $102,716."

0

fuel_for_the_fire 5 years, 5 months ago

Beatrice - The whole article is also found on the Reuters website and is written by an American; does that make it more credible to you than citing a foreign news website?

0

jaywalker 5 years, 5 months ago

Logicsound,Now that's a well-formulated argument and I definitely can see your point. I really wasn't trying to make a direct comparison between advertising and clothing, but merely trying to say that in total there's a lot of money - a LOT of money - thrown around in the name of 'campaign'. And it's all obscene in my opinion, but then I also just take it in stride, it is what it is.No doubt $150k is hefty for clothing, but considering it was for the entire family - husband and all the kids - and the constant costume changes that go on from stop to stop, well, it's not like the Griswolds buying up zoot suits in Rome, know what I mean? And while her image has been crafted to be an 'everywoman', I don't see the harm in allowing the family to shop at stores they normally don't get the chance to visit. If there was a mistake here it was on the part of the campaign handlers not grasping problems with perception for all this. What I bristled at is beatrice' ignorant claims of 'elitistism', as if shopping at a specific store or spending a specific amount of money automatically infers that a person holds such a world view. Bea also believes that Cindy McCain is an 'elitist' because she was a cheerleader and the member of a sorority. People that stupid piss me off. In any case, there's just too much that is more important in this race than for any focus to be given to something this trivial. And I agree with you on Hillary, she does not need to 'dress down', and it would be little more than patronization if she did. My point there is we know the extravagance with Palin, but not with Hillary. It's hypocritical. And if bea could report the numbers and the Clintons' spent say,.. a million on her clothes,... would that make her an elitist too? I don't believe it would, but I was simply baiting a fool. As always, logic, 'preciate your take.

0

invictus 5 years, 5 months ago

FYI, living in the suburban sprawl of Phoenix hardly gives you any kind of special insight into anything.

0

beatrice 5 years, 5 months ago

notajay, nice try at a putdown, but I don't even live in Kansas, let alone Lawrence. I used to live in Lawrence a few years back, but now I live in Phoenix, Arizona - 5th largest city in the country and a metro area population of 3.5 million. I understand perfectly well that there are rich and poor in every state. All I'm asking fuel for is some real proof of the claim that Obama is only leading among people who make less than $35K a year, and that McCain leads among all others. I simply don't believe it just because it was stated in one source. I want to see the numbers.

0

invictus 5 years, 5 months ago

The wealthy of this country are Republican and the super wealthy are Democrats. The Super wealthy will never have to worry about money, they are more concerned with keeping there position in society. Free markets threaten their class standing so they vote for democrats who will fix the class structure. There will little or no class mobility when the left win.

0

notajayhawk 5 years, 5 months ago

beatrice (Anonymous) says: "if Obama is leading only among voters making less than $35K a year, then how do you explain his commanding lead in places like New York, Connecticut and California..."The richest census tract in the country is in NYC. Pretty close to the poorest census tract in the country, also in NYC. How many people live in Watts compared to Beverly Hills, bea? And if you ever worried yourself about anyplace more than 3 miles from Lawrence, you'd know there are plenty of people in Connecticut that don't live in Fairfield County (like in the three largest cities, Bridgeport, New Haven, & Hartford, in that order, or the entire northeast third of the state, which has been economically depressed for many years, bordering on Rhode Island, the state with the highest unemployment rate).In short, bea, there are lots of poor people living in those states where Obama has those leads. But maybe they're the ones that only have cell phones.

0

beatrice 5 years, 5 months ago

Fuel, yes, there obviously are more people in California than in Alabama. My only point is that they make, on the average, much more in California, which means many more people making more money supporting Obama in greater numbers. Now, do you think that the percentage of people with post-secondary degrees is higher in Alabama than in California? That would be the question, and I don't know the answer. What I am arguing against is that just because something is stated in a paper, even a Canadian paper, doesn't mean it is true. I do not believe that Obama is leading in the polls only among those who make less than $35,000. I would want to see some legitimate proof before I believed that one, not just some quote from a Canadian paper.

0

fuel_for_the_fire 5 years, 5 months ago

Do I believe that people in California are making less than those in Alabama? Not every resident of California, no, I do not believe this. I do, however, believe that the population of California is approximately 8 times the population of Alabama. Furthermore, I am willing to bet that that there are more people in California without a postsecondary degree than there are in Alabama. With a population discrepancy this large, how could one think any different? Unless, you believe that no one in Alabama has any postsecondary education and over 87% of Californians do.

0

beatrice 5 years, 5 months ago

fuel, if Obama is leading only among voters making less than $35K a year, then how do you explain his commanding lead in places like New York, Connecticut and California, while McCain is up in Arkansas, Mississippi and Alabama. Do you really believe that people in California are making less than those in Alabama? Something appears off on the Canadian article.

0

fuel_for_the_fire 5 years, 5 months ago

The following excerpt is taken from a story on the Canada.com page entitled "Obama lead drops to 5 points". "Obama's lead among voters making less than $35,000 per year remains substantial at a little over 70 percent. But McCain, who had previously scored well only with the highest income brackets, now holds slight leads among voters in all income groups starting at $35,000 and above."Now, I don't know very many people with a post-secondary degree who make less than $35K per year, except for a few very recent college grads who, with more experience, will see their salaries increase. People with less education, on average, make less money; I'm sure there are individuals who are exceptions to this. I am not going to point out the obvious connection. People, at least the intelligent ones, will be able to connect the dots themselves.

0

slappedyomomma 5 years, 5 months ago

"...spending money on campaign advertising doesn't really speak to a person's personal identity like the amount of money they spend on clothes does."............................................except that a campaign is basically a big popularity contest. a lot of advertising is supposed to "speak to a person's identity" and aim it at viewers. why do they always show candidates kissing babies and acting like a "normal" person? because they are trying to speak to citizens about their candidates "personal identity".the fact that people are trying to make a big deal about Palin's clothes is pretty funny. what is the average cost of clothing for these candidates anyways? my guess would be around $4,000 per outfit. i would guess that BO's, McCain's, Biden's suits are close to $3,000 apiece. now Palin has a wardrobe that is comparable.there is something wrong with your thinking if $150,000 in clothing and accessories bothers you, but $650 million in advertising doesn't.

0

scott3460 5 years, 5 months ago

"So yes, I am hoping the polls are correct. Obama / Biden 2008!"Beatrice:John McCain guaranteed a victory on today's talk shows. Given his track record of sound judgment and foresight, I take this as the final sign of a lock for Obama. Get out the bubbly, this one's over. The fat lady's singing, the old man's delusional and the scary woman is headed back north to Alaska.

0

beatrice 5 years, 5 months ago

Oh logic, don't you know that arguing with jaywalker instantly marks you as a moron? Just ask him. I'm sure he will be more than happy to point it out. Who knows, he might go all out and compare you to a melon of some sort. If you haven't seen it, Maureen Dowd's article in the NY Times is spot on. As she points out, it isn't just the clothes themselves, which is an excessive extravagance, it is the selling of a politician as "everywoman" who handlers have dressed up like "supermodel." She didn't need it, because she is a naturally attractive woman. The whole thing makes her Jane Sixpack message ring false. She will do and say anything to get elected. Further, to make comments on the haute couture wardrobe also isn't sexist -- remember how much we heard about John Edward's $400 haircut? It would be like listening to a politician tell you how he is fighting for the working people, then after the speech he gets in his private jet to take him to his choice of 8 magnificent homes. Sorry John, but you are no Joe the Senator. That guy is running as the vp on the Democratic ticket. So yes, I am hoping the polls are correct. Obama / Biden 2008!

0

notajayhawk 5 years, 5 months ago

logicsound04 (Anonymous) says: "Comparing clothing expenditure to advertising expenditure makes no sense. Partly because the two things are completely different in nature and cannot be evaluated on the same expenditure scale, but also because spending money on campaign advertising doesn't really speak to a person's personal identity like the amount of money they spend on clothes does."Not too sure I agree on that. Pretty much everything that contibutes to the appearence of a public figure can be considered advertising. Every candidate for every major office spends money on their looks, including paying image consultants big bucks to tell them which color tie to wear in front of this or that audience. I actually find it refreshing that the expenditures for Ms. Palin's clothes were necessary - it means she didn't already have a closet full of apparel suitable for campaigning for national office, that more than likely until being chosen as the VP candidate she did have to shop at more moderate stores such as Wal-mart.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

jaywalker,Comparing clothing expenditure to advertising expenditure makes no sense. Partly because the two things are completely different in nature and cannot be evaluated on the same expenditure scale, but also because spending money on campaign advertising doesn't really speak to a person's personal identity like the amount of money they spend on clothes does.As I noted, the issue isn't that she's spending money on new clothes, as you are correct that looking presentable as a VP candidate is part of running a campaign.The problem is that spending $150,000 in 2 months (do realize how much money that is???) on CLOTHING is a direct contradiction of her contention that she is a small-town everyperson. She doesn't have to shop at Wal-Mart to spend a moderate amount on clothing--there is quite a range on the spectrum between Wal-Mart and NiemanMarcus/Saks 5th Avenue.As far as Hillary Clinton's wardrobe expenditure, it's different--she has not tried to sell herself as an everyday, average American, as she understands that to do so would trivialize her intelligence and political experience. Unlike Sarah Palin, Clinton has more to offer than the nebulous "Washington outsider" tag, as she is intelligent, experienced, and well-read. Again, the issue is not the act of spending money on a new wardrobe, it's the idea of spending such an extravagant amount and how that contradicts Palin and who she claims to be.

0

scott3460 5 years, 5 months ago

"I wonder why doesnt Obama spent the 600 million he raised for his campaign on poor people? Maybe he doesn't want to spent his own money on poor people he wants to spend other people's money, which is why he is for redistribution of wealth."I suspect our election laws dictate that if you receive campaign donations, you must spend the money on campaign activities.

0

slappedyomomma 5 years, 5 months ago

calling Palin "elitist" for the RNC buying her $150,000 in clothing is like calling Obama "elitist" for staying at the Waldorf-Astoria and his wife ordering Lobster, Caviar, and Champagne. hey pot, its the kettle...............the fact is that there are 3 multi-millionaires between the 2 tickets.P.S. Bea, you ARE a moron. and not because Jay says so. i've seen enough moronic posts on here from you to fill up my hard drive. save us all the time that it takes to skip past your posts.

0

slappedyomomma 5 years, 5 months ago

70% of statistics are wrong 30% of the time when 40% of the people say 20% of what they mean...

0

scott3460 5 years, 5 months ago

Forget Palin's small town, "real" America, one of us act, it's the sheer fiscal irresponsibility and stupidity that gets me. How stupid are the people running the McCain campaign not to know that spending that much money was going to make them look elitist? Do you want folks that dumb controlling the levers of government? Oh, and the polling is accurate. It's a democratic tidal wave coming, just as many of us predicted to howls of derision many, many months ago. Where are all the bush/McCain apologists now? Mighty quiet. Election night is going to be so fun. Think I'll sit and type "I told you so" over and over again all night!!

0

beatrice 5 years, 5 months ago

boo hoo, jay called me a moron. That hurts, jay. Boo hoo. Glad to know you are too dishonest with even yourself to admit that dressing up the hockey mom in fashion's finest is an elitist move on the part of the McCain campaign. Spin away on what Obama spends on advertisements, since he would be dishonest only if he was running on a "we won't run advertisements" campaign. Clinton, might I remind you, isn't currently running. Besides, she lives in New York where you can find fine clothing stores. She would have been dishonest had she shopped only in small towns to try to convince us she is someone other than the city slicker she really is. Palin is running as the "one of us," "Jane Sixpack," "hockey mom with lipstick" candidate. Clearly, that wasn't good enough for her GOP handlers, and she apparently isn't strong enough to have said "No" to the change in apparence to appease those who she would soon answer to were she to win. Hopefully, she won't, then she can get back to Alaska and she can be who she really is, not the person others now are trying to make her into. It isn't about the amount spent. While the dollars are high, it is really an issue of character and remaining true to yourself as you run. You, however, give her a pass no matter what she does. The rest of us "morons" realize that she will wear whatever and clearly say whatever, no matter how dishonest it is, in order to get elected. Regarding the plane issue in Arizona, I wonder how the other candidates running against McCain all got around the state? I guess they must have all had planes too. It is, after all, the ONLY way to get around the state. (I'm just trying to figure out how I have traveled throughout the state many times without an airplane.) Further, I have never, not even by accident, visited the dailykos site, but nice job of once again completely failing in your attempt to project your fantasy of the typical liberal on me. You, on the other hand, are actually someone who must call others names when your logic and intelligence fail you and you can't win an argument. Unfortunately for the rest of us, I'm afraid this is far too often. And as I keep saying, attack me all you want. I find it humorous because you really seem to get off on it. It must satisfy some type of Oedipal complex you carry around. Let us also face the fact that the only reason you haven't been attacking me recently is because I haven't been posting much of late. Otherwise, I'm sure you would being calling me names like you have been doing to others as you continue to play your usual role of self-appointed hall monitor. It is laughable. Besides being picked on a lot growing up, did you also eat paste as a child?

0

jaywalker 5 years, 5 months ago

bea, You're a moron. It's just that simple. Only the smallest of minds would grasp at such straws. You want her to run for VP of the U.S. while wearing Wal-Mart clothes.? Brilliant. They are not dressing her up so she doesn't appear to be a 'hick from hicksville'. THE campaign spent the money to keep her clothed through 3 to 4 times a day wardrobe changes and because she's running for VP of the U.S.! If she showed up in crappy-wear, you'd bitch that she's trying too hard to maintain the small town image. She doesn't have to maintain it, she is small town. Period. And you still haven't come up with the numbers spent on Hillary's wardrobe and make-up people. Gee, I wonder why that is? Not that it matters. I and any other rational human being realize that it's part of being a candidate. Obama's rented out his own channel on Dish network and has been running his ads there 24/7 for more than three weeks now. Wanna guess how much that costs? A hell of a lot more for just one day than the total for this Palin nonsense. It's all part of a campaign, and Palin's clothes and make-up costs are pennies in the bucket of what Obama has spent on advertising, but somehow that doesn't matter. And I've already answered you on the garbage about the plane comment. Again, you're a moron, or just plain dishonest. If you've actually seen the clip where she spoke that sentence you'd know the context. But intellectual dishonesty precludes you from actually being rational and fair about it, or like I said, you're just a moron and don't get it. The plane comment came from telling about how she'd been so afraid of flying, and during John's early run for the Senate they had to hop all over the state for campaign stops, and to get to where they were going with multiple stops every day the only way to get around Arizona to all the small towns was by private plane. Only a buffoon would take it the way you have, or else you've never bothered to actually see where this story came from and just ate up the sound bite from dailykos. Do me a favor and don't bother me anymore, you don't have the sense God gave a watermelon. You don't want me to 'attack' you? Quit posting back at me. If you hadn't noticed, I haven't addressed you in weeks because I've quit reading your posts.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

Ordinarily I would agree that a candidate's wardrobe is irrelevant. However, that is not the case with Palin, for a couple of reasons. She claims to be an average, everyday American like you and me. That is a selling point of her place on the ticket--that she brings the perspective of a common American family to Washington. Therefore, aspects of her public life that contradict that claim are absolutely fair game. First, most common Americans can't even comprehend the idea of spending $150,000 on clothes in the span of 2 months. How does that fit with the claim that she speaks for small-town, common American values?Second, we're not just talking about a new wardrobe and purchasing clothes to make her look professional and presentable. I would guess that most Americans can relate to the idea of buying new, professional clothes to prepare for a new job where you want to make a good impression. However, I think that ability to relate ends when you look at the AMOUNT that was spent on clothing. Are we really supposed to understand the idea of spending $150,000 on clothes during a financial crisis? Is there really no option for good-quality, stylish clothing at a more reasonable price?Over the past few months, we have seen that Palin is lacking in many areas that one might desire in a Vice President, however the fact that she relates to "small-town values" has remained. Now it is apparent that the "small-town values" line is merely a marketing ploy, and doesn't have anything to do with who she actually is as a person.Lastly, I'd like to point out that if Palin had some credentials worth discussing, there would be far less attention on the wardrobe expenditure.

0

1wetwilly 5 years, 5 months ago

I really don't care how accurate the pole is as I'm looking at the dancer

0

beatrice 5 years, 5 months ago

Jay, just keep digging it deeper. Your attacks are so silly, but if it makes you feel better, knock yourself out. Since you keep indicating that I don't really understand the meanings of the words I use, here is a little something on "elitism" taken straight from the dictionary just for you: "consciousness of or pride in belonging to a select or favored group."Will you please name one person from an unfavored or unselct group who would be able to make the conscious effort to spend $150,000 on clothing or more than $20,000 in two weeks on make-up? Ask yourself, why is the McCain campaign dressing Palin up? The answer is so she appears to belong to such a favored or select group. In what universe do you live in where the conscious effort to make someone appear as if they don't really come from a small town by dressing that person up in expensive garments isn't a sign of an elitist attitude? We aren't just talking about buying some new clothing, but about dressing someone in a very expensive wardrobe to ensure that person doesn't appear to be a hick from "pro-America' Hicksville. (I don't think of small-town America as Hicksville, by the way, but obviously the McCain campaign does. Otherwise, they wouldn't have needed to play dress-up with the Governor of Alaska.) She didn't pick out the clothing, but rather someone else picked them out for her. They are dressing her up. Why? What I find telling about the whole thing is that it shows that Palin doesn't believe her own small-town America is the best shtick. If she did, she would be happy to wear her Wal-Mart gowns while on the campaign trail and would have told the campaign handlers to take a hike. Knowing that Palin is bit of a tough and rugged lady (an admirable quality), seeing her in such fine appearal is the same as seeing Al Gore dress up like a hunter when visiting Montana. He doesn't wear flannel, so why pretend? By her own admission she is a hockey mom - with lipstick, so why dress her up like she is a super model? It is admitting that being "one of us" truly isn't good enough. No. They make her look like "one of them" - one of society's elite. It is all so fake, and that is why it is worth discussing. It goes to the heart of the McCain campaign, where they will say anything and do anything to win. Fortunately, most people are seeing right through it. Finally, to go back to our first "discussion" on Cindy McCain and elitism, what person can you think of from an unfavored class who would suggest that the "only" way to get around a state is in a private plane? Not just make a statement of it being a convenient way to get around for which she is thrilled to be in a position to afford such a luxury, but the "only" way. Simply, no ordinary citizen would make such a statement, but an elitist would.If you can say that none of this is a sign of an elitist attitude, then you should go into politics yourself. Anyone who can lie that well deserves to be in politics.

0

jaywalker 5 years, 5 months ago

"It is more like I make a statement, you criticize me personally and indicate I lack reading comprehension skills, at the very least."No, sugar, it's 'like' you write something exceptionally ignorant and I call you out. And don't pretend you're above the fray, you began this animosity when I was trading posts with Scott, stuck your nose in and 'attacked' me. And again, you can't read and comprehend, it's a sad, sad tale. Where have I 'attacked your parents'? And where did I 'pretend to take the high road'? If the 'high road' is saying another poster should not write that an opposer should just go ahead and die, than yeah, I took it. Honestly, further remedial education is in your best interest. You don't like when I call out your mistakes in reading? Be more careful. Seriously, how do you get that I 'attacked your parents'? That is textbook to your lack of reading skills. It's like a five year old making stuff up to tattle on a sib. And you do it all the time. Very sad, bea.As to the Palin nonsense, knock yourself out. It's a moronic distraction and has nothing to do with elitism, no matter how much you want to rail. I'm not kidding, look up the definition 'cuz your 'take' on it is laughable. Post-grad degrees my ass. I've told you before, do NOT share your 'elitism' thoughts with friends or colleagues. If you're not an intellectual joke to them already, you'll remove all doubt.

0

beatrice 5 years, 5 months ago

Jay, I wouldn't call what you and I do "sparring." It is more like I make a statement, you criticize me personally and indicate I lack reading comprehension skills, at the very least. Now you have even drug my parents into the discussion, then you convince yourself that you are somehow taking the high road. Funny. However, back to the Palin wardrobe nonsense, I will repeat what I find humorous about it, and why it shows Palin to be as phony as the worst politicians out there. She is running as the uber-small town woman, the pit-bull with lipstick one-of-us hockey mom, yet as soon as she had the opportunity to not actually look like someone who lives and shops in a small town, she took it. No hesitation and apparently without blinking. Now the RNC has a personal make-up woman traveling with Palin, who they paid more than $22,000 in two weeks, which makes the make-up person the highest paid person working for the McCain/Palin campaign. This all goes against Palin's small town image, which is the very platform Palin is making her stand. Sorry, but Gucci and professional make-up artists do not speak to "pro-America" small town values. And yes, the RNC and the McCain campaign insisting that Palin's small town garments aren't good enough for a national stage and that $150,000 on clothes and $22,000 on make-up must be spent in order to make her presentable to voters is an elitist attitude. A non-elitist attitude would be to say "thanks but no thanks" to the new look clothing. She should have said, "Accept me for who I am, clothing and all." Either small town America is good enough or it isn't. Palin has decided it isn't good enough. That is elitist. As I said before - consider the story line of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, of the everyman - or everywoman, as the case may be - making it to Washington and insisting on making a change in the system. Now consider Mr. Smith going to Washington, but not before stopping at the Ralph Lauren store to help him look more "authentic." So go ahead, rip into me some more and keep attacking my parents. It really helps your position of being a stand-up kind of guy.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

"Where are my so-called "racist" posts?"--------------I don't know. Did I say you had any?

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

Snap -The Grey Goose honks on a Friday night.

0

Flap Doodle 5 years, 5 months ago

Looks like the grey goose is riding somebody pretty hard tonite.Stillhavingawonderfulinternetlife.

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

logicsound04 (Anonymous) says: As long as YOU believe you aren't a racist, that's all that matters, right Marion?"Marion writes:Where are my so-called "racist" posts?Should be easy to find using the "Search" option on the LJW but so far, no bananna.Post a link to one of my posts which you believe is "racist" or simply copy and paste the allegedly offending post into a new one with the link to the original.Should be easy for you netties!Don't fake it or your internet a** will be handed to you on a platter and don't bother with those posts I have had removed; you don't know the content of those posts but I'll tell you his; there was nothing "racist" in any of the removed posts.NO "racist" posts but lots of posts defending the rights of all.Hmmmm.........................Makes one wonder, dunnit?

0

jaywalker 5 years, 5 months ago

"So, if my language offends, who really gives a damn. I honestly couldn't care less what you think. But you have a nice day, now."There's a difference between 'demonizing' someone and wishing they would "all die off and leave us in peace" and/or stating that someone is a "waste of skin and air". And I'm not surprised a simple-minded, ignorant child like yourself can't grasp this fact. And stating that you couldn't care less what I think at the end of a defensive rationalization, well, that's laugh out loud funny. And sorry, bea, that once again your reading comprehension has failed you. I don't believe the principal in your junior high should be notified, but your folks might consider a tutor. My posts aimed at acg have nothing to do with his/her 'calling out' Marion, I have no issue with that, done it to you many times. But writing you hope someone dies, or saying they're a waste of space on this planet is disgusting, ridiculous, and juvenile. I could care less if you or anyone else doesn't like another poster or their comments, but saying you eagerly anticipate their demise is pathetic. And even as much as we have sparred, I would have expected you to grasp this difference. I guess I gave you too much credit.And you still haven't looked up that word 'elitist', have you? Tell ma and pa: Tutor!In response to your question, though, who gives a damn? Was it your money? Was it taxpayer money? How much did Hillary's wardrobe and make-up artist cost? And again, who cares? A $400 hair cut for a man is over the top. Obama wears $1500 suits, which I'm sure cost more than that, and he has dozens of 'em. Bully for him! He looks great! But again, who cares? The women in government ain't shoppin' at K-Mart and the men aren't going to Men's Wearhouse. I swear, there have been some wastes of time and column inches in this race, but people focusing on this garbage may just take the cake. And it's another shocker that YOU would focus on it. Congrats.

0

beatrice 5 years, 5 months ago

Yes, I believe in polls, and I believe that there are many people around here who should be placed atop one. jay, if you don't call people on their outright and constant demonizing of others, as acg has done to Marion, it is the same as being in a room when people are making racist statements and not speaking up. So you see, for some of us there is a difference between writing ugly things about someone for their views, and writing ugly things about someone for being ugly. Now go ahead, rip into me and write my name down on your hall monitor pad. You should then recommend that the principal give me detention. By the way, do you think the RNC spending $22,000 in two weeks on a make-up person for Sarah Palin is at all elitist? I mean, that is a whole lot of lipstick for a pit-bull ...er... I mean, hockey mom. And I thought $400 haircuts was over the top.

0

tangential_reasoners_anonymous 5 years, 5 months ago

Marion: "... I ... is a straight-up liar.Geez, Marion... conjugate! Trobs: "... those that think like Marion?"You weren't confusing what Marion does with "thinking," were you?

0

tangential_reasoners_anonymous 5 years, 5 months ago

RET: "I'm not a big fan of George Michael.",;-DApparently you ARE.

0

acg 5 years, 5 months ago

I don't demonize them for disagreeing with me. There are a lot of posters here that have differing opinions than I. I demonize them for being hateful, racist tools. I demonize them for being so anti-human that it's almost hard to believe that people like that actually exist. So, if my language offends, who really gives a damn. I honestly couldn't care less what you think. But you have a nice day, now.

0

jaywalker 5 years, 5 months ago

"LOL jaywalker, keep on trying. You're not going to ruffle my feathers, even though for some odd reason you've been trying for two days"Trying to ruffle your feathers? No, just pointing out how juvenile you are for calling someone a 'waste of air' and hoping for someone else to die. And yeah, I'm the troll here. Hi bea. How ironic: "The fact that Marion and Tom must demonize those who disagree with them speaks to their level of humanity. It is very sad." Soooo, you criticize me for playing 'hall monitor', and yet all I've done is shine the exact sentiment you express above on acg. How wonderfully hypocritical of you, bea. Shocker.

0

notajayhawk 5 years, 5 months ago

blue73harley (Anonymous) says: "I am trying my best to justify voting for McCain but his health insurance proposal is the stupidest one by far and is pushing me to the left. Taxing my approx. $12K benefit and then giving me a credit is just plain silly. By the calulations on his website it is about a break even deal for me."The only way a $5000 tax credit is a break-even deal with the taxes on $12,000 worth of benefits is if you are in a 41.67% tax bracket. There isn't one (at least until Obama takes office). At today's maximum tax rate (that McCain would keep) you'd be $800 ahead, money you could use for your premiums (which can't be very high if your employer is paying $12,000 in their share) or other healthcare spending.

0

beatrice 5 years, 5 months ago

Glad to see jaywalker performing his role as hall monitor. Now you behave acg, or he will scold you again, and next time he will recommend you be given detention. So there. don't know much about polls, but do hope that Obama wins. The fact that Marion and Tom must demonize those who disagree with them speaks to their level of humanity. It is very sad.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

"unless you count when he actually does make a tough choice and he is wrong like the Surge in Iraq"--------------Or if you count when he actually does make a tough choice and he is right like the decision not to go into Iraq in the first place.See how easy it is to selectively make someone however you want them to sound?Too bad it doesn't give a wholly accurate picture of the situation...

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

ACG -Do you have your very own internet stalker? I'm jealous.

0

Satirical 5 years, 5 months ago

I have decided I am going to vote the same way Obama does.When Obama is faced with a difficult decision with serious real-life and political ramification he almost always votes "present" (unless you count when he actually does make a tough choice and he is wrong like the Surge in Iraq). So that is why I am goign to vote, "present." Who is with me?!Be like Obama - "Present" for President!

0

acg 5 years, 5 months ago

LOL jaywalker, keep on trying. You're not going to ruffle my feathers, even though for some odd reason you've been trying for two days. I just find you amusing, as I do most creepy trolls.

0

Satirical 5 years, 5 months ago

Trobs...That is b/c I work with you. I am the guy at the place who is in charge of the stuff, you know what I am talkin about : )

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

Satirical - we had that same question at work today.

0

Satirical 5 years, 5 months ago

I wonder why doesnt Obama spent the 600 million he raised for his campaign on poor people? Maybe he doesn't want to spent his own money on poor people he wants to spend other people's money, which is why he is for redistribution of wealth.

0

Satirical 5 years, 5 months ago

I trust polls about as much as I trust politicians...

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

Keep poking him with a stick and watch him splode all over the interwebs.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

As long as YOU believe you aren't a racist, that's all that matters, right Marion?

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

RETICENT_IRREVERENT (Anonymous) says: 'I defy you, acg, to re-print a single post made by myslef which is "racist" in nature; one which implies, suggests or states that one "race" is superior to another.' - MarionHow about this one?"Marion (Marion Lynn) says:This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement."Marion writes:Nice feeble attempt at spin there, RI!I get posts removed all the time for one reason or another; mostly because "staff" does not like my links.You have presented no evidence of a "racist" or "hate-filled" post.NEXT !

0

Flap Doodle 5 years, 5 months ago

"And please learn the correct use of the apostrophe, OK?"I LOL when the beast with nine fingers goes on a grammar & punctuation jag. Stillhavingawonderfulinternetlife.

0

Deja Coffin 5 years, 5 months ago

I have about as much faith in these polls as I do for politics in general......little to none. And BTW, we can post pics on here? I'm running out to glamour shots right now! Hope they still have the sequined sailor suit!!!

0

RETICENT_IRREVERENT 5 years, 5 months ago

'I defy you, acg, to re-print a single post made by myslef which is "racist" in nature; one which implies, suggests or states that one "race" is superior to another.' - MarionHow about this one?"Marion (Marion Lynn) says: This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement."

0

BrianR 5 years, 5 months ago

"He's really old, right?"Not really.Get off my lawn.

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

acg (Anonymous) says: I can't wait til the Marion Lynn's of this country all die off and leave us in peace. He's really old, right? At least he looks really old in his picture. The old, wrinkled, close minded morons are what is killing us. Until we rid ourselves of that hateful, racist generation, we're basically screwed."Marion writes:More of the "diversity" of Lawrence showing today, I see!I suppose that under The Reign of Terror of The Obamination "re-education camps" would be appropriate?I defy you, acg, to re-print a single post made by myslef which is "racist" in nature; one which implies, suggests or states that one "race" is superior to another.I further defy you to re-print a single post of mine which espouses "hate" towards any particular group other than the very racists and anti-Semites whom I have condemned on this forum and others and those posts are not really "hateful"; I dislike what those people stand for.And please learn the correct use of the apostrophe, OK?

0

classclown 5 years, 5 months ago

Okay fair enough. But I know you have no problem with YouTube links as they never get removed so I'll post one of those instead.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atEIcesGILkThat should fly.

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

I wish I got paid to watch forums all day.

0

jaywalker 5 years, 5 months ago

"I can't wait til the Marion Lynn's of this country all die off and leave us in peace. He's really old, right? At least he looks really old in his picture. The old, wrinkled, close minded morons are what is killing us. Until we rid ourselves of that hateful, racist generation, we're basically screwed"And you have a three year old child, acg?! I weep for her. Disagree to your heart's content, but noone needs rectum abyss sentiment like that, regardless the poster. And junior high schoolers shouldn't procreate. What the hell is wrong with your parents?I think it was Churchhill who said that each generation believes they're smarter than the one that preceded them, and will be wiser than the one that follows.To the question, I go by Investor Business Daily's polls, they are usually as close as it gets , or have been for the last couple elections, and have Obama by 3 or 4 percent right now.

0

Jonathan Kealing 5 years, 5 months ago

Classclown-Links generally are against our Terms of Service. I sometimes allow them but I will not allow them when they link to a file someone will automatically be downloading. That's an easy way to spread viruses and I will not allow our Web site to be used that way.Jonathan KealingOnline editor

0

classclown 5 years, 5 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

classclown 5 years, 5 months ago

Why was my post removed? All I did was post a link about people explaining why they intend to vote for Obama. People post links here all the time. Why pick on me? Epecially since it goes along with the theme about the uneducated masses voting.

0

classclown 5 years, 5 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

acg 5 years, 5 months ago

I can't wait til the Marion Lynn's of this country all die off and leave us in peace. He's really old, right? At least he looks really old in his picture. The old, wrinkled, close minded morons are what is killing us. Until we rid ourselves of that hateful, racist generation, we're basically screwed.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

I think so, but we will see on November 4th.I keep holding out hope that the Marion Lynn's of this country are a small minority...

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

The problem is logicsound, do the people who are voting for him outnumber those that think like Marion?

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

Moron Lynn is getting quite hysterical.Makes me feel pretty good about Obama getting elected.

0

BABBOY 5 years, 5 months ago

I am a democrat. I fear no one. Bite me!!

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

Just when I thought this thread was going to be boring

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

No, when I write that The Obamination may well usurp the Oval Office, I am referring to the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is a straight-up liar.He reneged on his promise to accpet public campaign funding and is literally attempting to purchase the presidency in a manner not seen since Old Joe Kennedy bought JFK's senate election nearly sixty years ago.The Obaminaition may well usurp the Office as the result of presenting what are really fals and bogus credientials; "qualifications" if you will for that Office.Setting himself forth as a champion of the people; a "community organiser", The Chosen One is doing a good job of misleading a good portioin of the population in to beliving that he actually has qualifications for that office.The reality is that Barack Hussein Obama is merely the "pretty face" offered up as backup to the Hillarybeeste and a truly "manufactured" candidate with little or no substance but with the backing of dangerous violent radicals such as Will Ayers and Louis Farrakahn as well as the most moneyed of the left who are certain that they have a candidate bout-and-paid-for.The American black population sees Barack Hussein Obama as the first "black man" to possibly win the White Hous, oblivious to the fact that The Chosen One is merely a puppet of the old racist Left who will help them even less than that racist party has in the past, if for no other reason than to be sure to not show preference.Backlash on a scale never before seen will result.As Tom Shewmon says, much of what the Obamination will do if elected can be undone in terms of legislation and programs but the restoration of civil rights stolen by the potentially impending Reign of Terror will be much more difficult to re-establish and the long term damage will linger for many years.

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

I'm scared. That sounds genuinely nice on these boards.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

Thank you for clarifying Trobs. I appreciate it.

0

invictus 5 years, 5 months ago

Trobs very true, why do we have send money to Washington to help poor people when there are poor people just down the street. It is all about power and everything has to flow through NY and/or DC.

0

sgtwolverine 5 years, 5 months ago

I trust the accuracy of political polls as much I trust the accuracy of politicians during campaigns. So: not at all.

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

Ron Paul wants to do away with the majority of the government. Get rid of the income tax, invoke a federal sales tax (you only pay tax when you buy something), stop military interventions, and let the state handle their own social programs. As it stands now, 70 cents of every dollar spent by the federal government for social services never reaches the people it is suppose to help. On top of that, the federal government tells the states how they must manage their social programs. Even if it doesn't work. I spent years in the military and it is the same situation, if it doesn't work, keep doing it. Yes, Ron Paul wants to cut social services, but he wants to cut everything else at the same time. It is a lot easier to manage things like social services at a local level then at a national level. Something that works for California, may not work for Kansas. In the eyes of our leaders though, that matters not.

0

blue73harley 5 years, 5 months ago

I am trying my best to justify voting for McCain but his health insurance proposal is the stupidest one by far and is pushing me to the left. Taxing my approx. $12K benefit and then giving me a credit is just plain silly. By the calulations on his website it is about a break even deal for me. But whatever happened to simplifying taxes!?!? AAARRGGG!!!

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

Trobs,Isn't Ron Paul as likely (if not moreso) as McCain to cut government programs? Am I misunderstanding his position?

0

Liberty_One 5 years, 5 months ago

I have 70% faith in the polls give or take 3%.

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

"I'm sure Marion is a thoughtful and reasonably intellegent person and just wanted to understand where he's coming from."Damn near spit coffee all over the montior. Good one.

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

Tom has it. It is not those that read the papers, watch the news, read independent sites, etc that affects the election. It is the die-hard, my candidate can do no wrong, party only voters that hurts us. It is the rednecks yelling "He's a terrorist!" and the Obamanites that yell "racism" when you talk bad about Obama. These are the people who lock on to an idea and refuse to budge. They refuse to take a second look at the issue and are absolutely against any other ideas on it. They decide the elections. Independents won't win it, whoever can convince more of their sheep to show up and vote will win it.

0

Tom Shewmon 5 years, 5 months ago

"Never underestimate the power of the uneducated masses." -Trobs"As an Obama supporter, this makes me a little nervous." -staff04Staff, read Trobs statement and don't be so nervous. Obama is going to win.

0

invictus 5 years, 5 months ago

"Four years ago this week - John Kerry had a 10 point lead over George W Bush in the battleground states"That's what happens when you rely on a constituency of irresponsible people.

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

I am independent, I think they are the same. Washington insiders who have nothing better to do then spend money we don't have as a nation on programs that are a waste. I was in the military and it was shameful to spend $60,000 on a computer monitor that was "militarized." Aka, enclosed in a steel box. Obama will tax us higher and spend more. McCain will spend more and cut programs many people need. Last time I checked, choosing the lesser of too evils is still evil. Ron Paul 08

0

fu7il3 5 years, 5 months ago

You can't poll 1000 people have a 7% margin of error, and have an representative poll.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

"Four years ago this week - John Kerry had a 10 point lead over George W Bush in the battleground states"-------------True, but there is a fundamental difference between Kerry and Obama....Kerry never had the kind of support from the other side of the aisle that Obama is enjoying right now.I think that's a BIG problem for John McCain. It's that mass appeal that is causing him to lose the battle for independents.

0

arizonajh 5 years, 5 months ago

"arizonajh, Marion is feverishly searching for some obscure foreign dictionary that defines usurp as democratically elected."I kind of assumed that it was the "word of the day" on Rush or Hannity yesterday. I was just wondering how it applied to an election. I'm sure Marion is a thoughtful and reasonably intellegent person and just wanted to understand where he's coming from. Maybe I'm wrong, but I hope not.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

"Obama worshipers seem to become more shrill and panicky" -Tommy Boy-----------------Irony defined.

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

Kansas is a swing state Staff04. We swing from middle-right to hard-right to wheel is broken can't turn it any further right.

0

RETICENT_IRREVERENT 5 years, 5 months ago

I still think dollar cost averaging ammo purchases is a good idea.

0

macon47 5 years, 5 months ago

not alot of faith here,especially when it is asked and reported bya liberal organization.if it is a regular unbiased polltaken by true americans,i do at least take note of the out come

0

staff04 5 years, 5 months ago

arizonajh, Marion is feverishly searching for some obscure foreign dictionary that defines usurp as democratically elected.To answer the question, I think polls are helpful in understanding the direction of the daily breezes, but I don't think that election day outcomes are very often mirroring what we see in the polls.12 days before the 2004 elections, Kerry was up by 11%. As an Obama supporter, this makes me a little nervous. I'm happy to be voting in a swing state, where my vote might actually count towards the outcome.

0

BrianR 5 years, 5 months ago

"Barbers are a great source that you can get a $25,000 poll for fifteen bucks - and that includes a tip..."--Mike Easley, Governor, North Carolina

0

acg 5 years, 5 months ago

arizonajh, please save your breath and time. You're not going to get a rational answer of any kind out of Marion as to his insanity. He's like our own little village idiot. Just pat him on the head and give him a hard candy and he'll wander away. Marion, how many times do we have to tell you? Now, go sit in the truck and don't play with the radio!!

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

"Marion you say in two different threads that Obama is usurping power, how so? " ArizonajahYou are wasting your time. Getting a logical response out of him is impossible. On the upside, he will call you all sorts of names for questioning him. That is always humorous.

0

invictus 5 years, 5 months ago

About as accurate as these on the street polls, No way that 90% of Lawrence women as beautiful as these polls would lead you to believe. I'd say there is 10-15% margin of error.

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

Four years ago this week - John Kerry had a 10 point lead over George W Bush in the battleground states. Polls are not accurate. Pollsters do not contact people who lack a home phone. So those of us that use a cell phone are not counted in the polls. Thus, a large segment of the population are not counted toward the actual vote. I would honestly put this presidential race a lot closer. Never underestimate the power of the uneducated masses. I assure you, they are the group of voters that determine the election.

0

arizonajh 5 years, 5 months ago

Marion you say in two different threads that Obama is usurping power, how so? To usurp you take something that you do not have a right to. How does Obama not have a right to be president if he is elected?

0

RETICENT_IRREVERENT 5 years, 5 months ago

I'm not a big fan of George Michael.

0

Tom Shewmon 5 years, 5 months ago

Guess we'll see how accurate they are in 10 days. Until then, Obama worshipers seem to become more shrill and panicky because this thing does not seem to be a lock. It should be by all measures: the absurd amount of $$$$ Obama has spent, having NBC and CNN as free campaign appendages, and anyone who opposes Obama being intimidated by being called a racist by the thuggish left.Obama should be out at least 15 pts. in the polls and he's not close to that.

0

jonas_opines 5 years, 5 months ago

btw: "Faith"?! Were the polls delivered from up on high, and given to us on stone tablets? Why not use "confidence" for something as secularized and uncertain as a sample political poll?

0

jonas_opines 5 years, 5 months ago

"That just about perfectly sums up the attitude of the Democrats; a fear-based philosophy and life which they wish to impose on us all through the usurpation of power by the Obamination."As told to you by the proven rationality and clear perception of Marion Lynn(tm)

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

Jamey Garner said:" As a fearful Democrat....."Marion writes:That just about perfectly sums up the attitude of the Democrats; a fear-based philosophy and life which they wish to impose on us all through the usurpation of power by the Obamination.

0

notajayhawk 5 years, 5 months ago

The current RCP average has Obama up by 7 points. While I believe he is ahead, I think that's a little inflated (there has always been, and will always be, a difference between what someone is willing to say to a pollster and which box they check in a private voting booth). Look at the range: From two polls that have him with a 1-point lead to a couple that have him at 13-14. How can you assume any accuracy with that kind of a spread?

0

blue73harley 5 years, 5 months ago

They are about as accurate as Dick Cheney.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.