Best elections data available.

I figured since we're just shy of one month out, it'd link to FiveThirtyEight.com, probably the best continuously-updating collection of aggregated elections/polling data available. 

Edited by agentwhale007 - 27 September 2012 at 3:02pm

FreeEnterprise wrote: Why does the major media keep posting polls that are +9 democrat?...

Because they are the ones available? The Rasmussen one is mentioned, but some doubt is mentioned as to its reliability..

No, you guys are missing what I am saying. 

This is what happens when the GOP nominates a joke of a republican. Sigh

FreeEnterprise wrote: No, this is what happens when people skew the numbers. There is no way that democrats will outvote republicans by +9. It has never happened.  The liberals want you to think Romney is a poor candidate.  He isn't, that is just the media bias skewing your opinion.  I wonder who fox news donates too?... hmm. but, but, but, I thought fox was conservative... http://www.theblaze.com/stories/surprised-news-corp-donates-more-to-democrats-than-republicans/ The media wants Obama to win. They will do anything in their power to make that happen. Period.

Wait, what?

I don't watch mainstream news. My opinion of Mitt Romney is entirely my own. I'm more than capable of deciding my own feelings about a candidates track record, I even have a shiny, worthless degree that says I went to college to understand it.

Spew all the conspiracies you want, but don't delude yourself into believing that everyone who isn't in lockstep with you is some brainwashed sheep of the left or the media.

FreeEnterprise wrote: It isn't that at all, remember that book I mentioned last year about how our viewpoints on politics are skewed by the media. Well our perception of republicans is also skewed by the same information.  http://www.amazon.com/Left-Turn-Liberal-Distorts-American/dp/1250002761/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1348862001&sr=8-1&keywords=media+bias that is what I was talking about. I wasn't insulting your intelligence or ability to think. I was just pointing out that you have never met Romney, and yet you have a distinct view of him... That view you have was shaped by the media coverage you have seen of the guy...

My views on him are based solely on his track record as a CEO and governor. I don't watch debates, actions speak louder than words. Romney has done nothing to impress upon me that he's any better than the dead weight we have in office right now. Am I going to vote for Barry? Hell no. But am I going to vote for Romney? I don't know.

FreeEnterprise wrote: What negative actions as a CEO did he do to make you think that?

It would actually be his actions as a governor outweighing his actions as a CEO 30 years ago.

FreeEnterprise wrote: Why did you say his CEO track record then?... What actions did you disagree with when he ran his state?  I'm not picking on you, I'm actually curious.

Because his success as a consultant and CEO are part of what I take into consideration when evaluating how I feel about the candidate for "my" party.

I don't want to write a book about the faults I find with Mitt, but I'll jot down at least a few things.

• The 1.5B he claims to have cut from the budget in Mass was not entirely a cut. He increased all sorts of fees and raising prices for state funded services. Many that directly affected small business, which I'm surprised doesn't bother you greatly.
• He benefited from an income based off previous tax raises very similar to what the Obama camp has done regarding the repayment of TARP funds
• He disguised implementing NEW taxes as "closing loopholes."(online purchases, sales taxes, massive taxes on commercial properties, etc)

I won't even start discussing the disaster of a healthcare system he spearheaded in Massachusetts, or the fact that it was at least partially an effort to keep his state dependent on Medicaid.

Edited by usafpilot07 - 28 September 2012 at 9:20pm

Mitt Romney bumper sticker:

Regardless of what Mitt has done, it is still so much better than more Obama... 

"They were pounding on me for positive information. You know, where is some good news we can share with people? We were monitoring all these polls and I was sending the ones that were most favorable because [campaign aides] wanted to share them with reporters," Hickman testified on May 14 at the trial in Greensboro, N.C. "We were not finding very much good news and I was trying to give them what I could find."

Hickman testified that when circulating the polls, he didn't much care if they were accurate. "I didn't necessarily take any of these as for—as you would say, for the truth of the matter. I took them more as something that could be used as propaganda for the campaign," the veteran pollster said."