Best elections data available.
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=190632
Printed Date: 14 November 2025 at 9:47pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Best elections data available.
Posted By: agentwhale007
Subject: Best elections data available.
Date Posted: 27 September 2012 at 3:02pm
|
I figured since we're just shy of one month out, it'd link to http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/" rel="nofollow - FiveThirtyEight.com , probably the best continuously-updating collection of aggregated elections/polling data available. Now that I know things about survey research and statistics, I feel like I appreciate Silver's work way more this election than last election.
|
Replies:
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 27 September 2012 at 3:59pm
|
Why does the major media keep posting polls that are +9 democrat?... ------------- They tremble at my name... 
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 27 September 2012 at 4:07pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
FreeEnterprise wrote:Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 27 September 2012 at 8:59pm
|
If I've been reading correctly, the Rasmussen poll is the only one not giving.Obama the 9 point lead. I know nothing of reliability when it comes to polls because I find polling in general to be a very unscientific method of reporting anything, but I don't know why you'd pick the one dissenting poll out of a half dozen others to report on. ------------- 
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 11:03am
|
No, you guys are missing what I am saying. The polls have been weaponized to help Obama. Just like the "fact checks" are so partisan now a days, that they almost always slam on the Republican while repeating democratic talking points. If you are going to do a poll, you are supposed to mimic what you will see on election day. These polls that show Obama up are only because they are skewing the number of democrats voting vs the number of independents and republicans... For example In 2004 the vote was R+4. In 2008 the vote was D+3 CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9. So 9 more democrats will vote than before according to our "non" partisan polling... That has never happened. EVER. And yet, they don't publicize that fact, they just say, hey look Obama is up by 9... because we skewed the poll to have 9 more democrats than have ever voted... In 2004 the vote was R+5 In 2008 the vote was D+8 CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9 In 2010 the vote was D+3 In 2008 the vote was D+7 CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/26/BREAKING-Democrat-Voters-Turnout-Advantage-Over-Republicans-Will-Break-All-Time-Records" rel="nofollow - http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/26/BREAKING-Democrat-Voters-Turnout-Advantage-Over-Republicans-Will-Break-All-Time-Records So by asking more democrats in a poll, shockingly they get more people voting for Obama... Problem is, the independents are swinging towards Romney. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/27/Romney-Winning-Swing-State-Independents-Media-Ignores" rel="nofollow - http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/27/Romney-Winning-Swing-State-Independents-Media-Ignores They do this to make republicans think they are done for, and hope that less will show up to actually vote... Or figure, "ah, it doesn't matter, Obama has it in the bag". When as usual they are just throwing out propaganda, and you guys buy it like it was polls in the old days before it became something controlled by the left. Oh btw, if Obama doesn't like your companies polling numbers. The justice department might open an investigation into your company. http://markets.cbsnews.com/cbsnews/news/read/22211431/daily_caller" rel="nofollow - http://markets.cbsnews.com/cbsnews/news/read/22211431/daily_caller ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 1:27pm
|
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/19/obama-has-edge-over-romney-in-three-battleground-states/" rel="nofollow - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/19/obama-has-edge-over-romney-in-three-battleground-states/
Fox polls are showing almost the same thing, but whatever helps you sleep at night. ------------- 
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 2:29pm
|
This is what happens when the GOP nominates a joke of a republican. Sigh ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 3:16pm
|
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/" rel="nofollow - 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. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 3:29pm
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. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 3:54pm
|
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" rel="nofollow - 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... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 4:05pm
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. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 4:11pm
|
What negative actions as a CEO did he do to make you think that? ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 4:26pm
It would actually be his actions as a governor outweighing his actions as a CEO 30 years ago. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 4:48pm
|
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. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 6:09pm
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.
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. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 28 September 2012 at 9:11pm
|
Oh hi USAF. Thank you for not being as lazy as me and saying that about Romney. ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 01 October 2012 at 4:36pm
|
Mitt Romney bumper sticker: I'm not a Conservative, but I campaign like one. ------------- 
|
Posted By: kendall
Date Posted: 01 October 2012 at 6:15pm
|
Vote for me. I hate almost everyone. Now that's progressive. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 02 October 2012 at 11:46am
|
Regardless of what Mitt has done, it is still so much better than more Obama... Oh lookie, people think the polls are propaganda at alarming rates. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/259655-poll-plurality-of-americans-believe-polls-biased-for-obama" rel="nofollow - http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/259655-poll-plurality-of-americans-believe-polls-biased-for-obama
I wonder why they think that?... http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/10/a-pollster-under-oath-137100.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/10/a-pollster-under-oath-137100.html
"Under oath, Hickman admitted that in the final weeks of Edwards's 2008 bid, Hickman cherry-picked public polls to make the candidate seem viable, promoted surveys that Hickman considered unreliable, and sent e-mails to campaign aides, Edwards supporters and reporters which argued that the former senator was still in the hunt —even though Hickman had already told http://www.politico.com/tag/john-edwards" rel="nofollow - Edwards privately that he had no real chance of winning the Democratic nomination. "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." ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Lightningbolt
Date Posted: 02 October 2012 at 12:07pm
| These people are going to lie and skew and we know this.waste of time listening to them. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 02 October 2012 at 12:35pm
|
Except people like whale and many others think it is all above board... Whale won't even admit the blatant skewing of adding 9 MORE democrats per poll and then saying... Hey look Obama is ahead by 9... Look what Washington Post just did... http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/01/wapo-crafts-headline-out-of-poll-with-8-margin-of-error" rel="nofollow - http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/01/wapo-crafts-headline-out-of-poll-with-8-margin-of-error
Fact checks are now a lie, and polling is skewed and propaganda. Where is our "unbiased" journalism, I guess having Obama in office is all that matters anymore? The debates start tomorrow, and of course all the "moderators" are huge liberals. So I can guess how the questions will go. Host Jim Lehrer : "Obama, you passed the historic legislation that was really needed to bring our medical system into the twenty first century. How did it feel to be the architect of such amazing legislation? Obama: "I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I did that, and I killed Osama too". Host: "Amazing response Obama, you are the smartest person in the room everywhere you go, how does that feel?" Obama: "I need four MORE years, because I am so smart, and I'm going to make others smart by hiring a lot of teachers, and paying them to educate our children. Without pesky result testing of course". Host: "Our next question is for FORMER governor Romney, Why do you hate black people, and send all our jobs overseas?" Romney: "wait, are you serious?". Host: "Clearly you want to take money from the poor and give it to your buddies who own companies, why are you and your friends so GREEDY?" This type of questioning for another hour, while Obama lies, and the media lets him. And the host does their best to make Romney look bad. Then Stephanopoulis will come out and declare Obama the winner, by a landslide. (he has picked the Democrat in 8 of the 9 past debates... Must be his "non biased" political slant or something). ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 02 October 2012 at 12:47pm
|
^I find it very strange that you expect to find truth and impartiality in politics. FE, maybe you should try yoga. ------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 02 October 2012 at 12:57pm
|
I play paintball... Very therapeutic ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Lightningbolt
Date Posted: 02 October 2012 at 1:00pm
| Try taking one to the soft spot.maybe out will get you off of the religion of politics. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 03 October 2012 at 7:56am
|
So Obama gave a speech when he was trying to get the nomination back in 2007. For some strange reason the hugely racist remarks he made weren't covered by the national media in attendance... A video of his speech was released last night, included in his comments were "the bullet is still in the gun". Referencing slavery and the "attack" of the government on black people in our country. He also lies saying that Katrina rebuilding wasn't given money like other states because they are a city of black people... The government is too busy building roads to the white suburbs and ignoring the black inner city. http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/obama-speech-jeremiah-wright-new-orleans/2/" rel="nofollow - http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/obama-speech-jeremiah-wright-new-orleans/2/
I'm sure the moderator will ignore that, and ignore the lies about the embassy that was burned down because of some video on youtube... Oh wait, it wasn't because of the video?... But, that is what the media has parroted for WEEKS now?... Good thing Al Qaeda is finished, or something.
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 03 October 2012 at 8:51am
Well, it is true. Statistically speaking, more money is spent on upkeep and construction by the state and federal governments in areas which are predominantly white. The reasons are myriad and far too numerous to list here, but the biggest reasoning is that the squeaky wheel gets the grease and well-off white folks tend to complain to the people who can direct the money to fix things. But it definitely is true. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: Lightningbolt
Date Posted: 03 October 2012 at 9:03am
| Tax dollars |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 03 October 2012 at 9:41am
There's a massive difference between racist and racially motivated. And it's funny to me the double standard the right exercises on this subject. They decry accusations of a racially motivated attack on the black culture as being silly then constantly accuse the government of waging war on Jesus and Christmas. Personally, I find both accusations to be absolute ignorance, but the contradiction is amusing. Also, weren't you the one that accused the government of using abortions to keep the black population down? Didn't you also accuse democrats of abusing the black population in order to keep the poverty / minority vote? Seems pretty attacking to me. So why is it racist that Obama pointed it out? If I were black and the government was killing my babies and forcing me into poverty with welfare I'd be pissed off as well. Unless of course even you don't believe that nonsense and you just be trolling. -------------
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 03 October 2012 at 9:46am
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 03 October 2012 at 10:22am
|
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/first-debate-often-helps-challenger-in-polls/" rel="nofollow - A good writeup on FiveThirtyEight this morning on how the first debate normally gives a measurable boost to the challenger in an incumbent race. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 03 October 2012 at 10:28am
|
This popped up on Yahoo this morning:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/truth-few-facts-may-hear-debate-131955840--election.html" rel="nofollow - http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/truth-few-facts-may-hear-debate-131955840--election.html
I found it fairly enlightening and sad at the same time. It truly irks me that we have to deal with the constant BS rhetoric instead of someone actually getting up and telling the friggin truth. I truly hope at some point, our society gets sick of this crap, dumps them all and elects someone into office that tells the truth and is straightforward on things. The truth, how refreshing. ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 6:28pm
|
By Monday we should see a reflection in polling data on the impact of the debate. I'll be interested to see how much of a catch-up this gave Romney.
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 7:36pm
|
I feel like my last response was ignored, how normal. I got called yesterday for what I think was a post-debate poll. I told them I was undecided. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 7:40pm
Landline or cell?
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 7:44pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 7:46pm
Cell, which I thought was odd, but they only asked me if I knew who I was going to vote for. I said I wasn't sure and they thanked me for my response. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 7:50pm
A lot of companies are now putting cellphone databanks into their random selection pools to have a more accurate sample size. We're at the point that using only landlines yields a result skewed much older than what it should otherwise be, as a lot of young people don't have landlines. I know I've not had a landline in three years.
|
Posted By: Lightningbolt
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 7:53pm
| I've said this for a while; obama is going four more. |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 8:13pm
Well, and we got cell numbers in our packets in my data collections classes in college, but I was under the impression that Gallup and the like still used landlines exclusively. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Rofl_Mao
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 10:43pm
The problem I see with this is I think people still have the mindset of four years ago and think the Romney is just another Bush, and I see the media playing this as well, even in Canada. Sucks for Romney because maybe he is a great candidate for Presidency, but people will refuse to see that because they are so trained to automatically think Romney=Republican=Bush=Bad, run away! Just my opinion. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 11:16pm
Well if he does.  Oh wait, that was today in CA... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 October 2012 at 11:20pm
http://www.gallup.com/poll/110383/does-gallup-call-cell-phones.aspx" rel="nofollow - Nope. Gallup's been using cells for a while now. Part of the hypothesis of why Rasmussen tends to skew right is because they still only use landlines for phone polls.
|
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 06 October 2012 at 9:08pm
While I was working as a telemarketer, I did a political survey campaign for a while. I don't remember who had contracted the campaign, but we called cell phones and landlines both. Actually, I'm not sure there are many telemarketing campaigns anymore that don't have cell phone numbers in their database. ------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 07 October 2012 at 5:14pm
|
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/06/oct-6-romney-maintains-poll-momentum/" rel="nofollow - Obama is -0.5, Romney is +0.5 since the debate. It might shift a bit tomorrow, too. The debate brought a good bounce for Romney. I'll be interested to see how the next debate works out.
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 07 October 2012 at 5:31pm
You do realize that America has some of the cheapest retail gas in the world, and that it's only beaten out by countries that engage in massive direct government subsidy thereof? http://www.bloomberg.com/slideshow/2012-08-13/highest-cheapest-gas-prices-by-country.html#slide51" rel="nofollow - http://www.bloomberg.com/slideshow/2012-08-13/highest-cheapest-gas-prices-by-country.html#slide51 American policies have kept gas prices very, very low by global standards, but GLOBAL market dynamics have had prices continuing to increase. You can hardly blame Obama for this. Prices were artificially low for some years due to the global recession, so any whining about gas prices that is univariate and isn't longitudinal for more than a couple years will fall flat on its face. You could, of course, elect Republicans who will support an Israeli strike on Iran, watch the strait of Hormux get closed, and see what happens *then*... But I'll probably be too busy overseas at that point to come back and say 'I told you so'. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 07 October 2012 at 5:41pm
This is complete BS. There is always time to come back for an "i told you so" post. -------------
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 07 October 2012 at 6:09pm
|
I think some type of conflict in Iran is probably inevitable. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Lightningbolt
Date Posted: 07 October 2012 at 11:02pm
|
I just find it completely insane that van jones was in the white house. |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 07 October 2012 at 11:07pm
I meant that if Mittens McChickenhawk ends up provoking a war I'll probably be stuck in it. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 29 October 2012 at 2:01pm
|
Curious what our liberal friends think of the polling today?... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 29 October 2012 at 4:41pm
------------- 
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 30 October 2012 at 8:42am
Lol, New York Times... hahaha.  Interesting how Gallup is now showing a +12 Republican shift... That is massive, and yet, neither one of your sources shows that at all... weird, huh... I'm sure the media covering up Obama's failure in Benghazi won't affect the election... Or something.
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 30 October 2012 at 12:52pm
Meanwhile in http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/30/christie-praises-obama-doesnt-give-a-damn-about-romney-photo-op/" rel="nofollow - New Jersey one of the most thought-of Republican Governors essentially flips Mitt the bird.... ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 30 October 2012 at 1:08pm
I think flipping Romney the bird is kind of strong...the reporter asked him about a photo op in the middle of a discussion about disaster relief efforts. He said he didn't give a Damn about politics and praised Obama for his help, both of which were pretty classy moves. The media headlines are trying to politicize most anything right now. -------------
|
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 30 October 2012 at 1:10pm
|
I love how personal FE takes this stuff. -------------
|
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 30 October 2012 at 9:20pm
| So FE, you're saying more registered republicans are planning on actually voting this time compared to last time? Amazing! But as for the Benghazi comment, I'm glad you think presidents shouldn't be re-elected if a terrorist attack happens on their watch, now to set my time-machine to 2004..... |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 30 October 2012 at 10:18pm
|
Terrorist attacks happen... That is life. What is different is that Obama had unmanned drones flying over Benghazi that showed LIVE footage of the attack as it went on, and the local CIA operatives were told to STAND DOWN and not help the people at the embassy... One disreguarded that order, and went anyway, and then after he helped save a bunch of lives, he then put his laser on the mortar attackers, and called in support. And again the Obama administration did nothing. (empty chair) and what happened? the SEAL died from that mortar group... The blame for that falls directly on the shoulders of Obama. He left them to die, for 7 hours, with NO help. We had special forces in the area that could have been sent there, but Obama didn't. Big difference between a quick terrorist attack, and ignoring 7 hour attack and doing NOTHING. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 30 October 2012 at 10:41pm
|
I do believe I read somewhere yesterday that it wasn't only CIA operatives that wanted to get there to help. I believe isaw that when the WH got word of the impending/potential attack(2+ hours ahead of time), a full SF A team requested permission to go as well, and were denied. That's on top of denying extra security that had been requested on multiple occasions in the weeks leading up to the attacks. Most of the time I separate myself from FE, but I think it's disgusting the lack of coverage being given to the utter failure on our governments part that led to the deaths of innocent Americans. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 30 October 2012 at 11:10pm
|
But the 9/11 attacks didn't just come down to "we got hit." We knew there was chatter, we had warnings, we ignored. This is where you run into problems playing the blame game no matter what your political persuasions. When Bin Laden was killed and Obama "took credit," the right was up in arms.He had nothing to do with it, he just gave the okay, etc. But now something bad happens in the same distant region of the world and itsentirety his fault, process be damned. I've said it a million times-you won't win an election by firing accusations off full auto at your opponent, you win it by methodically picking your shots. If you bombard the American people with a million accusations, just as the left did under Dubya, the people will see you as whiny. The other problem is that, in issues such as this, they're going to run straight to your past failures. This is a never ending argument of accusations. So apply the conspiracy theory test. What did Obama stand to gain by purposely allowing American diplomats to die and right before an election no less? So I believe it's fairly likely he didn't purposely allow this incident to happen for some sinister reason, and by that logic I see it as a possible mistake at worst, but really I'm in no position to judge because I about as much about strategic reaction as I know about nuclear reaction (not alot.) Mistakes that cost lives are tragic, but they happen every day in the countries were wage war in at the cost of thousands of lives. I don't see conservatives lined up to crucify military leaders. But time will tell, I could always be entirely wrong. Regardless, there are more pressing issues that are being entirely ignored every time the GOP tries to bring an issue like this to the forefront. -------------
|
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 7:30am
|
Anyone who thinks they know all of the facts about things like that, especially in cases where CIA and SF are involved, is a moron. Your security clearance does not go that high. -------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 7:37am
|
You are correct, attacks happen, and no one is laying blame on Obama for a terrorist attack. But, you are missing the point, (which is no wonder since the media is covering up for Obama, just to get him elected again) Obama had TIME to do something. AND DIDN'T, he CHOSE to NOT send in support. Even though he had the mortar guys lit up with a laser showing their EXACT location. And yet, did he send a missile? Nope. Did he send special forces WHO WERE IN THE AREA. Nope. Did he watch the video LIVE while it was happeneing. Sure looks like he did. And yet, he did NOTHING while our people were murdered ON OUR OWN SOIL. THAT is Obama. AND that is our media as liberals will cover for this guy even when people die because of his lack of leadership. While they let him and the media use a youtube video to blame this all on... It is pathetic. Even FACEBOOK is doing their best to cover this up... http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/30/Facebook-Censors-Navy-SEALS-To-Protect-Obama-on-Benghazi-Gate" rel="nofollow - http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/30/Facebook-Censors-Navy-SEALS-To-Protect-Obama-on-Benghazi-Gate
Failure after failure, and yet, the media still covers for him. Interesting how during Iraq the war casualty list was covered EVERY SINGLE DAY, and yet, when Obama is running the war in Afghanistan, it is rarely mentioned, even though the death count has gone crazy with all the liberal "war" rules, that tie the hands of our military. Benghazi is just another example that liberals running "protection" and a war is just stupidity. As they think rubber bullets, and no armed guards is a good idea. It is the old "strength through bowing" ideology. Failure. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qygtToan0Ko&feature=youtu.be" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qygtToan0Ko&feature=youtu.be
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 7:39am
It doesn't have to be a conspiracy to highlight a grievous mistake. How many days after 9/11 did conspiracy theories about Bush shooting down the Pennsyvania flight or staging the attack as an excuse for war start showing up? **edited**, NatGeo and the History Channel STILL show that stuff. Now, i preface this by saying the recent attacks were nowhere near the 9/11 scale, clearly. All I'm saying is that it seems to me like Benghazi has gotten very little coverage, especially when you consider some of the facts that came to light AFTER the initial reports(there was no protest, no sign of the video that Obama condemned had anything to do with it, etc.) ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 7:58am
Yeah, you are right, we should just take the word of Obama... This was clearly a mob that was mad about a trailer on youtube or something.... Oh wait. We used to have a media that would have gone crazy getting to the bottom of something like this, course now with our JournOlist media, all they care about is the (R) or (D) behind your name. If it is a (D) they get "protected" with no questions asked. Oh wait, Obama actually said last night that America "we leave nobody behind"... when talking about http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/10/30/Obama-Leave-Nobody-Behind" rel="nofollow - http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/10/30/Obama-Leave-Nobody-Behind
Seriously, you can't make stuff like this up, Obama and the media are so pathetic. A few outlets are finally putting on their big boy reporter pants and starting to THINK about asking some questions... http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-benghazi-questions-the-administration-must-answer/2012/10/30/02d02538-22e2-11e2-8448-81b1ce7d6978_story.html?" rel="nofollow - http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-benghazi-questions-the-administration-must-answer/2012/10/30/02d02538-22e2-11e2-8448-81b1ce7d6978_story.html?
The New York Post calls out the media on their LACK of coverage on Benghazi. Because... Liberals. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/the_mysterious_media_benghazi_bugout_BcSb3qr5XhCps5Lr5fZeyK?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Oped%20Columnists" rel="nofollow - http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/the_mysterious_media_benghazi_bugout_BcSb3qr5XhCps5Lr5fZeyK?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Oped%20Columnists
"Where is the Benghazi media feeding frenzy? I don’t think there’s a conspiracy at work. Rather, I think journalists tend to act on their instincts. And, collectively, the mainstream media’s instincts run liberal." ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 9:47am
|
USAF-I agree that mistakes should be called out and certainly more so at the chart of life. But in situations like this, I see a pattern-right wing media is crucifying him while the left is defending him. There's too much opinion and not enough qualified opinion. Without a full breakdown of where everyone was at, what the protocol is, what the chain of command is, etc its impossible to really say what the mistake was or if there was a mistake. The picture the right is painting of Obama is of a dude in the bat cave with a giant screen showing the ambassador being murdered and having a magic button that gets troops there in 2 minutes flat. FE-I don't understand the "he refused to call it a terrorist attack" criticism. Even if he did purposely call it something else, that isn't indicative of how the powers that be handled the situation. -------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 12:09pm
|
It still isn't about what they called it. It is about the White house NOT sending support. The attack when on for 7 hours or more. PLENTY of time to actually DO something to help OUR citizens who were under attack. And yet... http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/31/gingrich-rumor-says-networks-have-white-house-emails-telling-counterterrorism-group-to-stand-down-on-benghazi-rescue/" rel="nofollow - http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/31/gingrich-rumor-says-networks-have-white-house-emails-telling-counterterrorism-group-to-stand-down-on-benghazi-rescue/
And where is the media "getting to the bottom of this"? Oh yeah, it is THEIR guy. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 12:23pm
 /obligatory ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 1:38pm
2012/10/31/gingrich-rumor-says-networks-have-white gingrich-rumor-says-networks-have-white gingrich-rumor rumor -------------
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 1:46pm
|
I can't decide what's less reliable, the part about the rumor or the part about Gingrich. -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 2:21pm
|
I don't know much about how wars work, but I'm pretty sure just telling a group of soldiers to attack(counter attack?)in a country such as Libya is kind of a big deal. I mean maybe I'm wrong(probably) but I don't think it's as easy as calling the seat team because someone tried to rob a bank. Real life =/= rainbow six. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 31 October 2012 at 10:32pm
Especially considering AFCOM isn't anywhere near Africa. Right now we have one way in and one way out of Africa. Djibouti. Anyone who thinks we can just send people running in all guns blazing in helicopters doesn't understand the fact that there are a TON of shoulder-fired SAMs in the hands of insurgents over there. We simply don't have the ability to react quickly in Africa right now. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 01 November 2012 at 8:39am
|
I have never in my lifetime seen a press so ready to NOT ask questions when American citizens are killed by our inaction... Course, if they did dig, what would they find?... http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/benghazi_reveals_obama-islamist_alliance.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/benghazi_reveals_obama-islamist_alliance.html
"The nature of the http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/benghazi_osamas_revenge_on_obama.html" rel="nofollow - Benghazi disaster is now clear. Ambassador http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/27-10-2012/122603-russia_us_syria-0/" rel="nofollow - Stevens was engaged in http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/29/obamas-perfect-storm/" rel="nofollow - smuggling sizable quantities of Libyan arms from the destroyed Gaddafi regime to the Syrian rebels, to help overthrow the Assad regime in Syria. Smuggling http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/en/newsdetails/news/world/Libyan-charity-s-ship-implicated-in-Benghazi-attack-on-US-ambassador-20121030" rel="nofollow - arms to the so-called "Free Syrian Army" is itself a huge gamble, but Obama has been a gambler with human lives over the last four years, as shown by the tens of thousands of Arabs who have died in the so-called Arab Spring -- which has brought nothing but disaster to the Arab world. For the last four years, the Obama policy has been to offer aid and comfort violent Islamic radicals in the delusional belief that their loyalty can be http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/10/muslim-cleric-preaches-peace-islamic-supremacists-promptly-shoot-him-dead.html" rel="nofollow - bought . We therefore betrayed Hosni Mubarak, our 30-year ally in Egypt, so that the Muslim Brotherhood led by Muhammed Morsi could take over. Obama indeed demanded publicly that Mubarak resign, for reasons that never made any sense at all. Egypt went into a political and economic tailspin, and the Muslim Brotherhood were elected. The Muslim radicals have now purged the only other viable political force, the army and police, to protect their monopoly on power. We have colluded in that betrayal. In Libya, we betrayed Moammar Gaddafi, who had surrendered his nuclear program to the Bush administration. In Afghanistan, we betrayed the central government set up by the Bush administration and negotiated with the fanatical war sect of the Taliban to take over. The Taliban entered our history when they gave safe haven to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda in the years before 9/11/01 to plan, train, equip, and implement the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. The Taliban are our fanatical theological enemy, as shown by their sadistic attempt to assassinate 14-year-old women's rights advocate Malala http://photos.thenews.com.pk/e_image_detail.asp?picId=59500&catId=2&date=10/11/2012&dd=1&albumId=0" rel="nofollow - Yousuf . Afghanistan has many thousands of http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/06/08/219475.html" rel="nofollow - Malalas we will never hear about. Our consistent policy of betrayal of moderate Muslims in favor of radical Islamofascists goes hand-in-hand with our appeasement of the Iranian Khomeinist regime, which is the most America-hating Shiite regime, now facing competition from America-hating Sunni regimes in Egypt and elsewhere. It also fits our cooperation with Turkey's "neo-Ottoman" regime, which has also purged the Turkish army and police to remove modern-minded Turks from power. Egypt and Iran will soon have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. We have therefore followed a single "community disorganizing" policy toward the Muslim world, consisting of betraying moderates to bring theocratic fascists to power. Obama "explained" that policy in a publicized argument with Hillary Clinton at the White House when Mubarak was overthrown. His explanation? Fascist revolutions are "organic," and therefore more stable than moderate revolutions. Obama's fantasy policy runs http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/obama-stonewalls-on-libya-again/2012/10/29/37a8aa00-2210-11e2-ac85-e669876c6a24_blog.html?hpid=z5" rel="nofollow - contrary to U.S. foreign policy since World War I. The biggest loser in this mad administration has been hundreds of millions women of the Muslim world, who were on a path to modernity and freedom until Obama and Hillary Clinton betrayed them. Today they are shut inside the prisons of sharia law. The second-biggest loser has been relative stability in a great geographical swath of the Muslim world, from Afghanistan and Pakistan across the Middle East, all the way to Tunisia and Morocco. The third-biggest loser has been our anti-proliferation policy against the spread of weapons of mass destruction among developing nations. From fighting proliferation, we have turned to aiding it. Those three Horsemen of the Apocalypse are now out of the barn and riding free. In Benghazi, al-Qaeda showed that they could not be bought even by our back-stabbing policy. Our Benghazi arms-smuggling base was attacked by elements of AQIM (al-Qaeda in the Maghreb) in an act of betrayal against our fantasy-driven way of doing things. The American betrayer was itself betrayed, and Obama-Hillary could do nothing to defend the Americans under attack at the Benghazi arms-smuggling base, because any public revelation of the truth would rip the cover off our mad actions and focus the hatred of Muslim nations on the United States. The evidence now shows that Obama was aware of the attack within http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-met-panetta-and-biden-wh-benghazi-terror-attack-unfolded" rel="nofollow - 55 minutes of the start. It lasted for six or seven hours, and Obama consistently countermanded standing orders to protect Americans under attack in the Africom command area. General Ham has now been fired for following http://spectator.org/archives/2012/10/29/benghazigate-chapter-two" rel="nofollow - standard U.S. policy to defend American personnel. He took an honorable stand and was fired. In Syria, the Assad regime now has a legitimate basis to convict us of deadly dabbling in the Syrian civil war. Russia and China are likely to take up Assad's cause at the United Nations. They would be right on the facts. Because the Benghazi attack coincided exactly with the AQ attack on our Cairo Embassy, both on September 11 of this year, this was apparently a central command decision by AQ, presumably ordered by Osama bin Laden's successor, Al Zawahiri, in Pakistan using a video released on the web shortly before those attacks. The message was "al-Qaeda lives!" Everybody who saw the news photos that day got that message. Only Obama is in public denial. Because the Egyptian regime chose not to defend our embassy, we know that Muhammad Morsi was in cahoots with the AQ attack. Host governments always have the first responsibility to defend accredited embassies. Egypt "forgot" to defend us, and that was the message. The purpose of the AQ attacks was to embarrass the United States, and to show us to be a paper tiger, precisely the way Ayatollah Khomeini did to Jimmy Carter. AQ also wanted to tear off the cover of the Benghazi arms-smuggling operation, to make us look like a http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/captain_america_abandons_the_entire_middle_east.html" rel="nofollow - treasonous ally , which, as it turns out, we are. All of our allies around the world, from South Korea and Japan to Israel, Australia, and Norway, must now be reassessing our reliability. One major betrayal of our allies is enough to shatter sixty years of faith in American http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/more-evidence-of-deception/2012/10/17/2a4a26c6-1870-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_blog.html" rel="nofollow - leadership . Here is the evidence as published in the http://blogs.jpost.com/content/benghazi-october-surprise" rel="nofollow - Jerusalem Post , in an interview with retired counterintelligence professional Clare Lopez. The credit for the exposing the U.S. arms-smuggling conspiracy that just capsized goes to http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/22/the-real-reason-behind-benghazigate/" rel="nofollow - Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy (SecureFreedom.org) and other alert conservative columnists around the web." ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Apu
Date Posted: 01 November 2012 at 1:44pm
|
...DOTDOTDOT... Political debates aren't even fun with FE around. No offense FE, just sayin'. ------------- I need a new Sig... |
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 01 November 2012 at 2:36pm
Holy copypasta batman. I'd love to take the time to pick that editorial apart (it's an editorial, not a story) but if you can't find the time to write out your actual thoughts, I'll just copy/paste a response to it myself.  |
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 01 November 2012 at 2:58pm
Its actually "AFRICOM" and it's HQ is in Stuttgart, Germany. Fun fact, AFRICOM just got a new commander. According to the Pentagon ""The speculation that General Carter Ham is departing Africa Command due to events in Benghazi, Libya, on [Sept. 11,] 2012 is absolutely false,” Dempsey said in his statement. “General Ham's departure is part of routine succession planning that has been ongoing since July. He continues to serve in Africom with my complete confidence." This seems rather odd however, considering the a change of command ceremony for a 4-star combatant command is usually a pretty big affair, and that I live here and didn't even know it happened until someone told me after the fact. Those things have always been mandatory attendance for all senior leaders that are available. -------------
|
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 01 November 2012 at 6:56pm
| http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/31/world/meast/syria-sandy-facebook-claim/index.html?hpt=wo_t4" rel="nofollow - This is what we get for electing a weak president. See, even CNN is losing faith since they didn't cover this story up. Obama's have measures have only emboldened Iran and Syria, and ignored their great leaps in technology. Clearly we need to elect Mitt Romney, who will no doubt respond to this devastating attack properly and Nuke those responsible. You were right all along FE, I must concede. |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 01 November 2012 at 7:57pm
nitpicker... And in my defense, my buddy who is usually sent to do things in areas of the dark continent where mines, hippos, ebola monkies, and 12-year-olds high on Khat and toting AKs are prevalent usually just calls AFRICOM "Those S.O.Bs" but without the abbreviation.... He's learned to like two things over there. Riverbeds (because the flash floods sweep away or detonate the AP mines) and the guys in the AC-130's that they try to have on standby. To quote him, "shooting your rifle is only acceptable when you can't put your target designater where you need to and tell those guys to make everything within a 40 yard radius die very violently." Needless to say, he's not to happy when he's over there. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 02 November 2012 at 6:37pm
| http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/01/intelligence-official-offers-new-timeline-for-benghazi-attack/?hpt=hp_t3&hpt=wo_c2" rel="nofollow - FE's Idiotic, arm-chair quarterbacking, unpatriotic questions answered with new timelin e. Now let's wait to see if FOX's "confidential source" wants to reveal himself so he can get the Bradley Manning treatment and the FOX reporters who didn't check their sources can get the Dan Rather treatment. |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 02 November 2012 at 6:45pm
So CNN's unnamed source > FOX's unnamed source? I'll consider them both to be full of **edited** until anyone offers up something with evidence. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 02 November 2012 at 7:55pm
|
Generally I'd take a state department press release over an unnamed source who was supposedly there. Even if this source was in a position to know some of what was being requested, the department putting together a timeline of events has more access to different sources. Unless FOXs source is omniscient....oh, crap. FOX's source is Jesus, that's why they're always right about everything. Sarcasm aside, I want more information and accountability. It's a fairly big deal, but so would bombing another sovereign nation with have diplomatic relations with.
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 02 November 2012 at 9:09pm
|
Well, Petraeus has come out... And pointed the finger RIGHT AT Obama... http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/26/Petraeus-on-Benghazi-It-Wasnt-Me" rel="nofollow - http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/26/Petraeus-on-Benghazi-It-Wasnt-Me Expect "journOlist" members to continue to spin in other directions... As there is an election to win. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 02 November 2012 at 11:05pm
That's because it's not a debate. He's a child with his fingers in his ears. A debate involves logic and actual arguments and points, not just vomiting conspiracy theories that you don't fully understand. |
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 03 November 2012 at 12:25am
If anybody is spinning the available data, it's FOX with armchair quarterbacking about flight times for armed aircraft out of Italy. Then again, I'm arguing with a bloody simpleton who has shown himself unable to even acknowledge counter-arguments, or do anything other than copy/paste opinion pieces and spout random word-salad catch phrases. I've seen more developed arguments and critical thinking skills from 12 year olds. You sir, are a nincompoop.
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 03 November 2012 at 10:17am
| http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/11/02/us/politics/paths-to-the-white-house.html" rel="nofollow - Here's a really neat interactive tree showing the statistical paths to victory for both candidates. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 07 November 2012 at 9:53am
|
I just wanted to bump this to say that Nate Silver was almost completely spot-on with his statistical projections. Never bet against a sabrematician.
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 07 November 2012 at 2:27pm
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |