BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen...

Full story: Chicago Tribune

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama 's U.S. citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some opponents of Obama's ...

Comments (Page 4,403)

Showing posts 88,041 - 88,060 of167,602
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98917
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

2010
Typo. Didn't have my coffee yet.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98919
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Case is point is you didn't understand.
Right.....DAB
Grand Birther

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98920
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mitt Romney won't endorse the Ryan Plan.

Paul Ryan hates Romneycare.

This should go well.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98921
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

wojar wrote:
2010
Typo. Didn't have my coffee yet.
So typical.....blame the coffee!!! LMAO
Grand Birther

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98922
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
These idiot Libtards like Poopo, Wojo, Jacques throws out some cooked-book data from a despicable source and then then have the gall to slam our sources. And what is really sad is they actually believe that crappola too.
When the data are demonstrably true and accurate, is it still "cooking the books?"

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98923
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Now I have never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the draw and many of you on the left are smarter than I am. Yes, I have more knowledge on some subjects like aviation but I am no legal eagle.
But I have something most of you Libtards don't have and that is old fashion commonsense. Yes, I call it "CQ" for Commonsense Quotient. I have known a lot of very educated people who can not function outside of academia and I call those people "academic idiots".
In Hawaii in the mid-1970's I flew Medivac helicopters in the Army and one of our "No Fly" zones was a dairy farm on the north shore of Oahu. Well, one night I got bounced for a head-on car collision right in front of that Dairy Farm and the Firemen marked my landing zone on the inside of the fence at the dairy farm. I landed and picked up the two patients and transported them to Queens Hospital downtown Honolulu.
The next morning we got a complaint. Not from the dairy farm but from a housing area adjacent to the farm. The man said he was soooo scared that I would crash into his house that he and his wife ran outside and she gashed her leg while climbing over the fence.
Oh, they did file a claim against the government and I have no idea what became of it but no one said I did anything that was wrong. Oh, the guy was a .... professor of philosophy at the University of Hawaii. Yep, a for real intellectual idiot!!!
Oh, I have over 7,000 hours accident free!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98924
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
These idiot Libtards like Poopo, Wojo, Jacques throws out some cooked-book data from a despicable source and then then have the gall to slam our sources. And what is really sad is they actually believe that crappola too.
Grand Birther wrote:
<quoted text>
When the data are demonstrably true and accurate, is it still "cooking the books?"
Well Tootsie, comparing apples to oranges only fools Libtards like you. And if you CQ is below 90, you ARE a Libtard!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98925
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Oh, Nate Silver's hit piece on Rasmussen is dated November 4, 2010, and I have shot down Wojo time after time and he still will not accept the facts.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010...
Denial is not a river in Africa!
That's right, Rougie, November 4, 2010.

Does Rougie understand what happened on November 2, 2010? And does he understand how badly Rasmussen performed in comparison to reputable polling firms when the election results were in.

In the final three weeks prior to the November 2010 elections, Rasmussen's accuracy was at the bottom, with 5.8% error.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98927
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
And FiveThirtyEight is a left-wing political hack with an agenda. And just as you Libtards hate Fox News you also hate Rasmussen as the truth hurts, doesn't it!!!
Well, believe what you want but the Democrat Pity Party will be on the Golden Gate Bridge on November 7th and you will be jumping off into the abyss.
Hey, Rougie the Prophet, what ever happened to all those subpoenae that were going to be issued after November 2, 2010?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98928
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Oh, every now and then Fox News will ask they watchers to call in and give their opinions. Yes, Rasmussen doe these but will not allow Fox News to site them for any thing other than the opinions of their watchers.
Since I have a high CQ I know that they are worthless as the looney-tooney-lefties never watch Fox News so they never know when to call in. But you know what? Other polling companies also do push polls for customers and again they do not claim they are anything other than worthless push polls.
But in Nate Silver's article,
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010... collegesRogue Scholar 05 wrote:These idiot Libtards like Poopo, Wojo, Jacques throws out some cooked-book data from a despicable source and then then have the gall to slam our sources. And what is really sad is they actually believe that crappola too.biased-and-inaccurate-quin nipiac-surveyusa-performed-str ongly/
Has only one source, Rasmussen, which includes data from push polls. And Nate covers his butt but annotating that buy the double asterix and the foot note about Fox News.
Why does Nate not also add the push poll data to the OTHER polling companies? Why then it would show that Rasmussen is still the most accurate.
Grand Birther

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98929
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
These idiot Libtards like Poopo, Wojo, Jacques throws out some cooked-book data from a despicable source and then then have the gall to slam our sources. And what is really sad is they actually believe that crappola too.
<quoted text>
Well Tootsie, comparing apples to oranges only fools Libtards like you. And if you CQ is below 90, you ARE a Libtard!
LOL

538: Here are true and accurate reasons why Rasmussen's polls are biased and were wrong by a huge margin

Rogue Moron: BLAH BLAH APPLES. AND ORANGES! I HAVE COMMON SENSE.

Me: Bwahhhh ha ha ha ha ha!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98930
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
These idiot Libtards like Poopo, Wojo, Jacques throws out some cooked-book data from a despicable source and then then have the gall to slam our sources. And what is really sad is they actually believe that crappola too.
Huh? Cooked book data?

538 compared data from polls conducted in the last three weeks to actual results of the election in November 2010. Rasmussen effed up -- at the bottom.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98931
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
That's right, Rougie, November 4, 2010.
Does Rougie understand what happened on November 2, 2010? And does he understand how badly Rasmussen performed in comparison to reputable polling firms when the election results were in.
In the final three weeks prior to the November 2010 elections, Rasmussen's accuracy was at the bottom, with 5.8% error.
Hey idiotard, if Nate had removed the push poll data from Rasmussen, like he did for all the other polling companies, Rasmussen would be on top!!! And you are so stupid to know it!!!
From Wiki:
Elections--Presidential

2000
Progressive Review conducted a review of polling accuracy in the 2000 presidential primaries. The review ranked Rasmussen Research number one in accuracy. Rasmussen's prediction for the 2000 presidential election was off by 4.5%, compared to the average 1.1% margin of error most other national polls gave at the time.

2004
In the 2004 presidential election, "Rasmussen...beat most of their human competitors in the battleground states, often by large margins," according to Slate magazine. Rasmussen projected the 2004 presidential results within one percentage point of the actual vote totals earned by both George W. Bush and John Kerry.

In 2004, Slate said they “publicly doubted and privately derided Rasmussen” polls because of the methodology. However, after the election, they concluded that Rasmussen’s polls were the most accurate.

2008
According to Politico, "Rasmussen’s final poll of the 2008 general election — showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent — closely mirrored the election’s outcome." In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there."
Yep, but the Libtards will believe a looney-tooney-lefty like Nate Silver before thy believe any main stream source.
Yep, only far left papers like the New York Times will carry Nate's opinion pieces.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98932
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Yep, Nate Silver exposed for the looney-tooney-lefty bigot he is!!!
Criticism--Nate Silver
In 2010, Nate Silver of the New York Times blog FiveThirtyEight wrote the article “Is Rasmussen Reports biased?”, in which he mostly defended Rasmussen from allegations of bias. However, by later in the year, Rasmussen's polling results diverged notably from other mainstream pollsters, which Silver labeled a "house effect". He went on to explore other factors which may have explained the effect such as the use of a likely voter model, and claimed that Rasmussen conducted its polls in a way that excluded the majority of the population from answering. Silver also criticized Rasmussen for often only polling races months before the election, which prevented them from having polls just before the election that could be assessed for accuracy. He wrote that he was “looking at appropriate ways to punish pollsters” like Rasmussen in his pollster rating models who don’t poll in the final days before an election. In June 2012, Silver wrote that "Rasmussen Reports, which has had Republican-leaning results in the past, does so again this year. However, the tendency is not very strong – a Republican lean of about 1.3 points."

After the 2010 midterm elections, Silver concluded that Rasmussen's polls were the least accurate of the major pollsters in 2010, having an average error of 5.8 points and a pro-Republican bias of 3.9 points according to Silver's model. He singled out as an example the Hawaii Senate race, in which Rasmussen, in a poll completed three weeks before the election, showed incumbent Daniel Inouye only 13 points ahead, whereas in actuality he won by a 53% margin – a difference of 40 points from Rasmussen's poll, or "the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998". Silver named Quinnipiac University Poll as the most accurate poll of the election cycle. However, according to RealClearPolitics, in toss-up races where both Rasmussen Reports and Quinnipiac polled, the Rasmussen Reports final poll was closer to the mark in every race. The two firms projected the same candidate to win every race but the Florida gubernatorial race, where Rasmussen correctly projected Rick Scott's victory, while Quinnipiac showed Alex Sink with the lead.
]

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98933
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Oh, every now and then Fox News will ask they watchers to call in and give their opinions. Yes, Rasmussen doe these but will not allow Fox News to site them for any thing other than the opinions of their watchers.
Since I have a high CQ I know that they are worthless as the looney-tooney-lefties never watch Fox News so they never know when to call in. But you know what? Other polling companies also do push polls for customers and again they do not claim they are anything other than worthless push polls.
But in Nate Silver's article,
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010... collegesRogue Scholar 05 wrote:These idiot Libtards like Poopo, Wojo, Jacques throws out some cooked-book data from a despicable source and then then have the gall to slam our sources. And what is really sad is they actually believe that crappola too.biased-and-inaccurate-quin nipiac-surveyusa-performed-str ongly/
Has only one source, Rasmussen, which includes data from push polls. And Nate covers his butt but annotating that buy the double asterix and the foot note about Fox News.
Why does Nate not also add the push poll data to the OTHER polling companies? Why then it would show that Rasmussen is still the most accurate.
Why does Rougie ASSUME that Pulse Opinion Research push polls were included? Answer: because it's a false STRAW MAN and Rougie is trying to deny he shot himself in the foot again.
Grand Birther

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98934
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Lol, Barack Obama has 14 years experience working for private sector companies.

Paul Ryan once worked briefly for his family's company and McDonalds.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98935
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Oh, every now and then Fox News will ask they watchers to call in and give their opinions. Yes, Rasmussen doe these but will not allow Fox News to site them for any thing other than the opinions of their watchers.[Sorry, Bozo, these were not included.]

And what is really sad is they actually believe that crappola too.biased-and-inaccurate-quin nipiac-surveyusa-performed-str ongly/
3.3% error in the 21 polls conducted by Quinnipiac in the final three weeks before the 2010 elections put them at the top of the list. FACT.

Grand Birther

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98936
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Paul Ryan is such a champion of freemarkets and the private sector that he's worked in the government almost his entire adult life.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98937
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I know, I know, You Libtards claim that Nate Silver is neutral but he is very Liberal and yet in this article written in Jan. 3, 2010 Nate says the opposite of what he claimed ten months later on Nov. 4, 2010. Was Nate Silver wrong on Jan. 3 but right on Nov. 4? Or was he pushed by Media Matters into changing his opinion? When Nate did that he moved from left of center to become a Loon-Tooney Progressive.
Yep, Nate was for Rasmussen before he was against Rasmussen.

"None of the critics have any substantive complaints about Rasmussen’s methodology. The entire article, fueled mainly by complaints from left-wing apologist Media Matters, consists of gripes about the results of Rasmussen polling. Isenstadt notes that liberal pollster Nate Silver gave Rasmussen the nod as the third-most accurate pollster in predicting outcomes of elections. They beat most of the pollsters in 2009&#8242;s New Jersey gubernatorial election, for instance, and have a long track record of highly accurate predictions."
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/03/dems-de...

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98938
Aug 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

"Rasmussen Reports has rarely provided substantive responses to criticisms about its methodology. At one point, Scott Rasmussen, president of the company, suggested that the differences it showed were due to its use of a likely voter model. A FiveThirtyEight analysis, however, revealed that its bias was at least as strong in polls conducted among all adults, before any model of voting likelihood had been applied."

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 88,041 - 88,060 of167,602
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••