DiscussMormonism.com

palerobber wrote:
(emphasis added)

oh look, who could have predicted?

It's bordering on cruel for you to bring this thread up now.

I'm thoroughly enjoying re-reading it! I would say that this is a good opportunity for those predicting Obama's loss to explain themselves, but that would be even crueler.

Obama, once again, utilized his "database" of voters

subgenius wrote:Obama, once again, utilized his "database" of voters

I see you believe every whacky anti-obama fact you read. Here is a breakdown of the actual results in Cuyahoga County, Ohio.

Kevin Graham wrote:pjmedia!

Add another to the list of bcspace's cartoonish sources of information!

LOL.

Keving Graham! Debate style: about 97% ad hominem circumstantial well poisoning attacks on sources (under the assumption that if they are conservative sources, they must be, by definition, poor sources, an assumption that one could only agree with if he already accepted implicitly Graham's overall ideology and view of the world) and 3% attempt at substantive counter-argument.

Ironically, the only cartoonish source of information in most of these political debates in this forum is Kevin Graham himself, who has long shown himself unable to distinguish between sources dedicated to spin, propaganda manufacture, and activist boosterism and serious investigative journalism/scholarly sources - from the Right or Left - that subject political ideology and policy prescriptions to serious, critical analysis.

The old truths are still truths: the ad hominem circumstantial is still a fallacy of reasoning because it is logically irrelevant to the substance of any arguments made by any source, and people who use this fallacy, and especially those like Graham, who deploy it as a primary means of circumventing rational counter-argument and evidence-based critique, are not bringing anything of intellectual substance to the table at the outset.

He knows it, and many others know it as well.

Virtually every source BCSpace uses is cartoonish in that it is usually openly misleading and very wrong.

No, you are openly misleading and very wrong, Delusion, not PJMedia. They just have a now well established reputation for blowing gaping holes in leftist illusions and pretensions, as well as exposing the real evil and nefariousness that lies behind very much Democratic party politics and ideology.

Delusion's attack on PJMedia is just the typical secular leftist/militant secularist libertarian attack on the entire concept of conservatism proper, as PJMedia is a clearinghouse-site for op-ed column's and current essays from various sources, just like Townhall.com. Calling it a cartoonish source of knowledge and information is just a broad-brush smear of the entire conservative perspective. I mean, take a look at the roster of dopes, idiots, and undereducated stupes that are published there: Roger Kimball, Victor Davis Hansen, Ron Radosh, Michael Ledeen, Roger L. Simon etc.

Dopes, high school dropouts, learning disabled, confederate flag-waving yahoos all.

It's not that it is conservative or disagrees, but that the source is just bad.

No, it actually isn't, unless of course you would like to adduce an intellectual substantive, logically connected body of argument that it is.

Militant, secular-humanist libertarians and similar people on the Left have always shared some salient characteristics, which is why I'm a conservative, and not a "pure" libertarian.

Brackite wrote:Gallup now has Obama at 48%, and it now has Romney at 46%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150743/Obama-Romney.aspx


Obama will get 47%, 48%, or 49% of the popular vote.
Romney will get 45%, 46%, or 47% of the popular vote.

I was pretty close with my Prediction here. However, I thought that neither Obama or Romney would get over 50% of the Popular vote. I thought also that the third Party Presidential candidates would get more votes than they did. However, Obama did get a little bit over than 50% of the Popular vote.


Presidential Popular Vote Count:

Barack Obama (Democratic) -- 64,497,901 - 50.79%
Mitt Romney (Republican) ---- 60,298,327 - 47.48%

Hancock county went for Romney. As did the county I live in now.

http://freedomslighthouse.net/wp-conten ... 612web.jpg

Reservation counties in SD are very easy to see. The one reservation county in Nebraska is also distinctive.

No, you are openly misleading and very wrong, Delusion, not PJMedia

Of note, the article quoted at the top was born of the brief wave of conservative media attacking polling methods and was completely wrong and misleading in its analysis. In case you've been in a coma since the OP was written, you'll note that reality has made this quite clear. So, case in point.

Jaybear wrote:I see you believe every whacky anti-obama fact you read. Here is a breakdown of the actual results in Cuyahoga County, Ohio.

That graph is a laugable distortion of a more subtle attempt to play with numbers to make it appear voter fraud is afoot when it is not. That subgenius automatically believes it, even though that would require a massive international conspiracy to avoid an avalanche of legal scrutiny, suggests that he'll believe anything that flatters his political preconceptions.

EAllusion wrote:
That graph is a laugable distortion of a more subtle attempt to play with numbers to make it appear voter fraud is afoot when it is not. That subgenius automatically believes it, even though that would require a massive international conspiracy to avoid an avalanche of legal scrutiny, suggests that he'll believe anything that flatters his political preconceptions.

Sad, but true. And it pretty much describes most Republicans I know, and virtually all of them posting on this forum. They'll believe anything. They are the folks that give FOX News so much business.