Dr. Shades wrote:What's this? Are you implying that the Obama campaign would sue a polling firm for the way the people polled answered?
I don't buy it.
You have to be able to read conspiratorial freeper to parse this. The justice department is taking part in a civil lawsuit against gallup for overcharging the government for unrelated polling work.
Okay, thanks. That makes much more sense.
bcspace wrote:They certainly wouldn't put it in those terms. Rather, they would make up something such as taking too long to get results as soon as the polls for Obama started going south in order to send a message.
That sounds like something we shouldn't assume without some hard evidence. So, why do you assume that that's the "real reason" for the lawsuit(s)?
EAllusion, what's your take on that last comment by bcspace?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
mledbetter wrote:That is true, in around mid to late October and Nov. We haven't had the debates yet, and those are the wildcards in this game. We'll just have to see what happe I remember when Kerry was running, and polls where showing him in the lead all the way up until the debates. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry_hth.html
Of course, that could also have been his swift boating.
Your memory is off. Kerry led a little throughout the summer, but had a massive loss of his numbers relative to Bush at the beginning of September. The decline started after being swiftboated, then plummeted at the GOP convention. He was significantly behind until the first debate. Bush looked terrible in that debate, but his convention bounce was fading at that time too. At that point the numbers for Kerry rebounded to a much closer election, though still a minor deficit. That final pattern continued with some slight ebb and flow moments all the way to the end.
So your point that the debates can impact polling numbers a little is correct, but your example to illustrate it is not.