Monday, November 5, 2012

"Oh I'm Sorry.....
You've Maxed Out Your
RACE CARD........
YOU LOSER!
HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!"

Twitter Rant. Start at the bottom, read your way up! 


How I See The 
Electoral College
Playing Out Tomorrow 

Click on map to see larger version.

Friday, November 2, 2012

Anybody Else Remember How 
In 2008 The 
Democratic-Media-Complex
Seemingly Couldn't Stop Itself 
From Gushing Over The SIZE 
Of  The Crowds Obama Was 
Drawing & Comparing 
Them To McCain's?

Whatever happened to that? Anybody know?  


Anybody know why this DMC/MSM dog isn't barking about crowd sizes any more? 

If so, feel free to comment.  

UPDATE! Gateway Pundit has the  numbers. Crowd for Romney rally tonight was around 30,000. Meanwhile Obama's biggest crowd of the day was....4,000 in Springfield, OH:


In fact, Obama drew 2,800 and 3,800 at 2 other rallies today giving him a one day total of....10,600 (est.).  Or less than half of what Romney drew to this one rally tonight.  

UPDATE II: Now that the final GOTV in the swing states is underway, Obama For America had an event today in Cleveland Ohio with Stevie Wonder that drew........200 people.  
"I Just Called To Say Where Are You?"


Of course, OFA Ohio had an excuse when the local reporter asked why so few people turned out: 

They claim they only notified people 30 minutes before hand this event was being held.  As someone who's been involved in GOTV efforts, this is beyond epic fail.   Either the campaign botched this badly, or they are trying to pass off a REMINDER sent out over Twitter as the 1st time anyone was supposed to know about this event.  

You don't set up a Get-Out-The-Vote event with a celebrity and then wait until 30 minutes before to let the public know about it BY SENDING OUT A SINGLE MESSAGE ON TWITTER.  The report makes it clear many of these people were drawn by the sound of the live music.  

UPDATE III: More on those rally numbers from yesterday from the key battleground state of Ohio, where both campaigns are in a final last pitch attempt at Get Out The Vote efforts: 

Romney drew 30,000 to his rally last night: 


If you watched the rally live on CSPAN it was amazing.  CSPAN then showed Obama's own rally that night, also being held  in Ohio where he drew........2,800.  



Note this little bit of sophistry by the Dispatch reporter: Obama spoke to 2,800 supporters at the Franklin County Fairgrounds, while that loser Mitt Romney only managed to draw a crowd of 2,000 to his 'rally' that wasn't even a rally, it was an event held inside a factory.  

Nowhere in the article does the reporter admit while Obama was having his GOTV night time rally at the Fairgrounds with less than 3,000 people Romney was finishing up addressing 30,000 people in a county far less populous than the one Obama was in. 



UPDATE IV: Now the MSM is back to just inventing crowd numbers for Obama: 


Yep. Reporting a crowd of 'over 20,000' in an arena that seats 12,580. 
You Know What The Most
Amazing Thing About The 
Benghazi Cover Up Is?
That The White House Even
Tried It.

Twitter Rant from this morning.  Start at the bottom and read upwards!

Quick correction: I got one basic fact wrong during my impromptu rant: The drilling ban was supposed to last only 6 months, not 5 years.  

Monday, October 29, 2012

You Know It's Over When
Even Fantasy Polling Doesn't 
Give Obama A Greater Than
A One Point Lead At This Stage

Plenty of pollsters are still using a 2008 turnout model in their weighting of their poll results of D+7.

The results the DMC is now getting to their D+7 fantasy polling must be terrifying them.  

Here's what today's Real Clear Politics National polling of the Presidential race looks like today on Oct 29:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html



First, let's ignore all the polls that give Romney the lead for now and just look at the polls saying Obama has a 1 point lead or a tie at this stage with about 9 days to go.  All the post-third Presidential debate polls are from the 21st onward, so let's look at those.  

First up: the   IBD/TIPP poll taken from Oct 22nd to the 27th that found a 1 point lead for Obama: 



IBD/TIPP doesn't play games like many pollsters do and force you to do the math to figure out what their partisan split was.  CBS does that all the time.  IBD/TIPP shows they polled 7% more Democrats than Republicans for this poll and got a one point Obama lead, well within their margin of error of +/- 3.5%.

So. D+7 turnout predicted, a slim one point Obama lead.  On we go! 

Next is the Politico/GWU/Battleground poll taken from Oct. 22nd to the 25th that also found a one point lead for Barack Obama. 



Politico/GWU/BG  is a Reg. Voter survey that plays the cute game of never telling you exactly how their sample was weighted, they just give you the results.  Here it's 35% Democrat [43% with leaners] and 31% Republican [41% with leaners].  So that's a D+4 without leaners and a D+2 with.  Not too bad and pretty damn far from the D+7 or > fantasy polling we've seen for much of this year.  

So D+4 here gets Obama a 1 point lead.  

Next up is ABC News/Washington Post, a poll which was done from Oct. 25 to Oct. 28.  


UPDATE!!!! While I was making this post, from the time I took the screenshot of the RCP national poll results an hour ago, ABC News/WaPo has been changed from a one point Romney lead to a TIE.  It now looks like this: 


Here's the partisan split for that poll: 

Among likely voters that's a D+7 advantage.  And as I noted above, a while ago this poll claimed a one point Romney lead and now has changed that to a tie.  They must have adjusted the results. 

And finally: Pew Research's poll taken from Oct. 24-28, which also claims the race is currently a tie: 


Since they got caught putting out a D+19 poll in early August, Pew has changed how they reveal their sample and how they weight it.  In this latest poll they show you their unweighted sample size and composition, and then simply never get around to telling you if they weighted the results and if so, how.  570 R's and 560 D's is an almost 50/50 partisan split, but WITHOUT knowing how they weighted this poll, claiming a tie doesn't really tell us anything.  

OK those are the polls claiming Obama has a lead or a tie with Romney at the moment. 

All based on either a weighting of D+7 or hiding their weighting from the readers.  

Takeaway point: Even with D+7 fantasy polling they can't drag Obama higher than a tie or a 1 point lead.  

And their BS fantasy polling was always that: BS fantasy polling.  

With Republican voter ID now leading Democrats by one point 36/35 according to Gallup, and Republican voter enthusiasm higher than that of Democrats by over 10 pts, we're looking at a R+ turnout this election. 




The poll of 1,446 adults, taken Monday through Thursday, has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.
Republicans have opened a big enthusiasm gap: 64% say they are more enthusiastic than usual about voting, compared to 48% of Democrats. 

So what about all those polls out there still plaintively trying to sell their 2008 turnout model of D+7?  

I feel sorry for them.  Almost.  

Here's what happens to their D+7 fantasy weighting of their polls if this is indeed a R+1 or greater turnout this election.  

That IBD/TIPP poll that finds Obama holding a 1 pt lead? Here's what that would look like with R+1 turnout on Nov. 6: 

D+7 = 1 pt Obama lead
D+6 = TIE
D+5 = 1 pt Romney lead
D+4 = 2 pt Romney lead
D+3 = 3 pt Romney lead
D+2 = 4 pt Romney lead
D+1 = 5 pt Romney lead
D+0/R+0 = 6 pt Romney lead
R+1 = 7 pt Romney lead. 

Oh hey look, I'm where Gallup has had Romney for more than 2 weeks, with a +/- 3.5 pt margin of error:  Somewhere between a 4 pt and a 7 pt lead over Obama.  

The DMC knows if this turnout on Nov. 6 isn't AT LEAST D+5 Obama is toast.  Their OWN POLLS ARE TELLING THEM THIS.  A D+5 or greater turnout for Democrats predicted and they STILL can't get Obama above a 1 pt lead or a tie with Romney.  

But watch Liberals across the fruited plain sail on in blissful unawareness, still thinking Obama's got this in the bag somehow when he's actually trailing right now by 4 points or more.  

Obama must have it in the bag somehow because NATE SILVER SAYS SO! 



My prediction for months has been a turnout on Nov. 6 between R+1 and R+3 and I'm sticking with it.  

Saturday, October 27, 2012


Tyrone Woods & Glenn Doherty 
Refused To Stand Down.
Now We Need To Know 
Who Ordered Them To 
Then Refused To Send Them Help


Turns out Tyrone Woods & Glenn Doherty were even bigger heroes than we knew.

Yeah sure, they rushed from the CIA safe house to the Consulate and evacuated a buncha trapped Americans and led them to safety. Sure. Everybody knew that part for the past month and a half.

But now it turns out they had to DISOBEY A DIRECT ORDER to do that.

They were told to stand down and stay right where they were. And as they continued to hear the consulate come under fire, they finally said F**k this! and went came to the aid of those trapped in our consulate anyway.

Who knows how many more Americans would have died if they hadn't disobeyed their order to stand down?

During the second half of this 7 hour attack, after they escorted the people they rescued to the safe house, when the CIA safe house came under fire, they requested help. And were turned down again. Doherty and Woods were manning a machine gun on the roof of the safe house when a mortar round took their lives roughly 7 hours after the first shots were fired. Everyone in the building then fled and raced for Tripoli. They all made it.

Thanks to the heroes that gave their lives.


Here's Obama yesterday TWICE dodging the question when directly asked: why during this 7 hour long ordeal was no help sent to these trapped Americans? You had forces that could have been there in an hour. Why was nothing sent?



http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/president-obama-begs-off-answering-whether-americans-in-benghazi-were-denied-requests-for-help/

In light of the fact it's now common knowledge the last 4 hours or so of the attack on the consulate and the annex were watched LIVE via an overhead drone, the question why no help was sent is only growing.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_LIBYA_SURVEILLANCE_VIDEO?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-10-26-20-18-22

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-33816_162-57536611/could-u.s-military-have-helped-during-libya-attack/

CBS News has been told that, hours after the attack began, an unmanned Predator drone was sent over the U.S. mission in Benghazi, and that the drone and other reconnaissance aircraft apparently observed the final hours of the protracted battle.

This goes beyond the 'We said it was a terror act on day 1! No wait, now we'll say for 2 weeks it was a YouTube video! Hold on! Terror attack after all!' sideshow circus the White House played the last month.

The issue is boiling down to:

1) What possible reason was there for stripping security from these isolated personnel deep in the heart of Al-Qaeda land in the face of a deteriorating security situation and

2) What possible reason was there for leaving our own people trapped and isolated out there once a full scale assault on them began? An assault that lasts over 7 hours where they had a live video feed showing them exactly how bad it was? 



Watergate was about a conspiracy to bug a phone at the DNC and Nixon likely didn't even know about it beforehand. But he joined a conspiracy to cover it up. 



This was a terrorist attack on US soil that killed 4 Americans and we're goddamn lucky it wasn't a full scale massacre with victims in the upper 20's/low 30's. It defies reason these guys didn't ask for help during a 7 hour attack. So NOBODY dares go on the record & say "We didn't send them any help because they never asked for any." That's why CIA, State Dept., White House are currently playing the denial game: "Hey, WE didn't turn down any requests for help. Must've been somebody else."

But it's on the record: nobody sent anything to them when it mattered, when they were in mortal danger. The Marine FAST team didn't arrive until the next morning, 12 hours after the attack started and about 5 hours too late. 




Who decided to sit on their ass and just watch it unfold? Better question: Who made EVERYBODY ELSE sit on their ass and just watch it unfold?  Eventually we're going to find out.   People are going to talk.  

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

It's November 7th &
Progressives In America
Are Walking Around Going
"WHAT THE F**K 
JUST HAPPENED??!!"

Allow me to explain it all for you.  

Starting in March when it was clear Romney was going to be the Republican nominee, Democratic-Media Complex pollsters [DMC] started weighting their polls to fit a 2008 Presidential election turnout model.  This was a HUGE mistake, and allow me to explain why.  

As I have explained before, 2008 was a very historic election.  With Democratic voting enthusiasm very high [over 60%, in fact] and Republican enthusiasm extremely low [around 35% according to Gallup] the Democratic party managed a huge turnout advantage of a whopping 7 points.  Often shorthanded to 'D+7'.  

The Democrats turned out for that election - including many new 1st time voters, while millions of Republicans stayed home.  The usual turnout advantage is around 3-4 pts, so +7 was pretty damn high.  

John McCain ran a terrible campaign.  The only breath of life it ever got was when he picked Sarah Palin to be his running mate, and then he quickly squandered that by suspending his campaign to return to Washington when the financial crisis hit.  McCain was a long-time Washington insider trying to get voters to buy the idea he could reform the way Washington does business.  Many Republicans simply didn't buy this, and so on the day of the election didn't bother to go vote.  

This is why Barack Obama's margin of victory over McCain also exactly matches the Democrats turnout advantage - 7 points.  

But now that Barack Obama & the Democratic Party were completely in control of Washington, American voters got a real, long, GOOD look at what the Democrats would do with that kind of unchecked power, where they wanted to take the country.  

In the 2010 mid-term elections, the American voting public returned it's verdict on the Democrats agenda and the way they had governed for the previous 2 year period: a gargantuan landslide victory for the Republican Party.  The message to Democrats SHOULD have been clear:  we don't like what you are doing, so here's a sh*tload of new Republicans in Congress to put the brakes on your agenda.  

The most important point about that 2010 mid-term election though, is that NEITHER side had a turnout advantage that time.  Instead of the +7 turnout advantage they enjoyed in 2008, in 2010 Democrats ended up TIED with Republicans in the turnout for the election: an exactly even 35% to 35%.  Advantage = +0

What did a TIED turnout election deliver?  Anyone remember?  Liberals/Progressives/Whatever The F**k They're Calling Themselves This Week so quickly flushed 2010 down the memory hole, it'll be good to remember: 



Note how you see almost no light blue on those maps. The Democratic Party lost A LOT of ground in 2010.  

So.......did they learn anything from the stinging rebuke the voters delivered? 

Not at all.  

Obama & Co. didn't change course at all. They kept right on doing the same stuff they were doing the 1st two years of his term.  

So here we are, just 2 years on from that huge bitch-slap of a 2010 mid-term, and MSM pollsters have insisted all year on using a 2008 turnout model for their polls.  Heck, some of them took flights of fancy into deep outer space and actually posited DOUBLE DIGIT Democratic turnout advantages this year.  

Remember, D+7 was HISTORIC.  Pollsters have been claiming all year that the Democratic Party will not just MATCH it's 2008 turnout....they've been claiming they are going to EXCEED it. 

As I've said before, they are just fooling themselves if they think the Tea Party and the millions of Americans that sent an unmistakably strong message to Washington in 2010 just up and changed their minds or something.   

When the election is over and I have time, it'll be fun to go back through the Real Clear Politics Poll history page and see just how many MSM pollsters claimed  to see a D+10 or > in their national polls.  



This chart was made in mid-September to show what the pollsters were doing.  How many of them were saying they were seeing numbers that indicated Democrats would match or exceed their D+7 turnout in 2008?  6 of them were: 

Pew D+7 = 8 pts Obama lead
Reason D+8 = 7 pt Obama lead
Hartford D+8 = 3 pt Obama lead
Ipsos/Reuters D+10 = 5 pt Obama lead
ABC News/WaPo D+10 = 1 pt Obama lead
Dem. Corps D+11 = 5 pt Obama lead

That's just a snapshot of a 2 week polling period in September.  Half the pollsters  claimed to see a 'match 2008 or exceed it' result in their numbers.  

Now back in the spring/summer, consistently polling with a 2008 turnout model was getting Obama big leads.  DMC pollsters wanted to establish early that this wouldn't be any sort of a contest at all. Weighting their polls by a 2008 turnout model and then figuring in the extra 3-4 point advantage an incumbent President has, many of them were seeing Obama leads at 7 pts or greater.  

The narrative they wanted to set by the end of the DNC/RNC conventions was that Romney was so far behind, he would NEVER catch up, so most Americans would tune out the race.  Obama was supposed to be launched out of that DNC like a V-2 Rocket, build his lead, and by the time the debates were over, he was to have clinched the deal and left Romney behind in his dust.  

That's not how it happened.  

Much to the DMC's horror, as summer turned into fall, instead of BUILDING the big lead they started him out with in their polls, OBAMA STARTED SLIDING BACKWARDS. 

Instead of leaving Mitt Romney behind, Obama stalled and Romney started catching him.  

Think of a faulty plane altimeter.  It's 500 feet off, so when you are flying at only 500 feet, you think you are 1,000 feet off the ground.  This is the kind of advantage the DMC pollsters gave Obama right off the bat.  They simply threw out the 2010 election as some kinda anomaly and are trying to recreate 2008.  The actual turnout isn't going to be anywhere NEAR the D+7 or > they've been claiming all year. 

By the time they had to ease back the poll weighting to something approaching reality, Obama was supposed to be so far ahead, it wouldn't matter.  But Obama couldn't seal the deal. He's run a terrible campaign and he can't gain any new support to replace the voters who abandoned him long ago.  

10% of Republicans crossed over to vote for Obama in 2008.  He also got the Independent vote by a 55% margin.  He won't get anywhere near that this time around.  Maybe 2% of the Republican vote IF he's lucky, and he currently trails Mitt with Indies by double digits.  That's around 20 points he had to make up just to get back where he was in 2008.  

So here we are in the final 2 weeks before the election, and now the pollsters are being forced to re-weight their polls and drop the absurd D+7 or greater weighting they've been using.  Their credibility as pollsters hinges on getting that LAST POLL just before the election is held as close as possible to the actual results.  

Which is why the next two weeks any of the pollsters that haven't abandoned D+7 turnout models already will start to do so.  

Let's take a look at today's IBD/TIPP poll, a good example of a pollster still sticking to a D+7 at this late date: 

http://news.investors.com/special-report/508415-ibdtipp-poll.aspx

This poll finds Obama up by 3 pts.  With a D+7 turnout advantage.  

That's pretty much where all the pollsters sticking with a D+7 or > are at right now, Obama either tied or leading by 1-3 pts, inside the Margin of Error [MOE]

But as I've noted before, this ISN'T going to be a D+ turnout election.  It's going to be a R+ turnout election.  What if you take a D+7 poll giving Obama a +3 pt lead on Romney and re-weight it to a R+1? 

D+7 = 3pt Obama
D+6 = 2 pt Obama
D+5 = 1 pt Obama
D+4 = TIE 
D+3 = 1 pt Romney
D+2 = 2 pt Romney
D+1 = 3 pt Romney
0     =  4 pt Romney
R+1 = 5 pt Romney

Oh hey, you'd end up with a Romney lead greater than the MOE.  WHICH IS EXACTLY WHERE GALLUP AND RASMUSSEN ARE NOW.  A Romney lead between 4-7 pts the past week and a half.  

According to THEIR OWN POLLS, the DMC knows if this election isn't D+4 or >, Obama is gonna LOSE.  All the movement is to Romney; they can still use their fantasy weighting of their polls to keep Obama in the lead, but they CAN'T hide the direction the election is moving in.  

Their own polling says Democrats could still 'win' the turnout advantage by +3 and it's still not going to get Obama re-elected.  They have to have D+4 or greater to get Obama a shot.  

It won't happen.  November 7th the numbers will be crunched and Progressives across the fruited plain are going to want to know why after being confidently told for months they were going to bury the Republicans at the ballot box, HOW COULD THIS POSSIBLY HAPPEN? 

Because the people you trust for your news serve you ill.  Whether it be the Old DMC of ABCNBCCBSCNNMSNBCNYT or the new DMC of HuffPo, Daily Kos, DU, Politico, etc.  Their own hubris in declaring the Tea Party dead and then having a total media blackout like that would somehow keep it from having any effect on this election, and then engaging in fantasy polling for more than half a year is just going to end up biting them on the ass. 

Hard.  

Gonna be fun to watch the aftermath.