Posted on 09/18/2004 1:58:31 PM PDT by wagglebee
It is funny to go around and read the various Democrat websites today and take a look at some of the news. The Los Angeles Times has a funny editorial from yesterday complaining that Dan Rather was "set up." Who did it? Dan Rather was had! It just keeps going. The story just keeps getting added to. You've got a Houston Chronicle story today on Bill Burkett and you've got a Washington Post story today on Bill Burkett. It's two different people. If you listen, if you read the Washington Post, there's an effort to rehabilitate Bill Burkett and make him out to be a credible source. If you read the Houston Chronicle you get an entirely different picture of Bill Burkett. How can this be, with a media that's interested in getting to the truth?
Then if you go to ABC The Note today, boy their people are in meltdown at ABC's The Note! They just can't believe this. It was a short time ago that they said this was "Kerry's race to lose," meaning the race was all but over; the only thing that could change it is if Kerry blew it. Well Kerry's blowing it, and they're upset about this, and one of the big stories today is the disparity that exists in the polls. You've got Pew and Harris, which have it a one-point race either way, and then you've got USA Today/CNN/Gallup today that has it a -- what is it, a -- excuse me -- 13 point race, 55-42, Bush over Kerry. This is among registered voters, Bush ahead 52-44, but registered is not likely, likely is 55-42, it's a 13-point race. The boost Bush received from the Republican convention has increased rather than dissipated. This poll was taken Monday through Wednesday of this week. "Senator Kerry is like Seabiscuit," says Donna Brazile "He runs better from behind." So you've got all these different polls out there, pretty soon we're going to have some liberal media outlet start talking to us about the margin of error between the polls. Not the margin of error within a poll, but the margin of error between the polls. Al Hunt today in a Wall Street Journal piece "What if the polls are wrong?"
I mean, don't you love this? The polls are all going against their guy, so now all of a sudden there's a piece, "What if the polls are wrong?" He says, "Election surveys that screen out unlikely voters might be outdated." So we gotta start surveying "unlikely voters," if we want an accurate picture of the presidential race. Unlikely voters, that's what needs to change. That's why we're getting these distorted numbers because the pollsters are not sampling the unlikely. They sample registered, they sample likely, but Al Hunt says that's outmoded; it's old-fashioned. We need to go out and survey the people that aren't going to vote and find out what they think so that the polls will tighten. "Presidential elections are poll driven," he said. "The candidate ahead in the survey usually gets better coverage." Really? Would you say that's what's going on here? Let me take a sip here of my beverage. A little tickle in the throat here. Just trying to solve it so I don't erupt into a coughing spasm here borne out by the news that I'm reading.
So is the leader in the polls getting the favorable coverage right now, do you think? Doesn't sound like it to me; doesn't look like it to me. So Al Hunt says, "Well, what if the polls are wrong and we aren't surveying the real likely electorate? This might be more than an academic issue. The number of polls this presidential race show a gap in the preferences of registered voters versus likely voters, and in these models, the president usually does better with likely voters, the figure most news organizations emphasize. To get to likely voters, all polling organizations use what's called a screen asking questions to determine who is likely to actually turnout on Election Day. Now, these screens differently greatly as there's no consensus among experts on what works best."
"'It is an art, not a science,' says Peter Hart the prominent Democratic poll taker who's helped conduct the Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey for 15 years. This controversy will be fueled by today's just released Gallup poll that shows Bush with a 13-point lead over Kerry. This is at variance with other surveys this week which suggest a tight race with a much smaller Bush tilt, that the likely voter margin also is considerably larger than the eight point advantage in Gallup's registered voters in the survey." Excuse me, folks, I've got a frog in my throat. I'm trying not to let it distract me. "The likely voters match up invariably gets more attention," he says. So this, to me, is earth-shattering. This is ground breaking. The lib media has poll results it doesn't like and cannot explain, using their age-old formula. They can't explain how Bush is ahead. They don't understand it. It doesn't make sense. Using their age-old formula, the polls now don't make sense, so all we gotta do, we've got to expand and modernize. We've got to start surveying unlikely voters?
There is a crackup going on out there, ladies and gentlemen. We are witnessing it and we are in the midst of it. I got a great e-mail. I'm just going to go through the stack here today. It's Open Line Friday and whatever you want to talk about, feel free. I got an e-mail from G. Sabeneau who is a subscriber at RushLimbaugh.com (Rush24/7). He says, "Rush, if I recall correctly when the staffer notes at the Senate Judiciary Committee popped up that showed Ted Kennedy and his companions orders to block the appointment of a judge until a case in Wisconsin was heard in order to keep..." I think it was Michigan, "...in order to assure the ruling would go a liberal way, it seems everybody including old Dan Rather pretty much focused on how the memos came about or were leaked rather than focusing on what was in them. Remember that?" I do. That's why I want to read the e-mail to you because this is absolutely right.
There was a computer glitch. They had tried to make the charge that Republican staffers somehow got in there and hacked the Democrat system, turned out that's not what happened. It was just not secure and the memos ended up on Republican computers and they saw them and they saw the Democrat strategy, which is pure politics with judges, just block, block, block, block, block; deny, deny, deny, deny, deny, and, of course, the media and everybody, "How did the Republicans get those!" The substance, the contents of the memo didn't matter. Now with the CBS story and these forged documents, these forged memos, of course that's been blown to hell. Now not only do we not care how we got them, we don't care that they're forgeries. "They're still true!" Now, I'm telling you, folks, this is a crackup, and if you want to know why Bush is up 13 points in a Gallup poll in the midst of all this I can tell you.
A lot of this has to do with CBS. A lot of this has to do with Dan Rather, who's not helping Kerry at all with this, but most of it has to do with Kerry himself. He's all over the ballpark. It seems somebody has gotten hold of this campaign. I just saw Kerry making a speech and he launched. It was Howard Dean-esque. It is right out of Michael Moore's movie. Now all of a sudden Dick Cheney and Halliburton are central themes of the Kerry campaign. Cheney gets a pension from Halliburton since he worked there, and that pension it's going to total $2 million. Kerry is out there saying that he's still on the Halliburton payroll and Halliburton got a no-bid contract in Iraq. Somebody go check how many no-bid contracts Halliburton got during the Clinton years and you'll find it's quite a few, because there's nobody that does what Halliburton does. There's nobody else that does it. So they're back now trying to link Cheney to Halliburton.
I mean, this is the kook conspiratorial stuff that we heard throughout their primary campaign, was one of the reasons we thought Howard Dean was finally vanquished because they got hold of themselves, but it is pure panic time. It's now go back to the primaries and we gotta get this base revved up and one of the things we've learned is that Kerry has two elements of his base, and that's why no matter what he says he angers half the base. Half the base is so-called old reasonable Democrats, and they don't hate the military. The other half of the base hates the military, hates America, hates Bush, hates the world -- except for France and Germany. So Kerry's got to try to play to both of them, so today he chose to go out and appease the kooks in his base by bringing up Cheney and Halliburton again, and then trying to say that American parents had to buy their own body armor for troops when they were sent over to Iraq because Bush didn't spend enough money there.
I thought last week Bush was spending too much money in Iraq and not enough on education here at home and after-school programs. By the way, we spend $1 billion a year on after-school programs in America, and apparently, I think what the Kerry campaign is doing, folks, is simply throwing out trial balloons. They tried this business of, "We're wasting money in Iraq. We shouldn't be there." That didn't fly. Now they're going back to the tried and true, the Michael Moore model. They're going back to Cheney and Halliburton. It's just fun to watch. This is a crackup taking place, and when you see some of the stories today that describe the internals of the Kerry campaign and who's running the show and who's not, who's mad at who, it's exactly what I predicted on this program.
Or handguns . . .
This will be a clear indicator to them that we need MORE campaign finance reform to stop the LOOPHOLES expposed by those dastardly Swift Boat Ads. Democrats: Missing the point as usual.
a horse walks into a bar,
bartender says, why the long face?
The poor Dems are wondering when Kerry will get his dog and pony show on the road.
So Kerry's campaign people take a guy with a horse's face, who acts like a horse's ass, a famous horse's name?
Why do I see hilarious cartoons in our future?
I think it is going to be close.
EVERYBODY get out and vote!
Those nitwits live in dream land.
Yes, a nightmare.
I'm wondering why my screen name is on the header, can anyone help?
That'll be true no matter who wins. If it should be Kerry, I plan on spending at least the next four years in bed with the covers over my head.
I can't wait to see whether one of my liberal friends actually keeps his word and moves to Canada. (Not because I want to be rid of him, but because he made such a big ruckus over W. winning again.)
Hmmmmm.......
I'll look into that for you.....
Welcome to FR
(
Because Seabiscuit is the term that the Maha Rushie used!
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_091704/content/john_f_kerry_stack_2.member.html
BS!!!! As a horse lover who loves the story of Seabiscuit, I find that to be highly insulting and laughable. Call him the 'comeback kid', I don't give a crap if you compare him to Clinton, just leave Seabiscuit out of it.
I have some business acquaintances in Canada (the midwest provinces are fairly conservative). If your friends do go, they will quickly find out the how huge a failure socialism really is.
E-mail: Rush@eibnet.com, it's his story.
Thanks, much appreciated.
I feel embarassed (I'm new) and have a feeling that I may have caused it myself. Was browsing my reply list and may have hit the ping button by mistake? (yup, better keep me away from the red button) ;)
Where can I find info on the function of the ping button?
Thanks again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.