Posted on 12/23/2012 5:30:03 AM PST by IbJensen
Worse, a small group that always responds 100% of the time can seem to be 11 X as influential, and their opinion will show up as being far more widely held.
This last year Gallup Poll was asking everyone's sexual preference. The gays made sure they answered that one so they provided a nearly 100% response rate.
Gay folks, if no one else, understood quite well that it was Romney, not Obama, who was their big buddy ~ which had Romney leading Obama by about 3.0% just about the whole campaign ~ in reality their real field strength was about .35% ~ which meant Romney was behind Obama the entire campaign.
The pollsters who reported Obama in the lead had figured out early what that Gay factor built into Gallup meant ~ and backed it right out of the pocket!
So you want to reconcile the differences with a massive nationwide conspiracy?
I've never seen a Gallup polling report in which a gay demographic was included.
And I see no reason why gays would be responding to a poll nearly 100% of the time, whereas the general response rate, according to you, was 9%.
Furthermore, your claim that gays would be polling and voting (I'd presume) overwhelmingly for Romney defies common wisdom. My guess is the majority of their votes went to Obama, because he would be known to be one of them (ask Larry Sinclair if you doubt it) and he supported "gay marriage."
Seriously, are you telling me you missed the business about Gallup asking sexual preference? Go to it: http://www.gallup.com/poll/158066/special-report-adults-identify-lgbt.aspx and the 9%, you’ll find that at http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/09/30/we-are-the-91-only-9-of-americans-cooperate-with-pollsters/ It’s based on a report by PEW published in May 2012. The upshot of all of this is the GBLT’s were all answering every pollster, and you and I were answering nobody at all! ‘cause we bad, eh! So, what did ‘bama do for gays? Well, he let them join the Army ~ but Romney invented GAY MARRIAGE!
Now, a 10 minute low crawl through broken glass ~ you can do it!
for later
Yes - the parallels to Hitler are fairly exact. Hitler rose to power by feeding the grievances of the German people who had been “stabbed in the back” by the allies at Versailles, the bankers (sound familiar?), the Jews and various other undesirables including Bolsheviks, trade unions (here the parallels are obviously not exact but history doesn’t have to repeat it only has to rhyme).
Basically find an identifiable ethnic or national group, appeal to their base instincts, tell them that they’ve been “stabbed in the back” by some other ethnic or national group and promise them that all will be made well again if only a certain leader is given more and more power until that power becomes essentially limitless.
Basically we’ve seen the movie before.
Snide remarks about the “invisible and permanent powers-that-be” (Republicans) trying to take down minorities...... is a sentiment some minorities bandy about when they try to justify (what they deem) is their loser status.
================================================
THIS KIND OF PERVERSE CORRUPT THINKING IS REMINSCENT OF THE POST-CIVIL WAR ERA----Carpetbaggers---Northern invaders into the South ----were prominent in politics until 1875, but nearly all left under pressure from the Red Shirts and White Liners -----white paramilitary organizations, then-described as "the military arm of the Democratic Party", working openly to violently overthrow Republican rule, using intimidation and assassination to turn Republicans out of office and suppress freedmen's (former slaves) voting.
The Republican sheriff of Yazoo, Mississippi, received a brief flurry of national attention when insurgent white Democrats took over the county government and forced him to flee. (WIKI)
================================================
FREEPER ACTION MEMO In 1875, Hiram Revels, a Mississippi Republican--and the first African-American US Senator-- wrote to then-Pres Ulysses S. Grant denouncing Northern invaders into the post-Civil War south for manipulating the Black vote for personal benefit, and for keeping alive wartime hatreds. (WIKI)
We need to get someone with integrity----like Cong Allen West (not reelected)----- to write letters to his colleagues, and to the media.
Cong West needs to do the following:
(1) decry the agitation and intimidation tactics being used by these groups,
(2) expose using hatemongering for personal gain,
(3) emphasize the illegalities WRT threatening members of the US Congress,
(4) precpitate investigations into fraud and intimidation upon our electoral/legislative system by these hate-mongering groups, and,
(5) determine the scope and dimension of subversion these activities are visiting on US ntl security.
Thanks justiceseeker93.
Yes, I did miss the business of Gallup asking sexual preference. Thanks for your link. What I had been referring to is that I'd never seen a political preference poll subdividing the respondents by gender preference. My intuition is that those that identify as LBGT will prefer 'Rats in significantly larger percentages than the heterosexual population.
I agree with you that the 3.4% figure that Gallup got for LGBT is at least twice as large as what one would expect. But remember that the majority of the "LGBT" is most likely "B" or bisexual, especially among the women. So the % of truly "gay" or lesbian individuals is probably less than 2%.
BTW, the lefty MSM (including these pollsters) have a vested interest in overstating the percentage of gays and lesbians in the population because it increases their political clout.
That was a real mystery to everyone, and there it is ~ response rates on polls just aren't what they used to be. You'll want to go dig up the PEW report because there's much more with it.
By looking at the response rate problem it was easy to conclude that the 3.5% gayness reported by Gallup had to be divided by 11 to know what the real rate of self-identification really was. That's about .34%, or less than 1/10 Gallup's estimate based on raw data.
The problem of a small group being able to shift poll results applies everywhere. All you need to do is make sure your group ALWAYS responds to any pollster, or returns call back numbers they all use these days. Mormons, by themselves, could have shifted the poll by simply making sure they responded as if they were 67 million people strong!
I dismiss that particular possibility since that'd given Romney a 30 point leader over Obama ~ and he never did have anything like that. What he did have was a consistent 3 to 5% lead, and that's what's in line with the GBLT response.
Another factor that could have played a part is the proliferation of cellphone numbers ~ with the rich getting more than their fair share! According to Zogby the cellphone polling problem has been overcome, but reading through his material I didn't find out where they overcame the multi-number thing. Even if the gays didn't care for Romney all that much more than they did Obama, what about the rich?
Shuuush....I know nothing....and as a matter of fact...I never read your post....
I don’t know when it [the finincial collapse] is going to hit, I will probably be dead by then. But I do that when it hits, it will make the Germany of the 1920s and ‘30s look like a paradise by comparison. If you are younger than 50 I feel sorry for you.I wish, my FRiend that I had some advise to offer you, but I don’t. I never thought that the United States could be overrun with fools and idiots so quick.
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.