Foleygate: Conspiracy or Not? Get Ahead of the News Cycle!

10/8/2006 | Vanity

[Prospero]

Surely the same powers that took down Dan Rather and turned the arrogance of the Press completely upon itself, destroying a "forged but accurate" defense with joy and and abandoned will begin to pull it's evidence together in a single thread to PROVE or DISPROVE whether the Foley Affair is or is not a carefully orchestrated hoax. Will Freeper's accept the challenge or continue, perhaps, to be played like a harp.

[Just mythoughts]

Very good post. So Foley was about to get Abramhoffed?

[tennmountainman]

The FBI is investigating. A lot of people will be put under oath and we will learn who is responsible for this mess, close to the election.

[Just mythoughts]

Check this out.

[anymouse]

Lets lay out the Foleyed facts that don't add up.

I wonder if "Alamogirl" is up to compiling a nexus of the bad actors involved in this conspiracy?

[anymouse]

ping

[anymouse]

ping

[Just mythoughts]

Think everyone has gone to bed??? My mind is racing to those who I remember were looking at the angles.

[Just mythoughts]

ping

[Tut]

ping

[Blind Eye Jones]

This story is MSM attempt to have Republicans twist in the wind. Republicans should be telling the real story: their success and accomplishments. They have to frame the the debate and define the issues. Can't let MSM get the upper hand, throw them off balance or play strict defense.

But, on the other hand, I think the conservative base will show up regardless of the nonsense on TV. Still, offense is the best defense.

[Just mythoughts]

ping

[anymouse]

True, but the bloggers can help get the facts out about this conspiracy, while the Republican leadership is doing their job of leading us to victory.

[Just mythoughts]

ping

[Just mythoughts]

ping

[ER Doc]

When an FBI investigation proves there really was a conspiracy to take down Foley, I'll be impressed. Until then, we're indulging in wild speculation, while the principle of Occam's razor tells us to follow the simple explanation: Foley really was hitting on underage pages, and that's why he resigned the moment the story broke. The Republican leadership really did know about it for a considerable time, and chose to ignore it for political expediency, which is why we have all the stories from staffers resigning. The sooner Hastert takes real responsibility and resigns for the good of the party, the better for us.

[CyberAnt]

Well .. when the AP has to use a 16% overweighting of dems in order to get the numbers that say the public favors the dems to take over the House .. I think the repubs are doing just fine. Only a few weeks ago, the AP was using only 11-14% to get their continual low numbers for the President.

Having to use a higher number of dems only proves to me OUR NUMBERS HAVE INCREASED - NOT DECREASED!!

[ghostmonkey]

I found the internals of that newsweak poll.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/061007/nysa007.html?.v=73

Newsweek Poll
Congressional Republicans and Election '06
Princeton Survey Research Associates International

Final Topline Results
(10/7/06)

N = 1,004 national adults, 18 and over
Margin of error: plus or minus 4
Interviewing dates: 10/5-6/06

SAMPLE SIZE/MARGIN OF ERROR FOR KEY SUBGROUPS:

483 Men (plus or minus 6)
581 Women (plus or minus 5)

841 Whites (plus or minus 4)
145 Non-whites (plus or minus 9)

296 Republicans (plus or minus 7)
332 Democrats (plus or minus 6)
338 Independents (plus or minus 7)

SAMPLE SIZE/MARGIN OF ERROR FOR REGISTERED VOTERS SUBGROUPS:

899 Registered voters (plus or minus 4)

624 Likely voters (plus or minus 5) (definition noted below)

278 Republicans (plus or minus 7)
302 Democrats (plus or minus 7)
291 Independents (plus or minus 7)

NOTES:

Data is weighted so that sample demographics match Census Current Population Survey parameters for gender, age, education, race, region, and population density.

Reported sample sizes are unweighted and should not be used to compute percentages.

Likely voters are determined based on response to a series of questions about voting intentions, voting history, general interest in politics, interest in the 2006 election, and knowledge of the voting process. Likely voters are the 62% of registered voters with the highest score on an index summarizing response to the likely voter questions.

D2. Now I have just a few more questions so we can describe the people who
took part in our survey ... Regardless of how you might have voted in
recent elections, in politics TODAY, do you consider yourself a
Republican, Democrat, or Independent?

Total RVs LVs
25 Republican 27 29
36 Democrat 38 39
35 Independent 32 29
1 (VOL.) No party/Not interested in politics 1 1
* (VOL.) Other party * *
3 Don't know 2 2
100 100 100

[CyberAnt]

Well .. their numbers do not match the census - because the dems' numbers are not that much higher than the repubs. Even 6 or 7 percent is really high. Actually, the census numbers put us about even since the 2000 election when the conservative voters went out and registered repub. We are almost evenly divided at this point.

And .. the most accurate polls are those done with "likely voters" .. not "registered voters" (because they don't necessarily plan to vote) .. and using just "adults" totally distorts the real numbers.

Again, I've seen the pollsters (especially those who are very friendly to the liberals) totally skew/slant their polls in the dems favor.

[Prokopton]

A lot of people will be put under oath and we will learn who is responsible for this mess

Fat chance. We still don't know what the Sandy Burglar affair was really about and who was behind it nor do we know the truth about the Plame affair and who was behind that conspiracy against the President. When it comes to uncovering the truth about their enemies, Republicans stink.