How Obama Was Elected.

And heres the latest Zogby poll from 11-13/11-15-2008 from the HowObamaGotElected website:
512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

And yet…..

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her “house,” even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.

Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we “gave” one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)
 
YouTube - If Jesus Ran For President.
Don't be an idiot.
That video has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

And still, the republicans couldnt win....

Just a suggestion, instead of making stupid, smarmy comments, think about what you're saying.

It's not an "and still..." conclusion that's drawn after watching that video. It demonstrates the culpability of the media. The gross negligence they exhibited while reporting on this campaign.

And still implies that they lost despite having an obvious advantage.
 
Closer to the truth.......

Ten Chumps Who Helped Elect Barack Obama

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erik-ose/ten-chumps-who-helped-ele_b_143970.html

Barack Obama ran a great campaign. While shattering all fundraising records, he created a movement backed by small donors, not big lobbyists. Using community organizing techniques derided by his GOP opponents, he mobilized millions of supporters and gave them an ownership stake in his historic candidacy.

But he got some invaluable help along the way. With the post-election analysis season almost over, it's worth taking one final look at some of the characters who ensured President-elect Obama would make it to the White House.

This list is devoted to a special breed, seasoned political players and 15-minutes of famers alike, who did everything they could to stop Obama, only to see their efforts backfire. It's a bipartisan honor, evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. For obvious reasons, this list omits the folks with the most to gain from Obama's defeat, namely, John McCain and Sarah Palin, and Bill and Hillary Clinton. Although they also deserve special recognition for trying every boneheaded trick they could dream up.

Jeremiah Wright - The good Reverend's sin was enjoying his turn at the microphone too much. From the start, he was a nuisance and distraction. Wright got irritated with Obama after being asked not to deliver the invocation at his 2007 announcement speech in Springfield, IL, and made sure the press knew about it. Rev. Wrong for Obama should have disappeared after tapes of his most incendiary sermons aired on national TV last March. But by resurfacing barely a month after Obama's masterful speech on race in Philadelphia, Wright tried his best to sabotage the damage control. And by continuing to draw attention to his outrageous beliefs in the process of defending himself, he allowed Obama to repudiate him entirely.

Rick Davis and Steve Schmidt - Joint acclaim for the two strategists who were initially hailed by the press as turning around McCain's campaign. They undid all their own hard work by advising McCain to pick Sarah Palin, thus undercutting Schmidt's strategy of painting Obama as too inexperienced to lead. They urged McCain to ignore his gut instinct to choose either Sen. Joe Lieberman or former Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania. Together, their counsel trumped Mark Salter's preference of Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who would have been a formidable VP candidate. Pawlenty's only drawback was that he was sold to McCain as the safe pick, which left him out of step with McCain's need to gamble on a "maverick" choice.

Schmidt also deserves special props for convincing McCain to announce he was temporarily suspending his campaign and returning to Washington for what turned out to be bungled negotiations over the $700 billion financial bailout package. And Davis gets a shout out for signing off on TV spots attacking Obama over ties to former Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac advisors, shortly before it was revealed he had been earning $15,000 a month as a lobbyist on Freddie Mac's payroll for the past several years.

Mark Penn - Assigning honors to Hillary's strategists is tough, because collectively they ran a criminally dysfunctional campaign unequaled in modern politics. But Mark Penn was at the center of much of the infighting and tension that plagued her inner circle. According to Newsweek's behind-the-scenes account of the election, Penn was suspected of being less than honest with the campaign team about polling results that were unfavorable to Hillary, which helped Obama catch them unaware and unprepared with his Iowa caucus victory.

John Edwards and Mike Easley - This pair of North Carolina pols each contributed an assist through the self-serving ways they tried to play the endorsement game. Edwards withheld his endorsement for months, until it was clear Obama would beat Hillary and be the Democratic nominee. Thus Edwards made sure he would not be identified as an Obama team player, and limited damage to the Democrats' chances when Edwards' own career went up in smoke in August in his self-inflicted adultery scandal. Outgoing N.C. Governor Mike Easley endorsed Hillary a week before the state's May 6 primary. In doing so, the unpopular lame duck enraged Obama voters in North Carolina, particularly African-Americans, and solidified Obama's support.

Joe The Plumber - By basking in his moment in the spotlight, and running his mouth about his far-right wing nutty beliefs, he was immediately discredited as a spokesperson for average working stiffs. The unlicensed plumber whose name wasn't even Joe and whose income level would qualify him for a tax cut under Obama's tax plans made a mockery of McCain's last-minute campaign gambit to frighten voters with the spectre of higher taxes.

Sheldon Adelson - The wealthy casino mogul behind the right wing 527 group Freedom's Watch was suspected of being the Republican sugar daddy who anonymously funded the Clarion Fund, which dumped 28 million anti-Islamic scare DVDs in swing states around the country through mailings and paid advertising supplements in newspapers. Adelson and similar fat cats who bankrolled GOP-leaning PAC's wasted lots of money producing an avalanche of hate propaganda - mailers, robocalls, even DVDs. But this campaign tactic has lost much of its effectiveness in a world where people have access to multiple sources of information on the internet, instead of being limited to what they see on TV, read in their newspapers, or find in their mailboxes. Should have spent their cash on registering new Republican voters at conservative churches, state fairs, and NASCAR races.

Geraldine Ferraro - The most prominent member of the Nobama Democrats, she gave credibility to the divisive, time-wasting efforts of pro-Hillary deadenders who clung to PUMA, Just Say No Deal, and other faux-grassroots groups after Obama clinched the nomination. Ferraro was forced to step down from her official role with the Clinton campaign in March after claiming, "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," similar to comments she made in 1988 about an earlier black presidential contender ("If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race"). She reared her head again in May, quoted by the New York Times as saying she might not vote for Obama in the fall, because "I think Obama was terribly sexist."

Yet by refusing to cede her role as a Hillary surrogate, and tirelessly fanning the fames of party disunity, she helped keep media attention on the myth that there were legions of disaffected Hillary voters whose allegiance was available for harvest by any candidate in a pantsuit. Without Ferraro's efforts to keep the gender pot stirring, Sarah Palin might not have presented such a tempting opportunity for Team McCain to make a play for women voters.

Ashley Todd - It didn't get any uglier than this. Dishonorable mention goes to the mentally unstable McCain campaign volunteer with delusions of grandeur who thought she could scare America into believing she was attacked and robbed by a 6' 4" pro-Obama black thug who cut a (backwards) "B" into her face after spotting her McCain bumper sticker. Despite skepticism from police, the McCain camp rushed to exploit the situation, peddling breathless versions of events to the press that could not be confirmed at the time. McCain and Palin even called Todd to wish her well, guaranteeing the incident would receive widespread media coverage. Then Todd's story fell apart, as she admitted it was all a hoax and was charged with filing a false police report. The McCain campaign was left burned and looking even more desperate and unbalanced than they had before, with less than a week to go until the election.

Looking back over this parade of campaign horribles, it's no wonder the GOP blame game started long before election night, when the depths of McCain's meltdown became evident. There's a lot of credit to go around. But every fool on this list can rest assured that despite their worst intentions, they made a unique contribution towards helping the best man win in 2008.

Erik Ose is a veteran of Democratic campaigns in North Carolina and blogs at The Latest Outrage.
 
Zogby Poll: Almost No Obama Voters Ace Election Test

Survey finds most Obama voters remembered negative coverage of McCain/Palin statements but struggled to correctly answer questions about coverage associated with Obama/Biden

UTICA, New York -- Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election test which gauged their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the presidential tickets during the campaign, a new Zogby International telephone poll shows.

Zogby Statement on Ziegler poll

Only 54% of Obama voters were able to answer at least half or more of the questions correctly.

The 12-question, multiple-choice survey found questions regarding statements linked to Republican presidential candidate John McCain and his vice-presidential running-mate Sarah Palin were far more likely to be answered correctly by Obama voters than questions about statements associated with Obama and Vice-President–Elect Joe Biden. The telephone survey of 512 Obama voters nationwide was conducted Nov. 13-15, 2008, and carries a margin of error of +/- 4.4 percentage points. The survey was commissioned by John Ziegler, author of The Death of Free Speech, producer of the recently released film "Blocking the Path to 9/11" and producer of the upcoming documentary film, Media Malpractice...How Obama Got Elected.

"We stand by the results our survey work on behalf of John Ziegler, as we stand by all of our work. We reject the notion that this was a push poll because it very simply wasn't. It was a legitimate effort to test the knowledge of voters who cast ballots for Barack Obama in the Nov. 4 election. Push polls are a malicious effort to sway public opinion one way or the other, while message and knowledge testing is quite another effort of public opinion research that is legitimate inquiry and has value in the public square. In this case, the respondents were given a full range of responses and were not pressured or influenced to respond in one way or another. This poll was not designed to hurt anyone, which is obvious as it was conducted after the election. The client is free to draw his own conclusions about the research, as are bloggers and other members of society. But Zogby International is a neutral party in this matter. We were hired to test public opinion on a particular subject and with no ax to grind, that's exactly what we did. We don't have to agree or disagree with the questions, we simply ask them and provide the client with a fair and accurate set of data reflecting public opinion." - John Zogby

"After I interviewed Obama voters on Election Day for my documentary, I had a pretty low opinion of what most of them had picked up from the media coverage of the campaign, but this poll really proves beyond any doubt the stunning level of malpractice on the part of the media in not educating the Obama portion of the voting populace," said Ziegler.

Ninety-four percent of Obama voters correctly identified Palin as the candidate with a pregnant teenage daughter, 86% correctly identified Palin as the candidate associated with a $150,000 wardrobe purchased by her political party, and 81% chose McCain as the candidate who was unable to identify the number of houses he owned. When asked which candidate said they could "see Russia from their house," 87% chose Palin, although the quote actually is attributed to Saturday Night Live's Tina Fey during her portrayal of Palin during the campaign. An answer of "none" or "Palin" was counted as a correct answer on the test, given that the statement was associated with a characterization of Palin.

Obama voters did not fare nearly as well overall when asked to answer questions about statements or stories associated with Obama or Biden -- 83% failed to correctly answer that Obama had won his first election by getting all of his opponents removed from the ballot, and 88% did not correctly associate Obama with his statement that his energy policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry. Most (56%) were also not able to correctly answer that Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground.

Nearly three quarters (72%) of Obama voters did not correctly identify Biden as the candidate who had to quit a previous campaign for President because he was found to have plagiarized a speech, and nearly half (47%) did not know that Biden was the one who predicted Obama would be tested by a generated international crisis during his first six months as President.

In addition to questions regarding statements and scandals associated with the campaigns, the 12-question, multiple-choice survey also included a question asking which political party controlled both houses of Congress leading up to the election -- 57% of Obama voters were unable to correctly answer that Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate.

For content, contact: John Ziegler at talktozig@aol.com.

For more information on Ziegler's upcoming documentary film, Media Malpractice...How Obama Got Elected, please visit www.HowObamaGotElected.com, where there is a video of Obama voters on election day being asked many of the same questions.

For methodology, contact: Fritz Wenzel, 315-624-0200 ext. 229 or 419-205-0287 or fritz@zogby.com.

To view the survey results, please visit http://www.zogby.com/news/wf-dfs.pdf.

(11/18/2008)
 
Just a suggestion, instead of making stupid, smarmy comments, think about what you're saying.

It's not an "and still..." conclusion that's drawn after watching that video. It demonstrates the culpability of the media. The gross negligence they exhibited while reporting on this campaign.

And still implies that they lost despite having an obvious advantage.


There was a popular vote difference of 8.5 Million people - 53% to 46%

Republicans lost races all over the country.

Yo can clamor and blame the media, Acorn, and all this other nonsense, but this election and the last mid term demonstrate what I have been saying for about 6 years now.

The republicans are out of touch and the people are sick and tired of the BS.
 
The gross negligence they exhibited while reporting on this campaign.

And still implies that they lost despite having an obvious advantage.

PLEASE, quit crying in your Wheaties. For the last 3 weeks of the campaign all you could find in the MSM was BS about Ayers, ACORN and Obama being a "socialist" because that is all the McCain campaign talked about. If you think the GOP ticket had an "obvious advantage", then WHAT WAS IS? Apparently the only advangtage the GOP had was a mic and a camera that was more than willing to spread their smears. Don't blame the media for not amplifying some "obvious advantage" if they are only fed smears from the GOP stump speeches. Your cry of "foul" over your fictitious MSM bias to the left is weak, tired and BS.
 
PLEASE, quit crying in your Wheaties. For the last 3 weeks of the campaign all you could find in the MSM was BS about Ayers, ACORN and Obama being a "socialist" because that is all the McCain campaign talked about. If you think the GOP ticket had an "obvious advantage", then WHAT WAS IS?
That's not what I said....
comprehension seems to be a skill lacking amongst you liberals around here, desperate to make knee-jerk thoughtless responses, continuing to avoid anything that challenges your ability to think.

I said that JOEY'S COMMENT IMPLIED AN OBVIOUS ADVANTAGE. "..but still" is used when the results are in contrast to what you might otherwise think would have happened


Don't blame the media for not amplifying some "obvious advantage" if they are only fed smears from the GOP stump speeches. Your cry of "foul" over your fictitious MSM bias to the left is weak, tired and BS.

I understand that the media was busy spreading and amplifying fictitious smears about Sarah Palin, her daughter, her wardrobe, her family, and anything else the army of reporters and lawyers sent to Alaska could manufacture. The press couldn't possibly get around to vetting Obama.

That's demonstrated in the short video and the ZOGBY polling data I'm referencing in this post.

I also find it absolutely shocking that you think any kind of critical examination of Obama is/was "BS." That making it clear that he's in support of aggressive programs to "redistribute wealth" is nothing more than campaign season political attacks.

Are you that foolish, or are you also in lockstep with that political school of thought that you want to gloss over that stuff so that you can subversively advance the agenda in the future? If Obama came out and expressed what he really wanted to do in clear terms, he'd have been rejected by the public. We both know that. You seem determined to perpetuate the deception in order to accomplish a specific ends.
 
If Obama came out and expressed what he really wanted to do in clear terms, he'd have been rejected by the public.

More BS. If any candidate expressed his plans in clear terms, it was Obama. McCain's statements during the debates and stump speeches were so full of fear rhetoric and outright lies you couldn't tell what point he was trying to make. That is why McCain lost and Obama won.
 
I understand that the media was busy spreading and amplifying fictitious smears about Sarah Palin, her daughter, her wardrobe, her family, and anything else the army of reporters and lawyers sent to Alaska could manufacture. The press couldn't possibly get around to vetting Obama.

That's demonstrated in the short video and the ZOGBY polling data I'm referencing in this post.

There were no smears.....Palin's daughter is pregeant....money was spent on her wardrobe.
The question about which candidate said they could see Russia from their house was a obvious set up because none of the candidate's said that.
They asked the question to get the answer that they wanted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I understand that the media was busy spreading and amplifying fictitious smears about Sarah Palin, her daughter, her wardrobe, her family, and anything else the army of reporters and lawyers sent to Alaska could manufacture. The press couldn't possibly get around to vetting Obama.

Gee, EXCUSE ME and the rest of us 52% of REAL AMERICANS for being a tad bit CURIOUS about this unknown Sarah chick from Alaska who danced out of the Alaskan wilderness onto the scene just weeks before the election and who MIGHT just have to sit in the Oval Office. Are you so foolish to think us "real Americans" are just going to just take the GOP's word that she's a good person? Obama has had significantly more face-time w/ the public in their own living rooms up to the conventions than the Caribu Barbie that was pulled out of the hat, AND THEN SHIELDED FROM THE PRESS BY HER OWN CAMPAIGN for nearly a month after her unveiling at the GOP convention. The MSM was doing their best to do their due dilligence and "get to know" this person. It's not Obama's fault McCain chose an unknown, forcing the MSM to focus on her.

I also find it absolutely shocking that you think any kind of critical examination of Obama is/was "BS." That making it clear that he's in support of aggressive programs to "redistribute wealth" is nothing more than campaign season political attacks.

I find it absolutely shocking that the GOP thinks kicking a dead horse is going to make it get up and take them home. Obama's associations w/ Ayers and Wright have been wrung through the blender AND DEBUNKED long before Palin even strutted on stage. It was OLD NEWS. And it is hypocritical to call Obama's tax plan "socialist" while McCain's plan to "redistribute wealth" from the poor to the wealthy isn't, by the GOP's definition. But hey, if that's how YOU see it, fine. It only helps reveal how false the argument is.
 
Well, the little piece that you quoted Calabrio is a disclaimer by Zogby. Basically they are saying we don't really have anything to do with this poll - we were hired (by Ziegler, a right wing talk show radio host - and by his own admission... "In 2007 John was named the 54th most important talk host in the country by Talkers Magazine." - wow 54th...;) ). The questions were very skewed, and certainly right biased, but, Zieg can commission any type of poll he wants, if he has the money to waste...

Heck, I can commission a poll too... and just ask people who voted for McCain all sorts of leading questions - what blogger fun!!!

dbarbie1.jpg
 
More BS. If any candidate expressed his plans in clear terms, it was Obama.

Most people think Obama is a centrist, tax cutting, candidate who supports hawkish foreign policy. Does that sound like an accurate representation of Obama's political ideology based upon his record? Do you think that this observation I just provided is incorrect? If so, please tell me what you think the public expects of Obama.
 
There were no smears.....Palin daughter is pregeant....money was spent on her wardrobe.
Actually, I remember the "reports" of rumors that Palin faked her pregnancy and that Trig was actually her grandson. And yes while money was spent to dress her and her large family, does that story really deserve top of the fold attention from the NY Times, Washington Post, and the rest of the mainstream media in this country?

Perhaps I was too subtle. I was drawing a contrast, demonstrating the ridiculous effort of the media to dissect the Republican VP candidate while completely failing to examine the Democrat side of the race.

This video helps demonstrate that.


The question about which candidate said they could see Russia from their house was a obvious set up because none of the candidate's said that.
They asked the question to get the answer that they wanted.
To the contrary- the video demonstrates what information was emphasized by the media and popular culture. In the case of the "russia" comment, it demonstrates how a talking point that was prominently featured on SNL becomes perceived as "fact."

Even if you dismiss the significance of the SNL quote (when contrasted to the actual quote), the fact that everyone was able to associate that clam with Palin while being unable to answer the other questions is worth note.
 
Gee, EXCUSE ME and the rest of us 52% of REAL AMERICANS for being a tad bit CURIOUS about this unknown Sarah chick from Alaska who danced out of the Alaskan wilderness onto the scene just weeks before the election and who MIGHT just have to sit in the Oval Office.
That's fine.
But I think all 100% of us are still a bit CURIOUS about this unknown junior senator from Illinois who danced out of the Congress and WILL be sitting in the Oval Office.

You'd have though the media would have been as thorough and aggressive when reporting on and investigating him, wouldn't you?

The point is, they weren't. They haven't. And in all likelihood they won't.


Are you so foolish to think us "real Americans" are just going to just take the GOP's word that she's a good person?
Nope, and they shouldn't.
But they did take the DNC's word that Obama was a good person. That Obama was a qualified leader. That Obama had a stellar background....

I don't take issue with the intense scrutiny of candidates.
I don't take issue that GOP candidates were held accountable for their actions of decisions.

I just think it's terribly problematic and that it undermines our democrat systems when the media gives one political party a pass while campaigning against the other.


Obama has had significantly more face-time w/ the public in their own living rooms up to the conventions than the Caribu Barbie that was pulled out of the hat, AND THEN SHIELDED FROM THE PRESS BY HER OWN CAMPAIGN for nearly a month after her unveiling at the GOP convention.
You're a fountain of aggression and disinformation.
Let's address this:

1- Obama had more attention, but less scrutiny leading up to the convention. Exposure and scrutiny aren't the same thing. Obama has yet to be vetted by the media, though they have done a magnificent job selling him to the public.

2. Palin was much more available to the media than McCain, Biden, OR Obama in the months before the election.


The MSM was doing their best to do their due dilligence and "get to know" this person. It's not Obama's fault McCain chose an unknown, forcing the MSM to focus on her.
She wasn't an unknown. She has a record in government that is longer than Obama's. Regardless...

For the final time, I am not taking issue with the efforts of the press to reasonably investigate and report on any GOP candidate. That is their responsibility to do so. The role of the press is so important that it's constitutionally protected.

I take issue with the fact that this "due diligence" wasn't done on both sides, on all candidates. As demonstrated in the video, on the web site, and in the polling data done by Zogby.



Obama's associations w/ Ayers and Wright have been wrung through the blender AND DEBUNKED
What was debunked? Nothing was debunked. Even Obama won't give the same answer regarding his association with Ayers.

Anyone motivated enough to look into it themselves can figure it out. I'm sure that all of us would agree what their relationship is if we were to have a conversation.... though it would contrast with the various public statements made by Obama.

Nothing about Ayers has been debunked. Not his history. Not his politics. And not his association with Obama.

And as I've expressed before, putting aside the terrorism, what I find most disturbing is that these two are politically on the same page. Obama and Ayers have a very similar view of the role of government. And, since Ayers is no longer financing domestic terror (not on principle, but because it's ineffective), I'm also left to conclude that they also think that those political ends should be pursued the same way now.

Do you disagree with this.

And it is hypocritical to call Obama's tax plan "socialist" while McCain's plan to "redistribute wealth" from the poor to the wealthy isn't, by the GOP's definition. But hey, if that's how YOU see it, fine. It only helps reveal how false the argument is.
Nothing hypocritical here.
I'll argue that elements of some of McCain's policy were supported by socialist principles. However, what's of critical importance is the SCALE of it. Ultimately, McCain does support free markets and less government.

This is the same nonsense I keep pointing to in the other threads. Liberals keep using this tactic in debate. Since McCain supported a progressive tax, he is embracing what is inherently a socialist concept. Because of this, to condemn Obama's broad socialist/marxist political view is hypocritical.

No it's not. Politics is always about compromise.

Using your argument, since we have a progressive tax system in the United States, I can't argue that socialism is bad?? That's such flawed logic, it can only be applied in an effort to deceive.
 
Heck, I can commission a poll too... and just ask people who voted for McCain all sorts of leading questions - what blogger fun!!!

You can commission a poll, but with a reputable firm, you can't commission the outcome. Zogby stands by the results of the polling.

There weren't any leading questions in the poll, just general knowledge. If you want to take issue with the something, be specific.

The results are pretty clear.
Are you taking issue with the results? If so, state what and why, then we'll talk about it.

It's amazing, any of us outspoken conservatives will sit here and engage any of you on any subject. We'll do so in a candid manner, responding directly to any challenge you present us. If you think that we're incorrect, you can at least be confident that we're not doing so in an effort to deceive, just that we're incorrect. You guys on the left dodge and weave, avoiding challenge, and simply obfuscating the issue so that no thoughtful discussion can be had.

The campaign is over. While you should have always been candid, now is the time to actually have honest debate and discussion.
 
She wasn't an unknown. She has a record in government that is longer than Obama's. Regardless...

Well, actually, not really - Obama's Illinois State Senate voting record (7 years worth) is available, as well as his approximately 3 years in the US Senate voting record.

Because Palin has been in executive branches, she doesn't really have a 'voting' record per se, she does have some executive orders, and things of course that she has signed into law, or items she has presented to the Wasilla city council, or the Alaska state legislature that she wanted action on.

Oh, and Calabrio - here is the link to the results to the poll

It isn't a fair poll - it is a biased poll just for the reason that it only polled people who voted for Obama, if it were fair it would have polled people who voted for Obama and McCain - therefore giving us a comparison. The poll states to show how people view certain issues dealing with the election, but if it only polls one side, then we don't know what the comparison would be in regard to McCain voters.

So, we know that only 43% of the Obama voters knew they held both sides of Congress - but we have no concept of how many McCain voters would have known the correct answer.

I read the questions, and I would imagine that the McCain voters' answers, and results would probably be fairly similar to the Democrats' answers. But, because the poll is skewed to give us a 'viewpoint' from the right - we will never know... ;) just as Ziegler wanted it. It is his game, Zogby just happens to be the ball park he is playing in. The park doesn't set the rules, Ziegler did...

As it stands it is a useless piece of c*@p because it states only one side of the equation.
 
Well, actually, not really - Obama's Illinois State Senate voting record (7 years worth) is available, as well as his approximately 3 years in the US Senate voting record.

Because Palin has been in executive branches, she doesn't really have a 'voting' record per se, she does have some executive orders, and things of course that she has signed into law, or items she has presented to the Wasilla city council, or the Alaska state legislature that she wanted action on.

And because Obama's limited experience was in the legislature, it's much more difficult to hold him accountable for anything. This point is reinforced with his 130 "present" votes. Furthermore, the media never spent any time examining or focusing on his state senate experience.

I tend to think that actually showcasing his politics would only have gotten in the way of the wonderful narrative that the campaign had manufactured for him.

And, in your response, you just confirmed, Palin does have a RECORD... just not a legislative voting record. She's been in public office 1992, starting with city council.
 
Actually, I remember the "reports" of rumors that Palin faked her pregnancy and that Trig was actually her grandson. And yes while money was spent to dress her and her large family, does that story really deserve top of the fold attention from the NY Times, Washington Post, and the rest of the mainstream media in this country?

No its a complete waste of time.

Perhaps I was too subtle. I was drawing a contrast, demonstrating the ridiculous effort of the media to dissect the Republican VP candidate while completely failing to examine the Democrat side of the race.

This video helps demonstrate that.



To the contrary- the video demonstrates what information was emphasized by the media and popular culture. In the case of the "russia" comment, it demonstrates how a talking point that was prominently featured on SNL becomes perceived as "fact."

Even if you dismiss the significance of the SNL quote (when contrasted to the actual quote), the fact that everyone was able to associate that clam with Palin while being unable to answer the other questions is worth note.

I was surprised at how uninformed the people were in this video but I would not be suprised if it was a true sample of voters.
I was also surprised at how much air time SNL had at the end of this election.
Most of the bits failed at being funny and were obvious smears at the right.
I agree with your point that it becomes perceived as "fact."

McCain is a very funny man and did his best to show up and try to put a good spin on what SNL was up too.

With all that said, the question of seeing Russia was made to be misleading showing Ziegler's bias.
 
I think we have discussed the 'present' vote before. It is a rather common practice in the Illinois state senate to indicate that you might agree with the 'basis' or driving point of the bill, but that you will not be voting on the bill because things have been added to the bill that you don't agree with. Check out other state senators in Illinois who held office for a similar amount of time and you will find the percentage of "present" to "nay" or "yea" votes very similar.

In the US Senate it happens too - they just don't vote at all - so it ends up being 'absent'.

There may be an 'accountability' issue (but I don't see one), however, there certainly is 'record'. You can check out his school funding record, his gun control record, his housing assistance record, etc.

And his State Senate voting record is public record - if the right were so anxious for everyone to see it, certainly the McCain campaign could have drug it out and displayed it for all to see. It appears it may have been a case of 'nothing to see here -move along, move along.'

I only said that Palin doesn't have a 'voting record', I did indicate she has an executive record, but it is fairly hard to find source on it, and many issues that were brought to the table aren't available within her executive record.

If you have a place where I can view a compilation of her executive record I would love to see it... Especially of the years she spent as mayor, where she has the most lengthy experience.
 
With all that said, the question of seeing Russia was made to be misleading showing Ziegler's bias.

What is Ziegler's bias? I don't understand what that question demonstrated about Ziegler? Was it the way he framed it?
Because the video isn't about Obama, it's about the action and influence of the media during this past campaign.
 
I think we have discussed the 'present' vote before.
I know what the present vote means.
And, in this situation, I didn't present it as a means of undermining Obama's credibility. I simply mentioned it to demonstrate how difficult it can be to use a legislative voting record to assess a candidate.

And if you'd like more information on Palin, perhaps you should take that issue up with the mainstream media. Rather than reporting her accomplishments, they were more interested in smearing her on a personal level. So while we all know that her husband got a DUI a few decades ago, her political history remains a mystery to most Americans.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top