I wonder what kind of moron would say that. Oopsies, it was me.
I am changing my tune. I am evolving. Polling does not mirror social reality. Polls are extremely unreliable.
What’s the Matter With Polling?
Until the media shares with its audience the methodology behind each poll, they are merely spinning irrelevant "data" which has already been circumscribed into the coronated alternate reality game.
I am evolving as a blogger. I am no longer willing to toil over providing links to prove my points.
If something is true, that's that.
It is what it is?
Does anyone else besides myself and donkeytale wonder why there aren't any polls being produced in states other than the first few?
When the surge first kicked in, I noticed a poll for Portland/Oregon and it looked competitive. Very early in this process I saw another poll for California. Bernie was down something like twelve points. It was close for someone who didn't seem to have a realistic chance. The medium still had a little bit of O'Malley coverage to share. They had a lot on Joe Biden, Trumptard, & those damn emails.
McLuhan said content ends up meaning nothing to nobody.
I am starting to see what he meant.
I am one voter who the pollsters cannot ever reach. It is impossible for myself to be statistically circumscribed into polling results.
[Please pardon this interruption for a DFQ2 public service schtick.
Please go to this website to add your name to the quit stalking me with your rigged polls directory:
https://www.donotcall.gov/
We now resume this mailed in entry which was produced during halftime of the lame Boston/Indiana game.]
It may boil down to how many Bernie voters have made sure that they will be allowed to vote in their state's primary or caucus. We will also need to include in this zeitgeist sniffing analysis those Hillary voters who will end up voting for the saint bernardo.
No one knows. Everything is speculation based on polls no one ever explains.
It is a farce. The coronation is mythology.
23 comments:
Comments at the end of the past entry should be taken into consideration.
I changed my avatar/profile. I need to figure out the part about the blogs I follow. TLNL is inactive, so he needs to go.
Ah, Lenny Fritos, welcome to DFQ2.
I suppose we can have an excellent discussion about polls, because I both agree and disagree with your contention that the polls are off base.
The more pertinent fact is they are meaningless this early and even moreso in Iowa because caucus state polling has a more difficult time determining likely to caucus" voters.
Also, independents in Iowa can come out and switch their status to Dems on the night and vote.
It is quite possible that some nefarious conservatives, a growing number of whom are opting for indy status might just come out and caucus for Bernie, thinking it will jam up Hillary's plans.
This of course would benefit Bernie so I hope to see that happening.
That said, individual polls are notoriously unreliable as predictors, hence the success of the Nate Silver model which combines a number of polls into a single prediction.
I would say that at best the argument against polling is irrelevant at this stage. In 2008 SC was solidly for Hillary until Obama won Iowa and then switched overnight to the African American candidate who basically never looked back.
And using the British model for one election to discredit American polls is a bit disingenuous at this stage of the game. First, the Brit season is basically a 2 innings game. The entire campaign last only a few months versus about 2 1/2 years for the Amerikkkan.
Second, the British are drunken louts with a cynical worldview coloured by their inferiority complex while Amerikkkans are generally prone to being more forthright and truthful with their opinions, albeit naively and stupidly for the most part.
But I applaud your throwing down this anti-polling schtick as a way to foment the contrarians for Bernie vote.
It says vote for the Bern and embarrass the pollsters. Great move. Maybe the campaign has a spot for talents like yours.
How can 418 people give any indication of anything? The new one says Hillary has a 19 point nationwide lead.... based on 418 people. I'm not buying it.
Yes, this entry was unpaid political astroturf at its mailed in finest. I start out warming us up with a catchy tune. That riff, that main guitar line is stuck in my head. It's not like constantly hearing at the copa, the copacabana or I dunno (European for don't know?), Star Wars, nothing but star wars....
I respect your knee jerk contrarianism. I still don't think you have addressed the actual ineptness of polls. I agree a look at all polls instead of one would make for a better tea leave reading, but you still haven't proven why any one poll is accurate of anything.
There is the saying you can't put lipstick on a pig. You can't do the same to polls.
Then I wrapped it up with Flutie's miracle pass for all those who want to believe Bernie can do this but are being worn down by the medium as coronation pimps.
Yes, thanks for the great analysis of the above schtick. You nailed it. Though you still haven't explained why polls mean anything.
I see rumours that Hillary might be getting charged by the FBI for a Martha Stewart type crime. I hope so. Unfortunately the source is some anon wtf official sharing the scoop with Fox News.
Maybe Bernie knows something we don't know. He did a 180 degree turn and is now saying the damn emails are being looked into. He meant let's talk about the damn Super PACs and how Hillary is full of it.
Tomorrow night is the big debate.
I agree with you Iowa and NH are important, and then SC and Nevada. Bernie is working hard in the conservative, backwards SC and like you said, Bernie doesn't need to win the state. He just needs a moral victory and some of those delegates. He needs to survive. He needs to compete.
One thing I do not like is this emphasis that we are a year away from voting. No, I stick by my original analysis that Hillary versus Bernie is the true battle. That voting starts very soon. Holiday season come and go. Spring Grapefruit training is always around the corner.
I have also incorporated Hillary as the wicked witch into my dirty politics maneuvering. I believe in trolling for good. It is called ethical trolling.
And I keep mentioning The View. The polls seem to be focusing on older people shut-ins who watch that show. My zeitgeist sniffing shows that such voters are being whittled off from the ready for the witch administration.
I am saying that putting any emphasis on these polls is the equivalent of paying all of our attention to the worst division of football and wondering which 7-9 team from that division is a Super Bowl contender.
I am calling the big bluff. No way in hell town are polls reflective of the race.
We will find this out very soon. For now, we can kick back and laugh at Hillary tomorrow night.
Yes, people will do the opposite of what they are forced fed. It happened in Massachusetts with Scott "NutJob" Brown versus Martha "The Bitch" Coakley and Teddy's seat. Bernie's getting a lot of votes that aren't showing up in polls. No one has proven otherwise. That's what I'm talking about. How does the inability of polls to ever reach me not matter? How do polls represent anything when there is some psychology to who the triple f would ever respond to a poll?
I should have called Coakley DINO instead of bitch. I make these David Brock styled mistakes and end up making Bernie look sexist, similar to how I was socially engineered into attacking the Black vote.
I am predicting Wasserman Schultz ends up with Dave Weigel. They will make a very handsome couple.
I was getting worried about Bernie earlier in the season when it seemed he was losing his audio equipment. But then I read something very interesting on his earlier races in life. He used to lose his voice back then too. I believe he is one of us. Progressive to the core. He's that one in a billion politician who was and still is a regular guy. Let's face it. If Hillary is coronated, she is no shoo-in for the Finals. If Bernie wins, then we have a whole other kind of debate. In essence, who was the true greatness, myself or Goodman? That's why I need a Bernie victory. It is all about me. It'll be frosting on the cake that a true progressive has applied a knuckle grip on the oval office.
Everyone knew if the Red Sox completed the miracle in 2004, the Bambino Curse was dunne. It's the same with Bernie. If he beats Hillary, and I believe he will, he is already the President no matter who the wingnuts nominate.
I believe Bernie will win because I think the polls are bunk. It's like that old-school dfq2 post I made about moon made of cheese or Elvis sighting confirmed. I forget the exact headlines I mailed in as so-called satire or lampooning.
I want the polls dissected for what they are or I want the medium people to stop talking them up.
Do not call dot gov anyone? The View? We're talking about Joy Behar? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm? I thought so.
I think our personal internet histories show that the only way to advance this medium is to shut it down metaphorically. We must have gotten that accomplished. Maybe there is more to this than BK. Hmmmmmmmm? I need to follow the stats and see how the new hmmmmmmm schtick is doing in surveys. Everything needs to be calculated. Where is the band on the run. Everyone must supply photo id and all information. What about the Snowden vote? You are a smart kid. Why don't you take your time and investigate some of these polls. I mean in regards to the question of how possibly accurate could they be? I get it that 2 + 2 = 4 and a poll well done or even medium rare can add some insights.
I think you should study and flesh out more your concept of herding.
Less is more.
I do know when I nail it here or at Twitter or I don't.
I can watch the Celtics tonight at home with Atlanta. Should give us some answers. Though Smart and Amir Johnson don't look healthy and David Lee is playing old, crafty but past that freshness date.
And tomorrow night we can watch Hillary. I mean zoom in on her for a scouting report. Like wtf happened to Harden with the Brooklyn game? I heard he sucked as bad as a player can. I didn't watch it. I am very happy that Brooklyn is bottom of the barrel so far. Danny pulled off a Red Auerbach kind of trade. Maybe Danny will put Red to shame. Maybe Danny should hold those picks as ransome. There are rumblings about DeMarcus Cousins coming to Boston. I think more likely Karl is fired. Divac seems to have the power, not him.
I thought the Kings would have a better year. Scalabrine says Rondo gets a raw deal as a malcontent or people like the word petulant. I don't know if Cousins is worth it because the best players are so young and not too ready. Lee and Amir is not the bump I thought we'd get from them. Johnson is greatness, but he has some kind of apparently chronic ankle problems. I dunnot know.
So we zoom in on Marcus Smart or Harden, give our bosses a full report. Let's zoom in on Hillary. Is she nervous? Does she know something about the veracity of the polls we don't. She doesn't sweat. Does she seem to be sweating?!!!!??
You pose an excellent existential philosophical question.
Of course the only way one poll can prove anything is if it turns out to be accurate. Before the election that is not possible so we might as well be debating the existence of God here.
But as purely conjectural malarkey it is an endlessly fascinating topic.
One can prove that polls have meaning by say, pointing to Silver and MAMZ along with some others who in fact called the 2008 and 2012 elections based on their analysis of a basket of polls.
Your response that 2016 is different won't be arguable until after 2016.
I can see your points and of course 418 people is ridiculous for a statewide much less than for a national poll, unless the margin of error is something like +-10%
I went to get the oil changed in the vehicle which is a very sensible Honda CIVIC hybrid with 287,000 miles (before you go assuming I'm driving a Beemer or a Benz) and watched about 45 minutes of Sportscenter while waiting.
Dude, literally 3-4 of their stories were about Curry. GS is now 10-0 and they even put up stats showing that Curry is better than Jordan.
I'm thinking yes, especially because Step doesn't get away with swallowed whistle syndrome like MJ did, then I'm thinking y'know I really like this kid a lot, he's an extreme class act and clearly a top 2-3 player in the league but wait a second....
Can we even entertain this discussion before Curry gets at least about 3 rings minimum?
This sort of reminds me how the world went gaga over Walton when he won a title and Portland raced off to a 50-10 record the next year. Y'know, Walton was the greatest of all time, a bigger better (whiter) version of Russell, etc etc etc.
Then, all of a sudden....poof. He was done. Now he is barely in the discussion for top 50 alltime.
I don't know how this ties into your argument that the polls are wrong but it kinda sorta does.
It's not over til its over as the wise man once said, either for an election cycle or a player's career. We can debate all we want about the future now but it means little or nothing.
And yes, before he was hurt Walton was every inch as great as Russell and won a title with a much weaker team around him than Russell had....but Russ won 11 and Walton went down.
So there is no debate. Russell is the greatest player of alltime.
I think I read somewhere that Rondo is already proving to be OK (but nothing like a team leader) in the locker room but still sucking on the floor as much as he has for several years.
Rondo is extremely overrated. He was a great point guard for basically 2-3 years when surrounded by 3 HOF'ers. The game has passed him by and he is a horrible teammate.
Pierce was a stud for the ages, the heart and soul of that team, followed closely by Garnett then Allen. Rondo was the 4th best player on that team. He could have at least stepped up in the heart and soul department as Pierce aged but....nyet. He got worse physically, mentally and emotionally. I'll give him an out and say he was never the same after his injury problems and leave it at that.
Last year in Dallas he was the 12th best player on the team and a locker room cancer besides. His plus/minus and free throw percentage are simply atrocious.
Among the worst in the league. He's done. I'm done.
I know once a Celtic always a Celtic but the guy really shouldn't even be in the NBA at this point. He's a bad player. Period.
You make great points. We just don't know. Which is actually my way of saying you make a great point about my greatness.
There is a Scalabrine interview floating around. It is good. I see he did a mailbag. Interview, mailbag, that's semantics.
http://www.theplayerstribune.com/brian-scalabrine-nba-qa-mailbag/
He mentions Pierce too as the greatest trash talker ever. He said it never worked the other way around, that he had ice cubes for veins. This also isn't the first time I heard Scal praising Rondo.
It is what it is. He must have ben greatness in the past? Can Rondo at least be given that much?
Rondo is a KG, stubborn. They are Trump. Ruthless. Pierce is the good guy supertroll. More of an extrovert. KG and Rondo will make you cry. If you are their teammate. Pierce saved that for the other team.
Pierce was the extrovert captain in 2008 with KG the Hall of Fame talent and inner introvert security for anyone on the roster dogging it.
It was sad to see KG become a skeleton of what he once was.
Truth be known, it was Ray Allen who went for the ride, not Rondo. The Big Three, to be blunt, were KG, Pierce (yes greatness HoF material) and Rondo.
I am happy Dwight Powell is working out for you guys. You need that kid to develop to wipe some of that egg of of your trade faces.
It will get worse once the draft pick conveys. Maybe not. It depends how that pick actually gets used. At this point it's Crowder and a #1 late lottery to middle pick for Powell?
Rondo doesn't matter at this point. He got hurt and is like a lost tribe of NBA Moses or wtf. But if Jameer Nelson could last so long in the league, Rondo deserves his chance.
He gets a bum rap is what Scal says, that he isn't a bad teammate or drives coaches insane.
Pierce had a bad moment earlier in his career, just as bad as anything Rondo did. Even Antoine Walker did not like it. Pierce wrapped his head with that medical gauze stuff and acted weird in a press conference, something about the refs not protecting him.
Cousins, I don't know.
I see your point about Curry. He could get an injury. Maybe he will become a head case and start missing his shots. Probably not that. But I see your point. Let's see him be great before he is coronated as Michael Jordan.
I still don't think Jordan was that great and would take Magic or Bird over him. I think LeBron is overrated. I thought Holmes was overrated as a boxer. I think Pippen was underrated somehow. The NBA is a joke because of the refs. No one case study is more glaring than the Jordan rules. And no one has still debunked the idea that LeBron gets away with too much.
Some team someday will have a player who can stop Curry. I am no expert. I like Durant. I also like Westbrook for greatness. Isaiah Thomas is slumping with his shooting or else you'd be hearing about him and the 6-1 Celtics. They are 3-4 and trudging through a tough opening schedule and still in pursuit of that elusive chemistry referred to as team ball.
Tonight's a game I very much look forward to.
Atlanta is 8-2, off to a good start. But the game is in Boston. The C's need a win. They are like Bernie with great potential. But they need some wins if they are going to be able to attract a free agent or get closer to that one player, that one vote, which returns Boston basketball to its natural right of being on top of the mountain. They are the NY Yankees of basketball. They are due about nine titles over the next 25 years.
No one showed more heart than Rondo playing with one arm. His nickname became One-Armed Rondo. And Miami was incredibly lucky to get through that series. They had to cheat to win that series. Rondo's destiny was basically stolen.
As for Carlisle and Dallas last year, shit happens. Carlisle is looking as bad as Rondo for that one, imho. People might be going wtf DeMarcus? But then one might hear about George Karl being one of the biggest NBA dickheads.
Cousins asked his teammates if he went too far. I didn't see the clip. I don't even know if it is on film with him chewing out Karl's butt.
Rondo must have something left. I agree the league has changed and he will have to also. I imagine he could kick ass in Europe or China. He's probably too young to accept a backup role on a great team. That is what Rondo should do. Accept that he blew it with the Celtics who were ready to go to war with him indefinitely. I don't think he blew it with Dallas. I think it just didn't work out. You can't make a big trade like that midseason and assume it will work.
That was the problem with Ainge trading Perk for Jeff Green. He assumed we had Shaq and Jermaine and I think we got Krstic in that trade and we were supposed to have one more seven footer. But it all fell apart. It is easy to say that quite possibly if that trade doesn't happen, the Celtics win again with that Big Three era.
That's a coulda woulda shoulda team, the 2008 Celtics. You mention Bill Walton. I mentioned John Amos on Twitter. I believe JJ Evans ruined the career of Thelma's husband. It really hurt because the family was just rebounding from the traum of losing James who in a previous t.v. incarnation played a weatherman with Mary, Ted, and Mr. Grant.
It's all at the Twitter feed if people need more television heritage information.
I slipped in Roseanne, too. I don't think that John Goodman guy is ever funny. That was probably my biggest problem with it. I accept it gave the blue collar family its own show. I was contrasting it to Good Times and Cosby and basically argued that Good Times was more realistic than the Huxtables, JJ or no JJ acting the buffoon.
Now the Black elite is George Jefferson moving on up.
And another thing, it's a big complex world. We just don't know. And yes, John Amos is still greatness and funny. He said one day Jimmy Walker will be 85 and asked by a stranger to say dyn-o-mite and he'll probably flip out and beat him with his stroller.
I don't think Black people have made the advances in t.v. compared to those old shows. It seems like they are being circumscribed into neoliberalism.
The young people can probably see the future where it's about few jobs and dystopia if we don't change course.
I watched a lot of t.v. as a kid. Like I said at Twitter, you couldn't find more decent and wonderful people on t.v. than James and Florida Evans, Lionel and Louise Jefferson, and Lamont Sanford was a good man. I'm still not sure about Rollie. Oh yeah, What's Happening also did a lot for races chilling and loving and not being racists.
I also apologised for for old movie and I suppose Black person fetish. Maybe I feel drawn to the underdogs and outsiders because I've never felt part and parcel of society with a white privilege. I was a Bernie type who pretty early in the process had become a leftier than thou. You know most of the time people who do that never look back. I am not talking about hippies becoming yippies.
I'm talking about real life. And speaking of which, it's game time with Mike and Tommy!
You're wrong about Carlisle looking bad. The trade was all on Cuban and his stooge L'il Donnie Nelson. Rondo didn't fit into Carlisle's offense, just as he no longer actually fits into any good NBA offense. The point guard-centric game has passed him by. Carlisle is considered by NBA insiders to be the best offensive coach in the game as well as a player's coach. His teams generally play above their talent level. I say this all NOT as a Mavs fan. I can't stand Cuban to be honest. He is a jerk and a looser. His team is about to go on a long Celtic-like slide and may last longer in the dumps because he basically ignores the draft.
Now, Rondo is basically doing same to Karl George Rove in Sacto. Basically, a good offensive coach with a major piece that simply doesn't fit. Time for Rondo to head for the Russian League or WTF.
Yes, I give Rondo a(very generous)out for getting injured but that is life in pro sports. He was last an impact player when, 4 years ago? And yes, Ray Allen was and still is better than Rondo. Sorry, he just was/is.
If you don't have the guts to work and come back to the same level as you were pre-injury then at some point it is on you. Couple that with a sulky me first attitude and what have you got? Nothing. Nothing at all.
It's on Rondo also for not evolving his game. How can any guard stick in the NBA who can't shoot free throws and won't play defense? Rondo's plus/minus is ridiculously bad. Here is a recent article that stupidly tries to spin Rondo positively but then every fact presented screams otherwise:
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/25372372/the-rajon-rondo-resurrection-is-off-to-a-slow-start-but-there-is-hope
"More specifically, could Rondo and Karl coexist? Forget the personalities for a second; Karl likes to play fast, he likes shots at the rim, and he likes to spread the floor with guys who can either shoot 3-pointers or get to the line to get free points. Rondo likes to play at a snail's pace, micromanaging each possession to squeeze out the perfect assist. He's also someone who passes up layups for assist opportunities, doesn't shoot from downtown, and has become a historically poor free throw shooter.
The early returns on this marriage haven't been great. In fact, looked at from at least a few angles, they've been downright poor. The Kings are a winning team with Rondo on the bench (plus-4 per 100 possessions) and they get demolished when he's on the floor (minus-10.3 per 100). The offense is six points per 100 worse and the defense suffers by 8.2 points per 100. This isn't the ideal impact you'd hope from Rondo.
Part of the issue has been the pick-and-roll efficiency, or lack thereof. In the 2012-13 season when Rondo tore his ACL, he was enjoying an incredible season. Pick-and-roll possessions run by Rondo were producing 0.966 points per possession, which was in the 80th percentile of the league. Those plays resulted in a field goal percentage of 49.4 percent and a turnover rate of just 11.5 percent."
All one need do is look at GS to see the future of pro basketball. They don't take mid-range jumpers. It is all at the rim or threes. And they don't have a traditional point guard. Nobody does anymore, at least of the teams that win. Point and shooting guards are basically interchangeable. Hell, forwards advance the ball as often as guards on some teams.
But I give Rondo a pass for his injury and you for being a homerfied analyst in the grand Boston tradition of homers. Rondo helped bring you a title and I agree that absolves a lot of sins.
But since he's no longer there, who cares?
Basically, there were too many "basicallys" in the above comment.
And the writer laughably says Rondo was enjoying an "incredible" season when his pick n roll numbers were 80th percentile....LOL. In what universe (outside of homerdome, Massachusetts) does the 80th percentile of anything = incredible?
Rajon Rondo: 2012-13 vs. 2015-16 Production
Season Minutes PPG APG RPG Assist% TO% FG% 3FG% FT%
2012-13 37.4 13.7 11.1 5.6 49.3% 22.6% 48.4% 24% 64.5%
2015-16 33.7 12.0 8.6 6.8 38.6% 20.4% 41.5% 22.2% 37.5%
Wow. turnover ratio was pretty 'incredible' in 2012-13 for sure. Incredibly poor.
Can we stick a fork in this guy now once and for all?
I'm of the opinion Cousins will not help Boston.
But I could be wong.
Sorry that format didn't translate.
But TO ratio in 2012 was 22.6%. He's actually improved there, to a still poor 20.4%.
That's the only area his game has improved, other than rebounding. He is a pretty good rebounder for a point guard
I just realized if you preview your comment you don't have to that stupid robot test before posting....this a huge breakthrough.
I think the Paris events will now pretty much overshadow tonight's debate and turn it in Hillary's favour since she can point to actual foreign policy experience, such as it is. People are tending to feel hawkish against those Muslim Morons at the moment and this will play to her favour.
Or maybe I'm using this as an excuse to avoid watching another boring debate that will answer nothing and prove nothing.
I'm done
You're correct to question why I always stick up for Rajon Rondo. After he could no longer be referred to as One-Armed Rondo, he became Rondo the Matador on defense. You are correct he is a great rebounder. He aso used to be known for decent defense. But then he probably got lazy and like you said, he was fudging his viability by overestimating the value of polling done on the assist statistic.
Perhaps you stick up for Carlisle because like Rondo here, he is associated with the grand poobah of all endings, winning the last game of the playoffs.
It was just an awful trade all around for Dallas. It wasn't so bad because they didn't give up much for him. Crowder is decent. Maybe Crowder is better than decent. No matter how good Crowder is or becomes, I don't people will be talking about it like a Babe Ruth ripoff trade.
The draft pick will matter. If Dallas ends up in 9th or wtf (the pick is top 7 protected), then the trade becomes a bit more nauseating for the anti-homer side of it.
The C's conveyed the first Brooklyn pick a couple years ago. I think it was #17 or in that area. It became this guy James Young who looks to be a total stiff and has already been surpassed by #28 or wtf pick RJ Hunter.
So the #28 pick has already surpassed the #17 who may or may not be in the league by the end of next year.
That #28 pick, quite possibly the steal of the draft, was the Doc Rivers pick. I unerstand why Danny is hated. He is extremely white and a Mormon. Even I do not like him. But it is the kind of hatred one feels for Curt Schilling or Tom Brady I suppose who may or may not be a fascist pig Republican Trump supporter. Just win, baby?
You're nuts to not watch tonight's debate. I think you're wrong about Hillary having some huge lead and how the cards are all falling into place for her to maintain the alleged big lead.
To repeat, the polls are wonky bunk bullshite. I am not saying they are what they are and we shall see how accurate they are only when actual votes are counted.
I am offering the idea that they are false from its point of departure. The first lie is that the polls are accurate. Then all the other lies soon follow, that she is inevitable, that she has too strong of a running game, that Bernie never had a chance, and "Thanks, Bernie!"
I am saying this now months before the first votes that the polling is contaminated from the get go. Not only are they meaningless from an it's too early to know angle, they are flat out unscientific and not true.
Anyway, the recent attacks on Obama center around the fact that with his winning the big cheese spot, the Democratic Party has suffered losses across the political board, from big cheese legislative offices down to Governors or wtf.
As much as we dissect Rondo's influence on a team's bottom line, Hillary is becoming the political equivalent of Rondo putting up hollow stats with a horrendous plus-minus stat.
How many people actually back Hillary? 10-15% of the country? People like me will be added to the Democratic pile for the primaries, but we will not be counted in the Finals. I am much more open-minded than Counterpunch and Chris Hedges who have given up completely on politics and are content to shoot themselves in the progressive foot with attacks on Sanders. Those tools are not only not going to vote for Sanders, they hurt his chances to beat Hillary right here now. Ridiculous. Anyway, as they are apathetic losers, I will probably become them for the Finals if the coronation makes it into the Finals.
(continued)
The lesser of two evils is Bernie over Hillary and it's not even close. I'm not sure I will be able to hold my nose and vote for her over Rubio or Christie. I obviously can't support Trump or pretty much any of them Republicans or I will look like a Nazi. It's just an unbearable prospect looking forward to future political analysis.
I am thus going all in with saying the polls are not only premature, but that they are indicative of nothing.
Why would Bernie attack Hillary if her victory has already been coronated? Why would Hillary attack Bernie and co-opt every one of his issues if this sucker was already in the bag?
And I like to repeat points when they are very good ones. Where is the proof that Libertarians/Snowdens, Millennials, and the Lenny Frito's of the world are being processed into poll results? Look at yourself. You are a BernBot. I can't imagine you would ever respond to a poll by chance you are not already on the do not call list. Who answers polls? I imagine they are dumbass shut-ins who watch The View. I imagine they believe Hillary is a shoo-in to make it to the Finals because that is all they hear. So what are we learning from all these polls? We are learning the ins and outs of a small demographic which so happens to not have one original thought of their own.
On a side note digression, Ben Dixon linked to Media Matters. I tweeted him that I wasn't disputing the actual article, but that Media Matters is owned by David Brock and DINO's. The old politics doesn't work, just like Rondo is now an old-school fish out of water, and this is proven by the steady drip drip loss of support of Democrats becoming Independents.
A good sign for Bernie is that an African American woman from Ohio, a powerful one, has switched endorsement from Hillary to Bernie. She can' be spun as a Cornle West who I agree with you was not going to move the needle, was predictable, and even reinforced the idea that only a small fraction of African Americans will vote for Bernie. This time it is different. Her name is Nina Turner and she's wonderful.
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/11/nina_turner_changes_her_mind_o.html
On the flip side, I have decided John Lewis must have Alzheimer's or something. At the recent BLM protest of Hillary, he played bodyguard telling protesters to stfu. He spoke of how they are from a different time and place. Sure, you are correct that a lot of people have immediate concerns and this Hillary coronation seems to be the most effective way to keep the presidency. It doesn't mean they are correct or that perhaps they are not even real, as in the polls are failing us, that polls are some kind of racket.
I should have mentioned a while back that as long as we are logged in, we don't have to go near that goofy spam/not spam verification process. My bad.
Post a Comment