I just about fell out of my chair.... Santorum calls democrats "anti-science". I could rant a bit here, but I think we all already know how dumb and jaw-droppingly hypocritical this claim is. Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful. - Seneca
Absolutely - but that graph showed donations to candidates. SuperPACs aren't officially aligned with candidates, and Obama doesn't have any (or at least didn't as of a few months ago). Like I said, the poster may be right that Obama is in the pocket of billionaires, but that graph wasn't evidence of it at all because all it shows is $75,000 in campaign contributions. And when we're talking about $2500 drop in the bucket donations for billionairies, you also get stuff like this: Obama’s richest donor is Len Blavatnik, a Russian American industrialist worth $10.1 billion. He also donated to Romney. So is that really an Obama supporter? Or a Romney supporter? Or just a guy who likes to throw money around?
Whoever said that a sampling size when done right is extremely accurate in predicting future results.... I need help figuring this out: Why does this straw poll which is just a few weeks old not translate to the #'s you're seeing in the polls? CNN showed Ron Paul in last with 9% in Arizona last night. http://strawpoll.azgop.org/results/results-january-28-2012/ And the winner is… Newt Gingrich: 20 votes Ron Paul: 256 votes Rick Santorum: 8 votes Mitt Romney: 17 votes This is a complete landslide! What am I missing? All the members of the Arizona GOP are just Paulites or what?
The very wealthy spread their contributions around to ensure that no matter who is elected, they end up with a place at the table and the ability to get meetings with politicians.
Because straw polls are not scientific random samples. They are a bunch of crazy Ron Paul people choosing to vote. Ron Paul always wins internet and straw polls for this reason, and everyone else ignores these for this same reason. Again, 5 minutes researching basic polling would clarify a lot for you.
What makes a bunch of crazy Ron Paul people choosing to vote different then a normal republican voter choosing to vote?
Normal GOP voters aren't obsessed with winning meaningless non-scientific straw polls like Ron Paul voters are.
So you're saying the same thing Fox News said about Iowa. If Ron Paul wins, it won't count. Something must be wrong. Paul voters make scientific polls unscientific! lol
A "straw poll" is not a scientific statistical sampling, I wouldn't expect it to match. I would, however, expect the poll numbers to be very close to the eventual vote count from the primary.
Dude - you're an idiot, and you apparently have no interest in actually learning how anything works, which just makes it worse. You CHOOSE to be ignorant. There's no way around it. Go learn what a straw poll is. Then go learn what a scientific poll is. Then learn why the two are different. In the meantime, STOP POSTING ABOUT THINGS YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. You're the absolute worst marketing Ron Paul could ever have - you make his fans look like total morons.
Mitt Romney: Crap I'm down in the polls. Oh I know, I'll just propose lowering taxes across the board by TWENTY freaking percent. That'll solve my campaign woes. My God the Republicans are absolute clowns at this point. Party of fiscal responsibility, rofl. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/22/mitt-romney-tax-cut-plans?newsfeed=true
So he wants to decrease government's role and rely upon charities to take up the slack in doing "good works" and he wants to decrease tax incentives for giving to charities. That makes sense. I wonder: Will his tax rate now go from 13% to 10.4?
