PDA

View Full Version : General Politics Where's The Bounce


NCarlsCorner2
08-30-2008, 04:55 PM
Has anyone seen the double digit bounce Obama was suppose to get after the convention, if you find it, please give us the link so that we all can see it.ROFL

oldandslow
08-30-2008, 04:57 PM
Obama +8 gallup, + 4 Rassmussen...

This does not include Thursday Night...

www.realclearpolitics.com

\BTW avg is +6 so Obama was already there before the speech.

banyon
08-30-2008, 04:59 PM
Obama +8 gallup, + 4 Rassmussen...

This does not include Thursday Night...

www.realclearpolitics.com

\BTW avg is +6 so Obama was already there before the speech.

ROFLROFL...





...oh wait, there's the bounce.

NCarlsCorner2
08-30-2008, 05:02 PM
Obama +8 gallup, + 4 Rassmussen...

This does not include Thursday Night...

www.realclearpolitics.com (http://www.realclearpolitics.com)

\BTW avg is +6 so Obama was already there before the speech.

I said double digit bounce, Clinton got like a 16 point bounce after his convention.

banyon
08-30-2008, 05:04 PM
I said double digit bounce, Clinton got like a 16 point bounce after his convention.

okay, so you're only going to compare this bounce to one of the largest in history and not to the average. That makes sense.

Direckshun
08-30-2008, 05:05 PM
Kerry got a 0 point bounce after his.

What's your point?

Frankie
08-30-2008, 05:08 PM
I said double digit bounce, Clinton got like a 16 point bounce after his convention.

You should have asked for a triple digit bounce while you were at it. Would have strengthened your argument even more.

NCarlsCorner2
08-30-2008, 05:10 PM
Kerry got a 0 point bounce after his.

What's your point?

There was no bounce at all.ROFL

Sully
08-30-2008, 05:10 PM
ROFL



Great thread!

NCarlsCorner2
08-30-2008, 05:11 PM
ROFL



Great thread!

Glad you like it.

Bowser
08-30-2008, 05:17 PM
Speaking of bounce, HOW BOUT THEM PALIN VEEPS!!

J Diddy
08-30-2008, 05:17 PM
Glad you like it.

It makes me feel smarter

Programmer
08-30-2008, 05:23 PM
The bounce was negated by the timing of the Palin announcement.

So Obama has equalled Kerry, 0 point bounce.

Bowser
08-30-2008, 05:26 PM
The bounce was negated by the timing of the Palin announcement.

So Obama has equalled Kerry, 0 point bounce.

Link to substantiate?

Messier
08-30-2008, 05:28 PM
The bounce was negated by the timing of the Palin announcement.

So Obama has equalled Kerry, 0 point bounce.

No.

oldandslow
08-30-2008, 05:29 PM
The bounce was negated by the timing of the Palin announcement.

So Obama has equalled Kerry, 0 point bounce.

Actually, I suspect Palin HELPS Obama...

Programmer
08-30-2008, 05:29 PM
Link to substantiate?

www.realclearpolitics.com (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/)

Programmer
08-30-2008, 05:30 PM
Actually, I suspect Palin HELPS Obama...


I don't think so. I do know that we will all find out in November - or whenever the court case over the election is over.

Programmer
08-30-2008, 05:31 PM
No.

The polls have not changed from before the speech so the expected bounce, of however many points they expected, did not happen.

You can say the announcement of Palin as the Republican VP had nothing to do with it, but if that is the case his speech was a nothing speech.

banyon
08-30-2008, 05:32 PM
The polls have not changed from before the speech so the expected bounce, of however many points they expected, did not happen.

You can say the announcement of Palin as the Republican VP had nothing to do with it, but if that is the case his speech was a nothing speech.

The thread is about the Convention bounce, not the one day speech bounce. Try to keep up.

Bowser
08-30-2008, 05:34 PM
www.realclearpolitics.com (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html

LMAO

jAZ
08-30-2008, 05:34 PM
Has anyone seen the double digit bounce Obama was suppose to get after the convention, if you find it, please give us the link so that we all can see it.ROFL

:lame:

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/080829DailyUpdateGraph1_tyghnbv.gif

From -2 to +8 = 10 point bounce.

Guru
08-30-2008, 05:37 PM
It makes me feel smarter
And thats a feat in and of itself.:D

J Diddy
08-30-2008, 05:43 PM
And thats a feat in and of itself.:D
hey at least i can spell topecka

NCarlsCorner2
08-30-2008, 05:46 PM
:lame:

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/080829DailyUpdateGraph1_tyghnbv.gif

From -2 to +8 = 10 point bounce.


The bounce is after the convention, not before and after,:lame:

Guru
08-30-2008, 05:48 PM
hey at least i can spell topecka
ROFL

Direckshun
08-30-2008, 06:05 PM
The bounce is after the convention, not before and after,:lame:
Dude, do you know what a bounce is?

Take the poll numbers BEFORE an event.

Take the numbers AFTER an event.

And the difference there is your BOUNCE.

C'mon, NCC. Get it the **** together or stop starting topics.

Messier
08-30-2008, 06:07 PM
The bounce is after the convention, not before and after,:lame:

What do you think the bounce is?

jAZ
08-30-2008, 06:07 PM
The bounce is after the convention, not before and after,:lame:

ROFL

Yeah, keep up with that.

KChiefs1
08-30-2008, 06:10 PM
zogby.com

the only real poll worth a spit.

banyon
08-30-2008, 06:12 PM
The bounce is after the convention, not before and after,:lame:

So the increase in the polls during the convention is just a random coincidence then? Ok. I see. http://ncaabbs.com/images/smilies/01-wingedeagle.gif

KChiefs1
08-30-2008, 06:15 PM
http://www.zogby.com/50state/usa31.jpg

***SPRAYER
08-30-2008, 06:16 PM
http://thepeoplescube.com/images/Denver/T/Obama_MenCeasetobelieveinGo.jpg

bango
08-30-2008, 07:26 PM
Does it matter if there is a bounce in the polls or not? I imagine that there is a bounce when Sarah is running or jogging.

NCarlsCorner2
08-30-2008, 07:47 PM
:lame:

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/080829DailyUpdateGraph1_tyghnbv.gif

From -2 to +8 = 10 point bounce.

So going with your facts from Gallup, Bill Clinton got a 5 point bounce and Obama got a 2 point bounce, thanks.ROFL

VAChief
08-30-2008, 08:03 PM
So going with your facts from Gallup, Bill Clinton got a 5 point bounce and Obama got a 2 point bounce, thanks.ROFL

:shrug:

Messier
08-30-2008, 08:07 PM
:shrug:

Shhh. He thinks he nailed it.

Ultra Peanut
08-30-2008, 08:36 PM
WHERE IS THE BOUNCE

I AM TOO RETARDED TO LOCATE IT

http://i35.tinypic.com/33y28pj.png

WHICH SIDE DO I LOOK AT AGAIN

jAZ
08-30-2008, 08:41 PM
So going with your facts from Gallup, Bill Clinton got a 5 point bounce and Obama got a 2 point bounce, thanks.ROFL

I think it's more accurate to say that early convention + Hillary's speech resulted in a 5 point bounce for Obama. Bill's resulted in a 2 point bounce for Obama. Obama's speech isn't reflected yet, but I suspect it won't go anymore than 10 points.

10 is actually quite a suprise.

Remember McCain was trying to exaggerate expectations by calling a 15 point bounce. Everything else I saw suggested that "no candidate will get a double digit bounce this year and the both conventions were likely to result in 6 point bounces.

Who knows what the GOP one will get. The VP nomination announcement for McCain will ceratainly help keep Obama's bounce from jumping much further than 10 points. My guess is it will keep it to 10 total.

Logical
08-30-2008, 08:45 PM
I said double digit bounce, Clinton got like a 16 point bounce after his convention.Actually not even including Thursday nights speech Obama went from 2 down to McCain before the convention to 8 up after Wednesday night that alone is a 10 point bounce, we will have to wait for the next poll to see the bounce after Thursdays speech and Fridays naming of Palin (unfortunately we wont get separate results.

NCarlsCorner2
08-30-2008, 08:47 PM
Actually not even including Thursday nights speech Obama went from 2 down to McCain before the convention to 8 up after Wednesday night that alone is a 10 point bounce, we will have to wait for the next poll to see the bounce after Thursdays speech and Fridays naming of Palin (unfortunately we wont get separate results.

The Gallup poll that I saw is for the 27-29 which includes the Friday after the convention and it has Obama up by 8 points.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

Logical
08-30-2008, 08:47 PM
The bounce was negated by the timing of the Palin announcement.

So Obama has equalled Kerry, 0 point bounce.You are really hitting the sauce aren't you?

wazu
08-30-2008, 08:48 PM
Actually not even including Thursday nights speech Obama went from 2 down to McCain before the convention to 8 up after Wednesday night that alone is a 10 point bounce, we will have to wait for the next poll to see the bounce after Thursdays speech and Fridays naming of Palin (unfortunately we wont get separate results.

Those polls for both Rassmussen and Gallup came out today. No change.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

Logical
08-30-2008, 08:50 PM
The bounce is after the convention, not before and after,:lame:So you are as dumb as Tom?

NCarlsCorner2
08-30-2008, 08:51 PM
Those polls for both Rassmussen and Gallup came out today. No change.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

So he ought to thank the Clintons for the bounce.

jAZ
08-30-2008, 08:54 PM
So he ought to thank the Clintons for the bounce.

He can "thank" the Clinton's for keeping his numbers down to begin with.

Logical
08-30-2008, 09:00 PM
Those polls for both Rassmussen and Gallup came out today. No change.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/Thanks Adam

Ultra Peanut
08-30-2008, 09:53 PM
So he gets a +10 bounce from the convention (the average seems to be a +6 bounce), but because McCain managed to temporarily staunch the last day's effects a bit with a surprising VP announcement which certainly has no chance of backfiring, it's a big win for McCain. Right.

Nate says it well:

Since Obama's speech was well received by voters, one can probably assume that his numbers would be slightly higher had John McCain not announced his VP yesterday. On the other hand, the notion that something was gained by limiting Obama's bounce is silly. The convention bounce almost always fades by itself (it would more aptly be described as a convention 'bubble'). Stopping a bounce is a strategy designed to improve one's standing in the FiveThirtyEight.com polling averages for a day or two, rather than one's chances of actually winning the election.Also, Perot dropped out during the DNC in '92.

StcChief
08-31-2008, 01:04 AM
they forgot to air up the basketball...

DaneMcCloud
08-31-2008, 01:06 AM
Polls are worthless at this time, regardless of who eventually wins the GE.

jAZ
08-31-2008, 01:10 AM
Those polls for both Rassmussen and Gallup came out today. No change.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

Wow, big splashy VP annoucement and no McCain/Palin "bounce"?

:p

beer bacon
08-31-2008, 02:30 AM
I said double digit bounce, Clinton got like a 16 point bounce after his convention.

That was the largest bounce in history, and it was so huge because Perot dropped out in the middle of the DNC. Be more ignorant.

J Diddy
08-31-2008, 02:32 AM
i'm so sick of hearing about bounce, i aint even gonna use that fabric softener anymore

who freaking cares

Frankie
08-31-2008, 10:44 AM
http://thepeoplescube.com/images/Denver/T/Obama_MenCeasetobelieveinGo.jpg

You believed:

1- That Bush and Cheney were going to bring integrity back to the White House.

2- That Saddam had ties to Osama Bin Laden.

3- That Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and was ready to unleash them on us.

4- That the Iraq war was actually legit.

5- That anything that the current White House says is the truth and meant for to benefit you and I.

6- That McCain is acyually going to cut your taxes.

7-......... etc., etc., etc.,.....

:shake::rolleyes:

RINGLEADER
08-31-2008, 12:04 PM
Wow, big splashy VP annoucement and no McCain/Palin "bounce"?

:p

Actually the Rasmussed tracking poll has Obama's lead down to +3. To get to that number it means he polled at +1 in yesterday's numbers (down from Obama +5 or +6 after Thursday's numbers).

Gallup has the race contracting to Obama +6 today which mirrors the Rasmussen trajectory almost exactly. That means yesterday's Gallup numbers were somewhere between EVEN to Obama +2 (down from Obama +8 or +9 the day before).

So there's your bounce jAZ.

All that said, the polls don't matter much until after the debates.

Programmer
08-31-2008, 03:16 PM
1- That Bush and Cheney were going to bring integrity back to the White House.

Compared to Clinton they did.

2- That Saddam had ties to Osama Bin Laden.Do you have proof that he didn't?

3- That Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and was ready to unleash them on us.

Again, do you have proof that he didn't?

4- That the Iraq war was actually legit.

It is legitimate, there was approval from congress, overwhelming approval, for the war.

5- That anything that the current White House says is the truth and meant for to benefit you and I.

Surely you don't believe that? No administration in the WH has ever told the truth for our benefit.

6- That McCain is acyually going to cut your taxes.

Show me where he is planning to do anything more or less than is currently in place,and on the flip side explain how Obama is going to cut taxes with all of the new programs he wants to bring in. Where will the money come from for those?

7-......... etc., etc., etc.,.....

Continued jibberish.

McCain isn't the messiah, but neither is Obama. The lesser of the two evils is currently McCain.

Programmer
08-31-2008, 03:17 PM
Actually the Rasmussed tracking poll has Obama's lead down to +3. To get to that number it means he polled at +1 in yesterday's numbers (down from Obama +5 or +6 after Thursday's numbers).

Gallup has the race contracting to Obama +6 today which mirrors the Rasmussen trajectory almost exactly. That means yesterday's Gallup numbers were somewhere between EVEN to Obama +2 (down from Obama +8 or +9 the day before).

So there's your bounce jAZ.

All that said, the polls don't matter much until after the debates.


Please, don't use facts. It confuses him.

Messier
08-31-2008, 03:24 PM
Do you have proof that he didn't?



Again, do you have proof that he didn't?





No, there is no reason or need to prove a negative, (that he didn't) it was up to the administration to prove their claims.

***SPRAYER
08-31-2008, 03:47 PM
B.O. is 47% and McCain is 43%. That is with giving B.O. PA and VA is up for grabs.

B.O. can't crack 50%.

Ari Chi3fs
08-31-2008, 04:14 PM
What will Sarah Palin's Fake baby do for Obama bounce?

***SPRAYER
08-31-2008, 04:35 PM
You believed:

1- That Bush and Cheney were going to bring integrity back to the White House.

2- That Saddam had ties to Osama Bin Laden.

3- That Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and was ready to unleash them on us.

4- That the Iraq war was actually legit.

5- That anything that the current White House says is the truth and meant for to benefit you and I.

6- That McCain is acyually going to cut your taxes.

7-......... etc., etc., etc.,.....

:shake::rolleyes:

I did?

Frankie
08-31-2008, 05:04 PM
Compared to Clinton they did.

Do you have proof that he didn't?



Again, do you have proof that he didn't?



It is legitimate, there was approval from congress, overwhelming approval, for the war.



Surely you don't believe that? No administration in the WH has ever told the truth for our benefit.



Show me where he is planning to do anything more or less than is currently in place,and on the flip side explain how Obama is going to cut taxes with all of the new programs he wants to bring in. Where will the money come from for those?



Continued jibberish.

McCain isn't the messiah, but neither is Obama. The lesser of the two evils is currently McCain.

ROFLROFL
I was gonna ask if you replied here with a straight face. But then I considered your post history.ROFL

SBK
08-31-2008, 05:30 PM
What will Sarah Palin's Fake baby do for Obama bounce?

The tin foil hatters are already on Obama's side. :D

Programmer
08-31-2008, 06:04 PM
I was gonna ask if you replied here with a straight face. But then I considered your post history.

I know what I was asking, I'm just wondering if you have any clue of the comments you made.

If I thought you had the intelligence of a knat I wouldn't have asked. So, considering the mutual disdain society here, how about answering the questions, if you can.

Programmer
08-31-2008, 06:13 PM
No, there is no reason or need to prove a negative, (that he didn't) it was up to the administration to prove their claims.

We are looking at the "proof of the time". Proving a negative, eh? What intelligence information was left over from your butty Bill's administration?

I know your claim is that there were no Al Queda training camps in Iraq and that if there were Saddam had no knowledge of them. I'm just curious as to how all of you can claim he had no knowledge, the man knew everything that went on in that country.

Believe what you feel is right, the good thing is that your belief doesn't make it fact.

***SPRAYER
08-31-2008, 06:18 PM
We are looking at the "proof of the time". Proving a negative, eh?

Sarah Palin's daughter is the mother of Trig.

BigOlChiefsfan
08-31-2008, 07:28 PM
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

That sucks! Emptysuitiana Jones at the Plywood Temple of Doom didn't seem to have any real effect. Gazillions watched that telepromptfest. Nobody cares? When Zogby said he lost ground, I dismissed it...it's Zogby. But now Rasmussen says he got bounce Zero? Zip? Nada? Nil?

All that money wasted. All that cheese, all those whines. Code pinkos and anarchist stinkos having to share cells. And for what? I thought this guy was a real Chicago scumsucker. Those guys buy a vote, it's supposed to stay bought.
Geez, metrosexual, better get your limp hand strong.

Friendo
08-31-2008, 07:58 PM
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

That sucks! Emptysuitiana Jones at the Plywood Temple of Doom didn't seem to have any real effect. Gazillions watched that telepromptfest. Nobody cares? When Zogby said he lost ground, I dismissed it...it's Zogby. But now Rasmussen says he got bounce Zero? Zip? Nada? Nil?

All that money wasted. All that cheese, all those whines. Code pinkos and anarchist stinkos having to share cells. And for what? I thought this guy was a real Chicago scumsucker. Those guys buy a vote, it's supposed to stay bought.
Geez, metrosexual, better get your limp hand strong.

ROFLROFL it's still early for Momma, but that right there is sum good BOCF smaque!

***SPRAYER
08-31-2008, 07:59 PM
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

That sucks! Emptysuitiana Jones at the Plywood Temple of Doom didn't seem to have any real effect. Gazillions watched that telepromptfest. Nobody cares? When Zogby said he lost ground, I dismissed it...it's Zogby. But now Rasmussen says he got bounce Zero? Zip? Nada? Nil?

All that money wasted. All that cheese, all those whines. Code pinkos and anarchist stinkos having to share cells. And for what? I thought this guy was a real Chicago scumsucker. Those guys buy a vote, it's supposed to stay bought.
Geez, metrosexual, better get your limp hand strong.

Not impressed with B.O.? Me neither.

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2008/08/the-idiossey.html

J Diddy
08-31-2008, 08:17 PM
We are looking at the "proof of the time". Proving a negative, eh? What intelligence information was left over from your butty Bill's administration?

I know your claim is that there were no Al Queda training camps in Iraq and that if there were Saddam had no knowledge of them. I'm just curious as to how all of you can claim he had no knowledge, the man knew everything that went on in that country.

Believe what you feel is right, the good thing is that your belief doesn't make it fact.


remember this it applys to you as well

Messier
08-31-2008, 08:24 PM
We are looking at the "proof of the time". Proving a negative, eh? What intelligence information was left over from your butty Bill's administration?

I know your claim is that there were no Al Queda training camps in Iraq and that if there were Saddam had no knowledge of them. I'm just curious as to how all of you can claim he had no knowledge, the man knew everything that went on in that country.

Believe what you feel is right, the good thing is that your belief doesn't make it fact.

No. I have no claim either way. I don't know, and the doubt is why I think it was wrong to invade.

Belief doesn't make it fact. That is correct, for both of us....and I guess that's where we are.

Programmer
09-01-2008, 09:38 AM
We are looking at the "proof of the time". Proving a negative, eh? What intelligence information was left over from your butty Bill's administration?

I know your claim is that there were no Al Queda training camps in Iraq and that if there were Saddam had no knowledge of them. I'm just curious as to how all of you can claim he had no knowledge, the man knew everything that went on in that country.

Believe what you feel is right, the good thing is that your belief doesn't make it fact.


remember this it applys to you as well

Mine is not a belief, it's opinion derived from official documents. I believe that you have nothing to back your "belief".

Messier
09-01-2008, 10:24 AM
[quote=J Diddy;4966025]

Mine is not a belief, it's opinion derived from official documents. I believe that you have nothing to back your "belief".

An opinion is still a belief. Neither is provable.

Frankie
09-01-2008, 11:55 AM
I know what I was asking, I'm just wondering if you have any clue of the comments you made.

If I thought you had the intelligence of a knat I wouldn't have asked. So, considering the mutual disdain society here, how about answering the questions, if you can.
Be careful what you ask for, lest you may get it (for your convenience and in the interest of clarity your comments have appropriately been assigned the color of shitty green):



Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie:

You believed:

1- That Bush and Cheney were going to bring integrity back to the White House.

Compared to Clinton they did.

To you, of course he did. But to humans bloody hands for more green in the pocket constitutes gross lack of integrity. Willfully and repeatedly lying to achieve the above takes the said lack of integrity to new, undiscovered depths. Ask the families of 4000 plus dead Americans and 20,000 or so maimed ones whether lying for war profiteering constitutes more integrity than lying about one's zipper. Don't even concern yourself about more than 100,000 Iraqi dead.:shake:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie:

2- That Saddam had ties to Osama Bin Laden.

Do you have proof that he didn't?

A stupid and pathetic attempt at deflection. I should need to provide no proof. Though there's more than enough EVIDENCE against it. Those who wage a bloody bogus war and those who support it and them need to provide proof that he DID. The burden of proof is on the current administration and the sheep who are still going whichever direction they prod them to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie:

3- That Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and was ready to unleash them on us.

Again, do you have proof that he didn't?

See above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie:

4- That the Iraq war was actually legit.

It is legitimate, there was approval from congress, overwhelming approval, for the war.


So a Repuplican puppet congress along with a bunch of misinformed Dems, all relying on manufactured info approved a bogus war. That really makes this war legit in your book. Even now! :shake: The question is who KNEW that this war was bogus. The WH and the CIA knew. The rest of them, (the congress included) was operating based on falsified "evidence." At worst the members of the congress were inept, gullible and trusting. You should understand that last part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie:

5- That anything that the current White House says is the truth and meant for to benefit you and I.

Surely you don't believe that? No administration in the WH has ever told the truth for our benefit.


I don't. But you sure have believed and continue to believe Bush and Cheney, and are prepared to vote for the next Bush.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie:

6- That McCain is actually going to cut your taxes.

Show me where he is planning to do anything more or less than is currently in place,and on the flip side explain how Obama is going to cut taxes with all of the new programs he wants to bring in. Where will the money come from for those?

1- I am on the record expressing doubt that anyone in the next WH can cut taxes. Simply because the current greedy and inept occupants have created so much debt and deficit that it will cost all of us money trying to undo them. And my point was NOT that Obama WILL cut your taxes. It WAS that McCain WON'T. I know it's hard for you to concentrate, but try to stick to the point when arguing.

2- Having said the above, it stands to reason that reducing the war expenses from $11 billion a month to only a couple of billions will go a long way toward us seeing our taxes begin to reduce in a reasonable amount of time (and/or to open room for some of those programs). Your candidate famously wants to stay in Iraq another 100 years. You do the math. Oops, I'm sorry, I know I'm asking too much of you.

3- Somebody posted a link here a couple of days ago that would calculate your tax cuts under the Obama plan. I'm taking it with a grain of salt. But at least it's a start. I suggest you try that link as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie:

7-......... etc., etc., etc.,.....

Continued jibberish.


If I went to a remote primitive African tribe and talked to their primitive undeveloped minds about a device that flushes their crap away, they will call it "jibberish." Get the point?

McCain isn't the messiah, but neither is Obama. The lesser of the two evils is currently McCain.

"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" "Well that's one way to kill'em (Iranians) off. Huh, huh..."
Mind you Obama was NOT my first choice. But "EVIL?!" :shake:

Next time you challenge someone to answer your pathetic requests, at least do some self educating.

RINGLEADER
09-01-2008, 12:04 PM
Based on today's numbers tracking numbers from Rasmussen and Gallup it appears Obama's numbers have returned to the pre-Palin announcement range for yesterday (around +7 for yesterday in the Gallup poll and +4 for yesterday in the Rasmussen poll).

Smed1065
09-01-2008, 12:15 PM
Compared to Clinton they did.



:rolleyes:

BigOlChiefsfan
09-02-2008, 06:37 PM
Looks like O got a pretty good bounce after all. Today it shows he's up by 8%. Now that's what I'm talking about. It's not double digits, but it's not bad. Some polls even show him at 50%. Proving Abe Lincoln was half right all along.

***SPRAYER
09-04-2008, 09:37 AM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

:)

Ultra Peanut
09-04-2008, 09:38 AM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

:)Obama's only up by an average of 6 points nationally! 538's simulations only have him winning an average of 307 EVs! He only has a massive advantage at the grassroots level!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

***SPRAYER
09-04-2008, 09:43 AM
Obama's only up by an average of 6 points nationally! 538's simulations only have him winning an average of 307 EVs! He only has a massive advantage at the grassroots level!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Don't forget the margin for error!

:D

RINGLEADER
09-04-2008, 11:04 AM
Obama's only up by an average of 6 points nationally! 538's simulations only have him winning an average of 307 EVs! He only has a massive advantage at the grassroots level!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Based on today's polling from Rasmussen the trend yesterday continues. Last night's polling was EVEN to +1 Obama.