Who do you support for Governor in Pennsylvania in 2010?

[Mitt vs Mutt]

Dave Rogers wrote:

<quoted text>
Wrong as usual sonny. As a faithful viewer of fair and balanced news FOX your post is only partly correct. Do your homework this time then come back and tell me what's missing from your post.

Ailes of Fox News Cozied Up to Condi Rice in a Letter

Posted on Nov 1, 2012



A handwritten note from Fox News President Roger Ailes to George W. Bush’s secretary of state in 2005 reveals that the man who runs the cable news channel that touts itself as “fair and balanced” offered to help the administration.

The note from Ailes, which was sent to Condoleezza Rice shortly after she assumed the office, was obtained by Gawker via a Freedom of Information Act request. It reads in full:



Madam Secretary:

Great first month. You handled hearing beautifully. If I can be of help off the record—just call.

Warm Regards,

Roger

In response, Rice’s office sent what appears to be a generic form letter, thanking Ailes for his “kind note of congratulations.”

A Fox News spokeswoman on Thursday defended Ailes’ letter by arguing that he never actually mentioned the Bush administration, that the offer was a “personal media-related one” and that Rice never took him up on it (as if Fox News didn’t help the Bush administration enough already). The spokeswoman added:“As the head of a news organization, Roger speaks to powerful people from the left and the right all the time—if every other news chief wants to release their off-the-record correspondence and conversations, Roger will too.”

Surely then, Ailes must have sent a similar letter to current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, offering the same “personal media-related” and “off-the-record help.” Don’t bet on it.

As John Cook, the Gawker reporter who uncovered the letters, noted:

It goes without saying, but: Please just imagine for a moment how Fox News would cover the publication of a private note from the editor of the New York Times to an Obama administration official offering “help off the record.”

Here’s guessing “Fox & Friends” would have a field day.

LQQK HERE:
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/f...

Folks you cant make this shit up!
LMAO

[Mitt vs Mutt]

UAW to Hit Romney With Bailout Profiteer Accusation

The United Auto Workers is expected to file a complaint that accuses Mitt Romney of violating the federal Ethics in Government Act by concealing a multimillion dollar windfall he received in the auto industry bailout, journalist Greg Palast reports.

UAW President Bob King plans to announce that his union and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington have formally taken their concerns to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics in Washington, claiming that Romney hid a profit in the range of $15.3 million to $115.0 million in a so-called blind trust held by his wife, Ann.

“The American people have a right to know about Governor Romney’s potential conflicts of interest, such as the profits his family made from the auto rescue,” Palast quotes the union executive as saying.“It’s time for Governor Romney to disclose or divest.”

Added King:“While Romney was opposing the rescue of one of the nation’s most important manufacturing sectors, he was building his fortunes with his Delphi investor group, making his fortunes off the misfortunes of others.”

Greg Palast originally reported Romney’s windfall in an article in The Nation magazine last month. The UAW complaint will ask Romney to disclose exactly how much money he made.

LQQK HERE:

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/u...

[Ted]

Dan the Man wrote:

<quoted text>
It's hard to make rational, coherent arguments when you're a complete head-up-your-ass dipshit.
ev·i·dence
noun
- ground for belief
- an indication or a sign

Yes, good danny BOY! You've identified your problem: It's hard for you to make rational, coherent arguments when you're a complete head-up-your-ass dipshit.

You've self-diagnosed well.

Now. Try hard to understand, BOY, that what you call 'evidence' is merely information used in making a GUESS of a future outcome. It's NOT the outcome itself, now is it BOY, despite your gloating, premature celebration.

The critical word is 'GUESS', not 'evidence', BOY.

You copy and paste poll after poll desperately trying to 'prove' Obama's reelection is, in your word, "INEVITABLE."

It isn't, BOY.

All your poll-posting today hints at your deep anxiety about this election's outcome. Are you trying to convince YOURSELF, BOY, in quoting so many polls that your Obama wet dream isn't becoming a Romney nightmare?

Polls don't elect presidents. Votes do. Election day is next Tuesday, the day all polls become even more meaningless.

It's difficult for you to accept, isn't it BOY, that only a month ago before the first debate Obama had such a commanding lead in the polls.

No wonder you appear so unsettled. A week from now Obama may be lame duck. It's a frightening thought for you, BOY, but it's a possibility regardless of what polls today are guessing.

[Mitt vs Mutt]

Greg Palast at Seniors for a Democratic Society:

According to ethics law expert Dan Curry who drafted the ethics complaint, Ann Romney does not have a federally-approved blind trust. An approved “blind” trust may not be used to hide a major investment which could be affected by Romney if he were to be elected President. Other groups joining the UAW and CREW include Public Citizen, the Service Employees International Union, Public Campaign, People for the American Way and The Social Equity Group.

... In 2009, Ann Romney partnered with her husband’s key donor, billionaire Paul Singer, who secretly bought a controlling interest in Delphi Auto, the former GM auto parts division. Singer’s hedge fund, Elliott Management, threatened to cut off GM’s supply of steering columns unless GM and the government’s TARP auto bail-out fund provided Delphi with huge payments. While the US treasury complained this was “extortion,” the hedge funds received, ultimately,$12.9 billion in taxpayer subsidies.

As a result, the shares Singer and Romney bought for just 67 cents are today worth over $30, a 4,000% gain. Singer’s hedge fund made a profit of $1.27 billion and the Romney’s tens of millions.

Read more here:

http://seniorsforademocraticsociety.wordpress...

[Dave Rogers]

Mitt vs Mutt wrote:

Davey......How's that electoral map working out for you?
LMAO!

Well, I really don't have any faith in polls or electoral maps. Polls are only as good as those taking the polls. Polls are usually bias and this applies to both parties and party supporters.

I've seen to many elections where polls showed their candidate way ahead and no chance for the other candidate, only to show the exact opposite on election day. The insider polls are about as accurate as you will find and the insider polls are rarely ever released to the public and you can't trust those releases. I do know what I'm talking about here.

I post polls and electoral maps as a way of responding to those who swear by them and to have some fun.

[Mr Crumpets]

Dave Rogers wrote:

<quoted text> Giving yourself a pat on the back Muffins? LMAO So obvious.

So, where are all my misspellings?

Hahahaha.

Zing....wrong as usual

I wouldn't have been able to go that long with misspelling at least 10 words

You're so smart. Aren't you?
Or are you now?

You're voting for Romney....couldn't be that bright

But I admit my spelling sucks...but Mitch he spells well, doesn't he?

So..
Am I Mitch?
You betcha not....hahahahaa

The maps turning blue

Hey Davey....feeling Blue these days

[Dave Rogers]

A fair and balanced Electoral Map.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/cust...

I'm Dave Rogers and I approved this message.

[Mitt vs Mutt]

Dave Rogers wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, I really don't have any faith in polls or electoral maps. Polls are only as good as those taking the polls. Polls are usually bias and this applies to both parties and party supporters.
I've seen to many elections where polls showed their candidate way ahead and no chance for the other candidate, only to show the exact opposite on election day. The insider polls are about as accurate as you will find and the insider polls are rarely ever released to the public and you can't trust those releases. I do know what I'm talking about here.
I post polls and electoral maps as a way of responding to those who swear by them and to have some fun.

Not even Fox polls? WOW! I thought they were 'straight up' and honest and would conduct a nonpartisan poll..........

[boxhard]

In the 2004 presidential election, "Rasmussen...beat most of their human competitors in the battleground states, often by large margins," according to Slate magazine.[38] Rasmussen projected the 2004 presidential results within one percentage point of the actual vote totals earned by both George W. Bush and John Kerry.[39]

In 2004, Slate said they “publicly doubted and privately derided Rasmussen” polls because of the methodology. However, after the election, they concluded that Rasmussen’s polls were the most accurate.[38]

2008According to Politico, "Rasmussen’s final poll of the 2008 general election — showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent — closely mirrored the election’s outcome."[40] In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there."[41] An initial Nov.5, 2008 Fordham University analysis ranked 23 survey research organizations on the accuracy of their final, national pre-election polls, assuming a 6.15% margin of victory by Obama. Rasmussen Reports and Pew Research Center tied as the most accurate.--wikipedia

can you spot the poll that has been the most accurate since 2004 ?

LMAO !!! that darn rasmussen pollsters accuracy. why cant they be more like cbs/abc/cnn and the other pretenders.

tuesday will be the most accurate poll.

Mitt vs Mutt wrote:

Quick quiz for poll fans: Can you spot the Ohio poll that is different from the rest?
Ohio Poll/Univ of Cin. 10/25 - 10/30 1182 LV 2.9 48 46 Obama +2
Rasmussen Reports 10/28 - 10/28 750 LV 4.0 48 50 Romney +2
SurveyUSA 10/26 - 10/29 603 LV 4.1 48 45 Obama +3
Gravis Marketing 10/27 - 10/27 730 LV 3.6 50 49 Obama +1
PPP (D) 10/26 - 10/28 718 LV 3.7 51 47 Obama +4
CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac 10/23 - 10/28 1110 LV 3.0 50 45 Obama +5
Purple Strategies 10/23 - 10/25 600 LV 4.0 46 44 Obama +2
CNN/Opinion Research 10/23 - 10/25 741 LV 3.5 50 46 Obama +4
ARG 10/23 - 10/25 600 LV 4.0 49 47 Obama +2

[Mitt vs Mutt]

boxhard wrote:

In the 2004 presidential election, "Rasmussen...beat most of their human competitors in the battleground states, often by large margins," according to Slate magazine.[38] Rasmussen projected the 2004 presidential results within one percentage point of the actual vote totals earned by both George W. Bush and John Kerry.[39]
In 2004, Slate said they “publicly doubted and privately derided Rasmussen” polls because of the methodology. However, after the election, they concluded that Rasmussen’s polls were the most accurate.[38]
2008According to Politico, "Rasmussen’s final poll of the 2008 general election — showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent — closely mirrored the election’s outcome."[40] In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there."[41] An initial Nov.5, 2008 Fordham University analysis ranked 23 survey research organizations on the accuracy of their final, national pre-election polls, assuming a 6.15% margin of victory by Obama. Rasmussen Reports and Pew Research Center tied as the most accurate.--wikipedia
can you spot the poll that has been the most accurate since 2004 ?
LMAO !!! that darn rasmussen pollsters accuracy. why cant they be more like cbs/abc/cnn and the other pretenders.
tuesday will be the most accurate poll.
<quoted text>

Welcome back to the conversation there Boxturd........I heard you were masturbating and your hand slipped of the knob and you broke your nose,,,,,,,get better quick and go out n vote! yeahhhh babyyyyy!

[Mr Crumpets]

boxhard wrote:

In the 2004 presidential election, "Rasmussen...beat most of their human competitors in the battleground states, often by large margins," according to Slate magazine.[38] Rasmussen projected the 2004 presidential results within one percentage point of the actual vote totals earned by both George W. Bush and John Kerry.[39]
In 2004, Slate said they “publicly doubted and privately derided Rasmussen” polls because of the methodology. However, after the election, they concluded that Rasmussen’s polls were the most accurate.[38]
2008According to Politico, "Rasmussen’s final poll of the 2008 general election — showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent — closely mirrored the election’s outcome."[40] In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there."[41] An initial Nov.5, 2008 Fordham University analysis ranked 23 survey research organizations on the accuracy of their final, national pre-election polls, assuming a 6.15% margin of victory by Obama. Rasmussen Reports and Pew Research Center tied as the most accurate.--wikipedia
can you spot the poll that has been the most accurate since 2004 ?
LMAO !!! that darn rasmussen pollsters accuracy. why cant they be more like cbs/abc/cnn and the other pretenders.
tuesday will be the most accurate poll.
<quoted text>

Nobody cares...
Please babble on idiot boy

[Reverend Irreverent]

...So I had a comment regarding Bible-based voters. Anyone want to comment on that, or are we simply going on more copied biased blog opinions? I mostly want to hear the opinion of people on the Romney side. TaxNoMore would work well.

That said, I haven't seen much of him in a while since I mostly don't follow this one. Not since he posted in a topic outside of this one and was chased out to take residence solely back in this one. Being as I see little from this particular poster except clippings from blogs and repeated postings with little added feedback, is TaxNoMore just some badly coded bot?

TaxNoMore, focus on this one momentarily and give me an opinion. I mean a humanized one. Leave the copy-and-paste jobs behind and tell us why Biblical voters should swing Romney.

[boxhard]

ROMNEY gona take your free cheese away muffins. ROMNEY gonna cancel your free phone. ROMNEY gonna hide your food stamps in your work boots ensuring you starve. i can see why you so nervous with all thats on the line 4 u. good thing your mom still lets you sleep on the futon in the basement. LMAO @ MUFFIN HEAD !!!

Mitt vs Mutt wrote:

<quoted text>Welcome back to the conversation there Boxturd........I heard you were masturbating and your hand slipped of the knob and you broke your nose,,,,,,,get better quick and go out n vote! yeahhhh babyyyyy!

[Mitt vs Mutt]

boxhard wrote:

In the 2004 presidential election, "Rasmussen...beat most of their human competitors in the battleground states, often by large margins," according to Slate magazine.[38] Rasmussen projected the 2004 presidential results within one percentage point of the actual vote totals earned by both George W. Bush and John Kerry.[39]
In 2004, Slate said they “publicly doubted and privately derided Rasmussen” polls because of the methodology. However, after the election, they concluded that Rasmussen’s polls were the most accurate.[38]
2008According to Politico, "Rasmussen’s final poll of the 2008 general election — showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent — closely mirrored the election’s outcome."[40] In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there."[41] An initial Nov.5, 2008 Fordham University analysis ranked 23 survey research organizations on the accuracy of their final, national pre-election polls, assuming a 6.15% margin of victory by Obama. Rasmussen Reports and Pew Research Center tied as the most accurate.--wikipedia
can you spot the poll that has been the most accurate since 2004 ?
LMAO !!! that darn rasmussen pollsters accuracy. why cant they be more like cbs/abc/cnn and the other pretenders.
tuesday will be the most accurate poll.
<quoted text>

Rassmussen is a Republican Poster and for this election cycle is clearly biased; however I find their polling interesting in that when Obama is ahead, I know he’s way ahead, when they say he’s tied, I know just ahead, when they say he’s 1-2 points behind, that means he’s tied, Obama behind 4-5 points means Obama down by 2-3 points. At this phase in the election this is state of accuracy. In the month of October, their polling will more accurate and neutral. The Rassmussen Polling will show the truth that they alreadyb know; that is Obama winning the popular vote by lest than four points and winning the Electoral Vote by a land slide.

[boxhard]

oh i think you do care. must suck to see the most accurate poll having your hero behind. well next tues you wil know. you libs sure are testy these days.

Mr Crumpets wrote:

<quoted text>
Nobody cares...
Please babble on idiot boy

[gshoes]

boxhard wrote:

<quoted text>oh i think you do care. must suck to see the most accurate poll having your hero behind. well next tues you wil know. you libs sure are testy these days.

Obama way ahead. Four more years. Go cry Taliban teabagger

[boxhard]

sorry buddy but unlike the obama slobberers i wont be cryin over a politician.

i can always tell a gman by his shoes....

gshoes wrote:

<quoted text>
Obama way ahead. Four more years. Go cry Taliban teabagger

[Dave Rogers]

Mr Crumpets wrote:

<quoted text>
So, where are all my misspellings?
Hahahaha.
Zing....wrong as usual
I wouldn't have been able to go that long with misspelling at least 10 words
You're so smart. Aren't you?
Or are you now?
You're voting for Romney....couldn't be that bright
But I admit my spelling sucks...but Mitch he spells well, doesn't he?
So..
Am I Mitch?
You betcha not....hahahahaa
The maps turning blue
Hey Davey....feeling Blue these days

Lets see if you are “Mitch M?

Mitch M
West Mifflin, PA
Mitch M wrote:
"Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
6 days to go! Do something EVERY SINGLE DAY to bring this home for the blue team!!!
GO DEMS!
THE CLEAR CHOICE
OBAMA 2012 !!!!
YEAH BABYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!

1. Mitch M posted from West Mifflin.
2. THE CLEAR CHOICE
OBAMA 2012 !!!!
YEAH BABYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!! is your trade mark, Muffins from West Mifflin. lol

Then we have this reply to Mitch M’s post above, from
Mr Crumpets
Columbia, MD
Excellent analogy Mitch...

Now we both know you are Mitt vs Mutt from West Mifflin, PA.

We know this because the one day you were bragging how easy it was to have another ID with a different IP address showing.

Showing off post after post, back to back different IP and user ID’s. While you were bragging and telling me how stupid I was for not being able to do this you were posting as “Mr Crumpets from Columbia MD” aka Mitt vs Mutt from West Mifflin, PA.

Then came my reply to the above post
Mr Crumpets wrote: <quoted text>
Excellent analogy Mitch...

Giving yourself a pat on the back Muffins? LMAO So obvious.

So in conclusion you are Mitch M, Mr Crumpets aka Mitt vs Mutt from West Mifflin of PA.

Now to address this post.

Zing.....I'm not wrong. You are lying as usual.

Yes, I am smart, and very smart to see through your multiple personalities, or ID"’s if you prefer.

You post under one ID then reply to yourself using another ID. When you post and you’re getting hit with facts that prove you are lying, you leave and come right back using a different ID and many times several ID’s to defend yourself or have it appear you have other liberals supporting your lie.

As for Mitch spelling well all you do there is use spell check. You started using spell check after I made fun of your spelling and grammar. A grammar check is your next tool.

You asked.
So..
Am I Mitch?
You betcha not....hahahahaa

Yes, you’re Mitch M, Mr Crumpets, Mitt vs. Mutt and many others too. Keep denying and creating other ID’s I’m having fun figuring out who you are while you look like a total imbecile.

The definition for imbecile is:

1. Imbecile was a medical term used to describe a person with moderate to severe mental retardation, as well as for a type of criminal.

2. It arises from the Latin word imbecillus, meaning weak, or weak-minded. "Imbecile" was once applied to people with an IQ of 26–50, between "moron" (IQ of 51–70) and "idiot" (IQ of 0–25).

3. The term was further refined into mental and moral imbecility. The concepts of "moral insanity", "moral idiocy"," and "moral imbecility", led to the emerging field of eugenic criminology, which held that crime can be reduced by preventing "feeble-minded" people from reproducing.

I suggest from now on you refer to yourself as Mr. Imbecile. I think it describe you perfectly. Don’t you?

Oh, and Mr. Imbecile I do have some days I feel blue/sad but today is not one of them.

[Dave Rogers]

Mr Crumpets wrote:

<quoted text>
Nobody cares...
Please babble on idiot boy

Please babble on idiot boy...the famous words of bobby6464 aka Mitch M, Mr Crumpets, Mitt vs. Mutt and many other posters on here.

Will the real Mitt vs. Mutt please stand up. Then go get bent. LMAO

[Dave Rogers]

Mitt vs Mutt wrote:

<quoted text>Welcome back to the conversation there Boxturd........I seen you masturbating and your hand slide,yeahhhh babyyyyy!

LMAO. Whats wrong with Mitt vs Mutt's post?