An archive is never a stop button.


I thought I said search for "electoral-vote.com" "clinton" and "bias". That was just a rough example of the terms you could have used to search.

Hint: don't use the term "for lies".

I bolded how you just answered your own question.

See above.

The link is broken, figures. I'm sure that map gave some states to each in raw numbers, then cited the total number of "toss-up" states. But go ahead and *believe*, hope you're right. Tracking polls, ya know.

I thought the final ballot was a poll!!! There's no way that could've been a flippant answer to push your buttons, right? Right?


But out of context they make no more sense than a single frame from a movie.

That's the way you're taking it. Be my guest. And you'd better hope that a dictionary isn't used to define these two words -"hope" and "change", because if and when it is, you're dead in the water.

That's what that site tries to do and fails every time. Might as well use tarot cards, there's no reason not to use them to try to predict election results, either, is there?

Where is this stop button you speak of? You just keep making things up left and right.


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...as&btnG=Search

Wheres the bull(*)(*)(*)(*) you were talking about?

So now you no longer claim he cherry picked polls, but rather that he picked biased pollsters?

Please show me any evidence that Rasmussen, SurveryUSA, Research 2000, or Quinnipac U is biased.

The link is not broken. I works completely fine.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2004/oct/oct30.html

So you've gone to attempting to debate, to attempting to act like a child. Good job.

Who says I'm taking it that way? Using the animated map puts the results completely in context. As does looking the results over any period of time, using the ARCHIVE.

And giving me negative rep doesn't make you look less foolish, it just tells me that you are not confident in your arguments alone.

Though I see no reason why you would be..

SWEET!!!! Mccain will spank Obama!

__________________
Not many people know this, but I'm really famous!

I hate to burst your bubble in La-La land....but most people don't even start paying attention until about August/September. But FYI, McCain leads Obama in the Independent group by about 14%----seeing as how polls are so important to ya. Independents will be key to this election.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06...-mccain-obama/

They're actually tied on independent voters. Obama leads by 1 point, but that's pretty (*)(*)(*)(*)ed insignificant.

__________________
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
- Thomas Jefferson

It was from you, and we both know it. Obama-bots like to do that. Please, please, please, stay "confident" in your arguments.

Please?

On this compter screen, the way to access the button is to to the "view" button, go down to the sixth option listed, and press "stop".


That that site has been criticized before for bias.

At various times, he's done both. Every time, he's wrong.

SurveyUSA is the worst by far of that list when it comes to bias. They've all been wrong, but not as wrong as electoral-vote always been.

Three times I tried it, this is what I kept getting:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2004/oct/oct30.html

But then, it's not an archive.

You were trying to edjumicate me and assumed I didn't know the difference between a vote or a tracking poll or an exit poll. Kind of reminded me of a schoolmarm.


Well, you can use an actual ARCHIVE, like here:

http://www.archive.org/web/web.php

or, in this case, use the stop button again.

Wtf are you talking about? I gave myself a negative rep, makes sense.


There is no way to access the links I showed you using your stop button. They are archives, not simply a 'stop button'.

Thats not what you said. You said:

And you have yet to present any evidence of such.

Wheres your proof? How does he cherry pick polls without omitting polls? If he includes all polls from his sources he can't be cherry picking anything, he has to exclude some to be 'cherrypicking.

None of this is evidence or proof of bias.


It is impossible to get to the links I showed by simply using the stop button.

You've given up trying to defend pretty much all your arguments. You no longer claim there is a Hillary bias, that he cherry picks polls, that there is no archive, or that he doesn't use tracking polls.

All you are doing now, is claiming polls in general are not accurate.

This is getting tiresome. What it with you people, asking a question that you want to qualify as some answer you never received? That's not going to work.

It was from you, and we both know it.

And "your turn"?

Thats' the only way I could stop the map without the button. Hence, they're not "archives".


So? Where's the contradiction?

Prove otherwise. I've told you, you're going have to dumpster dive on this one.

I'm not trying the site owner in a civil case, so your demands for "evidence" doesn't matter. Even so, search opensecrets and/or find a statement that he supported someone other than Clinton OR Barack Hussein Obama.

No, you prove to me that he always uses the same pool of polls, and that his "alogrithims" he uses aren't always "evolving".

PPI, SurveyUSA will just reinforce delusions. That could be a selling point to some.

The only way it's possible for me. How are you stopping the map otherwise? Tell me, in words, not links, because I get the "internet explorer cannot open this webpage..." every time I try.

Hmmm...site could use an archive.

The electoral-vote site was wrong all last presidential election. That is all.
Not since he got that tingling feeling a la Chrissy Matthews (and you have as well) for Barack Hussein Obama. TRUE

Still never the point. TRUE, he does. Prove otherwise.

Still never the point. TRUE.

FALSE

Haven't we covered this? He uses tracking polls that he cherrypicks to draw up his worthless EC maps.

Btw, how'd you like that other one ITT?

Five months away...TRUE. More reactive than predictive at this point. Let me know if you change your mind on that tarot reading.