Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Tarheel31

Election results are SKEWED!

9 posts in this topic

I was just listnin' ta Fox news for all the reel troof and they says that the results are jus skewed!

Romney really one!

The have been counting 100% of Democratic ballots and only 35% of Republican (Christian) Ballots!

Those Muslims are diabolical!!!!

http://unskewedpolls.com/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just remember how the Republicans kept saying that the polls were wrong because they were "over sampling" Democrats.

Not so.

Obama was winning in the polls and he won last night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 538 website that people tried to ignore called this election a while ago. Rational people already knew what was going to happen last night; even Gingrich knew....he sent out an email saying as much a couple of days ago to his supporters. It was amusing flipping between the different networks last night and seeing them milk it and delay reporting changes in the vote tally. Everything is all about entertainment these days apparently. On a side note: YES.....CUBAN B! Just wanted to get that off my chest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Republican philosophy recently has been that there is an alternate version of the FACTS. (See climate change)

FACTS are FACTS, there aren't 2 sides to a FACT.

The ROFL moment with their desire to manipulate the FACTS when it came to polling results was that we would all get a definitive answer in a week and a half, and that would effectively PROOVE that they are full of sht.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was amusing flipping between the different networks last night

I watched Karl Rove (what a hideous pumpkin head) last night on Fox explaining how Romney was in good shape, that all the Democratic votes were from the early voting and that all the Republican votes were currently being counted.

He was trying to convince everyone that Romney was going to catch up and flip all those swing states.

It was funny to see the Fox news anchors seem a little skeptical of his "puppy dogs & ice cream" fantasy world.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was funny to see the Fox news anchors seem a little skeptical of his "puppy dogs & ice cream" fantasy world.

Thanks to things like cable tv and the internet it is now possible to completely isolate yourself from reality and insulate yourself in a "bubble" where you can almost manufacture your own reality. This is what I feel is the root of the extreme partisan nature of today's politics. If you don't want to hear the other side, you don't have to; you can pretend they don't exist. You can pretend that they don't have valid points and you can make exaggerated claims to demonize them. All of that is dangerous as hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My step brother works in state politics in Florida. He's been telling me for months that Romney had zero chance, that unless something came along to move the needle, he just didn't have the numbers. I admit that seeing Dick Morris on Fox promise a landslide for Romney got my hopes up. Should have listened to my step brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Posts

    • Mitchell would be a mistake IMO. He's too short to play with Walker. It would be the NBA's smallest backcourt. 
    • Look at this from Greg's viewpoint: 1. We did not draft or bring in a TE (many of us, including me, thought the team might bring in a young TE) Greg knows we have few options at this point. 2. Greg is about to retire (2-3 years) and his stock will never be higher.  He has led the team in receiving for a few years. 3. He knows there is cap room.  Gettlemen wants to carry  that over to re-sign 3 hog mollies for 2018; Olsen wants it now.) I think the Panthers lack of movement at TE has Olsen in a great negotiating position. Now let's take a look at the Panther's position: His quote about business and productivity could backfire on him. Businesses sign contracts for future services.  People sign them every day and honor them.  I may sign a long-term contract for less than I am worth, but in turn, I get security.  If you think you are worth more, don't sign.  I think the problem is the transparency over salaries.  If you know what Jacob Tamme made last year because his agent worked out a great deal, you can use that to negotiate a new deal for Olsen if you compare the numbers.  However, Tamme may have underperformed his deal, and it is erroneous to assume the performance of others based on their contracts is fair market value.  What they offer and what you take is fair market value. If Olsen wants a deal based on his productivity, remove his guaranteed money and make it incentive based. Take away the guarantees and make it possible for him to earn $10m--or $2m, depending on his productivity.  I am sure that he wants the security of the current deal and the Panthers to assume all risk.   Do you think the Raiders did not think that Jamarcus Russell's deal should equal productivity?  It is a gamble for both sides--a 4-5 year contract is security.  Guaranteed money you take for a promise to perform at your highest level for the length of the contract.  Olsen is not giving money back if he has a bad year, I assure you.  Contracts are not rewards, they only concern themselves with the now and the future. So where you ranked last year and the year before that---that simply means the Panthers made a wise investment in Greg Olsen.  I mean, if I invest in Cisco stock, buying it at $40 per share because it is expected to rise to $50 per share and it ends the year at $60, Cisco does not come to me and say, "We should have charged you more when you bought our shares--can we have an additional $8 per share?" THAT is business . Olsen should blame himself if he signed a lower deal than he is worth.  If he did not believe he was worth more then, why should the Panthers pay more now?  The Panthers paid him fair market value and he accepted the offer. I think it is bad practice to start paying people who outperform their contracts