Obama vs. McCain: General Election Chatter For August - Page 57 - Politics and Economics

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Politics

Obama vs. McCain: General Election Chatter For August

...

Page 57 of 133

First

7 37 47 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 67 77 107

Last

Page 57 of 133

First

7 37 47 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 67 77 107

Last

08-24-2008 , 06:54 PM

#1401

The 13th 4postle

banned

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 11,244

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/a...exclusive.html

This link which has a guy claiming to be a detailed expert on forgeries says it is a fake.

I read a little bit and it seemed really detailed and above my understanding. But the one that is on the website is not the original birth certificate which would crush all doubt.

08-24-2008 , 07:02 PM

#1402

gobbomom

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,263

they can have as many "experts" as they want come forward to say it's a fake, but unless they have a certified copy that trumps the State of Hawaii's certified copy, it's all just silliness.

08-24-2008 , 07:05 PM

#1403

The 13th 4postle

banned

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 11,244

Quote:

Originally Posted by gobbomom

they can have as many "experts" as they want come forward to say it's a fake, but unless they have a certified copy that trumps the State of Hawaii's certified copy, it's all just silliness.

Isn't the FEC supposed to determine this or what? And why did the DailyKos get a copy before everybody else?

08-24-2008 , 07:09 PM

#1404

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by The 13th 4postle

Quote:

I have decided to leave out the low level technicalities and the how-to section of this report due to a lack of time and more importantly I want to get the facts out as quickly as possible. As some of you may or may not know some asshat decided to track me down and vandalize my car and hang a dead mutilated rabbit from my front door in a lame attempt to intimidate me from proceeding with releasing any details of my analysis. They did succeed in delaying the report by a few days but instead of deterring me they just really pissed me off. To their credit, if I had not taken a few days off from the analysis I would have missed the most damning piece of evidence – the remnants of the previous security border. So to the demented ****** who slaughtered an animal to make a point – f*ck you and thank you. And because of the amazing number of violent psychopaths who seem to be drawn to this issue, I am not going to use or supply any details that can be used to identify the owners of the COLBS used in the analysis except for those which have already been publicly disclosed. If the owners want to come forward on their own that is entirely their decision. Now let’s get to the summarized report.

^^Yeah, this guy sounds like a real professional

And if this guy's analysis is based solely on the digital reproduction and not the original document, it's completely worthless.

08-24-2008 , 07:14 PM

#1405

General Tsao

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 30,575

Quote:

Originally Posted by gobbomom

Feltstein is obv. a guy, guys. Women don't use words & phrases the same way you guys do.

Are you serious? Look at the way s/he rambles on about stuff that has nothing to do with what was originally being discussed.

08-24-2008 , 07:16 PM

#1406

The 13th 4postle

banned

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 11,244

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWookie

^^Yeah, this guy sounds like a real professional

And if this guy's analysis is based solely on the digital reproduction and not the original document, it's completely worthless.

If you read the rest he actually goes into real detail, but yeah your right a digital reproduction is pretty worthless to look at and after thinking about this for 5 minutes while I was smoking, it seems a little ridiculous that Clinton didn't expose this and that nobody else has. The bureaucracy in Hawaii responsible for this would have to be in on it and that seems impossible quite frankly.

08-24-2008 , 07:18 PM

#1407

The 13th 4postle

banned

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 11,244

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feltstein

I refused to sink to your level and respond to a juvenile attack.

Your attack betrays an obvious disdain and lack of respect for a female's opinion. I wasn't going to dignify it.

BTW, I finally got around to answering it in a camouflaged and backhanded way in this very thread. Perhaps I used another word for girl that you fail to comprehend.

gobbomom, thanks for trying to bring intelligence where there seems to be little...(k..thanks) <--- girly language?

Seriously all you have to say is Im a guy and the subject would be dropped, I'm not going to go looking in an +1400 post thread looking at each of your +300 word posts to see where you said it in a camouflaged way.

08-24-2008 , 07:45 PM

#1408

Feltstein

banned

Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,277

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Murphy

3/31/06 Times (New York, N.Y.) 1,683,855

The top 12 for spring 2007:

1. Limbaugh, at least 13.5 million (listen at some point during the week)

2. Hannity, 12.5 million

"Keep in mind that Premiere Radio, Limbaugh's syndicator, stands by its official figure of 20 million weekly Rush listeners."

7/31/01: "Customer service at McDonald's Corp. was ranked last in a University of Michigan study of fast-food chains earlier this year. Customers complained of rudeness, slow service and incorrect orders.

The company has defended its dedication to the 45 million customers it serves daily."

Exactly my point of making the analogy between Rush and Sean and Ronald McDonald: rude, slow, and incorrect.

As far as your numbers, do you think that Premiere Radio might inflate the actual number to increase ad revenue? LOL. This article is pretty funny, unless you're a ditto-head.

The Infrared Zone...Speaking Truth to Power
Saturday, 26 June 2004
Limbaugh by the numbers...

Quote:

Rush Limbaugh claims he has an audience of 20 million listeners. Very impressive.

American Idol gets 20 million viewers too. I don't know what that means. I do know that neither is good for the IQ of our great nation.

So Limbaugh has an audience of 20 million.

That also means that 255 million Americans don't listen to Rush Limbaugh.

Based on the 2000 election....

appx. 50 million people voted for Bush. That means there are 30 million people who voted for Bush that don't listen to Rush Limbaugh. Assuming all of Limbaugh's listeners voted for Bush. Doesn't say much for the patron saint of fascism does it? 60% of voting republicans don't bother to listen to the guy.

Still 20 million is a lot of people right? Yes and it would be even more impressive if 20 million people actually listened to Rush Limbaugh. Fortunately they don't. Let's take a look at how they arrived at 20 million in the first place. You'll see that just like most of Limbaugh's preachings, his ratings are a little slight of hand, some outright falsehoods, and a whole lot of twisting the facts to fit his claims.

As a former Radio Program Director I assure you I can take Arbitron numbers and spin them to say whatever I want.

Limbaugh's 20 million is the total number of possible listeners for a week. If you listen closely they actually say he reaches an audience of 20 million people every week. So does NPR but does that mean all 20 million are actually listening? Obviously not. Just because you can reach an audience with your signal doesn't mean they'll actually tune you in.

Just for fun I'll give Rush the benefit of the doubt here. Let's say his total number of listeners in a week is actually 20 million people. Very impressive again right? Not so fast. That total is what is simply the number of people who tuned him in at one point or another during a week. That means that they added up the numbers from every show for a week and the total is where they got the 20 million. So in reality all the nut jobs that listen to him every day were counted 5 times in his weekly total. It does not mean by any definition that 20 million separate people listened to his show during a week. It simply means that the same people who listen over and over were counted 5 times. Imagine if we could find a way to make our vote count 5 times. Kerry wins in a monumental landslide!

Now let's break it down some more. Of the total listeners every day. Many of them may have only listened for 5-10 minutes or what is known as a quarter-hour. Doesn't matter. They count towards the total. So now we have people who are listening for a few minutes being thrown into this very impressive total. They aren't listening from 12 to 3 every day. They simply show up as a listener for at least 15 minutes. Now if you listen for only 30 seconds but you write it down in your little Arbitron diary guess what, Rush Limbaugh picks up antother quarter- hour. A person literally could have been listening by accident but they just happened to be an honest diary keeper and Rush gets their rating. Takes some of the shine off the whole thing don't you think?

The real number you want to look at is called the AQH. That is the Average Quarter Hour. That is where you might get a better idea of how many people are actually listening to Limbaugh. And the AQH will give you the true size of his audience.

The AQH is the number of people listening during any quarter-hour of Limbaugh's show. That's the true audience and I promise you it's not 20 million. Not even close. It might be 3 million and that's pushing it. Still those are truly great numbers in Radio. Trust me, there are radio people out there who would sacrifice their family to a volcano for an AQH of 3 million. But it's hardly the 20 million that Big Fat Rush would have you think it is.

Let's break it down some more. Limbaugh is on about 640 stations. So let's take the AQH rating and see where we really are in terms of audience size.

3 million actual listeners divided by 640 stations. That comes out to 4687.5 listeners per station. Obviously that isn't how it works but that is the average number of listeners per station. Clearly a station in Cleveland will have a much larger total than one in Auburn, NY just because the markets are so different in size but you get the gist.

I won't even go into the details of how incredibly flawed and unreliable radio research is. I'll just say that it would get laughed out of any sociology convention. The participants are about as reliable as Rush Limbaugh's facts which is to say not very.

After further review and a little scrutiny it seems that Rush Limbaugh's ratings and his alleged audience of 20 million are a lot like Rush Limbaugh's show. Big and blustery but unable to withstand scrutiny of any kind. Simply stated, he lies about his ratings just like he lies about most everything else.

He may even have an audience of 3 million but all that means is that 272 million people AREN'T listening to him.

The New York Times circulation is a bit different. Many papers are delivered every morning to their readers. If one paper is delivered to a home or office, 2, 3, or more people might and probably do read it. Others are sold in shops and left on trains, buses, or in cabs.

Also, your quoted number for the NYT is daily, but your inflated numbers for Rush/Hannity are weekly. And as gobbomom already pointed out the NYT is syndicated in 100's if not 1,000's of other newspaper worldwide, and the NYT also has an excellent web-site.

You also have to consider who is reading it to make an accurate assessment of its influence. Is its audience people who willingly call themselves ditto-heads and eat a lot of Big Macs, or is it people who might be able to wield a bit of influence themselves?

So if you posted those numbers trying to make the case that Rush or Hannity (or both of them combined even) has more influence than the NYT, then I believe that you might be delusional and that your case is really a woven basket.

08-24-2008 , 07:56 PM

#1409

AlexM

ignored

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 20,655

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feltstein

WOW. I didn't realize Biden was that good. No foot in mouth there. No stuttering there. Just a good old fashioned verbal smack down.

FOX is trying to make Biden's health (1988 brain aneurysm) an issue. Are you kidding me?

Like someone said before, Obama could pick Jesus, and FOX would say he looks like a hippie and..psst...you know he's actually Jewish and...psst...his parents were homeless at one point...and psst...people called him the Jesus Messiah...and...psst...he did time in jail...and...click

FOX would never address where Jesus stood on the issues of the day. Or, they would distort them. Love thy neighbor would mean that Jesus was for adultery, turn the other cheek would mean Jesus is a sissy...Jesus throwing the money changers out of the temple would mean that Jesus was a communist...FOX would also say that Jesus was ZOMG an anti-Rome Roman hater...

Now FOX is reporting that Biden is a cat lover and Obama is a dog lover...ok TV out the window...

And if McCain chose Jesus, the rest of the media would be going nuts with "OMG, homophobe, racist who hates the poor." Standard and typical.

08-24-2008 , 08:04 PM

#1410

Bill Murphy

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 6,402

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feltstein

So if you posted those numbers trying to make the case that Rush or Hannity (or both of them combined even) has more influence than the NYT, then I believe that you might be delusional and that your case is really a woven basket.

I posted those numbers simply because I was curious and googled "NYT daily circulation", "Rush Limbaugh number of daily listeners" & "McDonald's number of daily customers", then copied/pasted verbatim, including the bit about Premiere which was why I put it in quotes.

You started the post I replied to with "Do you know how many...", so I figured a semi-snark/LOL reply was in order, esp. as I thought you may have been semi-levelling to begin with. I don't listen to Rush or Sean, do eat at McD's regularly, and often read parts of the NYT online, usually via links from MSN, etc, or reprints in my local rags, which was a good point made by another poster viz the NYT's circulation numbers.

Plenty more I could say, but you're obviously a troll so I'm done.

08-24-2008 , 08:07 PM

#1411

Bigdaddydvo

King of the Politics Forum

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 21,496

This is a fine ad. I couldn't agree more:

http://www.mikefrancesa.com/wordpress/?p=995

08-24-2008 , 08:26 PM

#1412

4 High

Searching For Jenna Fischer

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,735

Can't wait to up the 400 clips of Romney talking smack about McCain when hes picked to be VP.

08-24-2008 , 08:29 PM

#1413

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4 High

Can't wait to up the 400 clips of Romney talking smack about McCain when hes picked to be VP.

Well they certainly won't end with, "I'd run with Obama".

I doubt they'll run any like that tbh. I do expect ZOMG HOUSES populist rhetoric for the ******s however.

08-24-2008 , 08:33 PM

#1414

4 High

Searching For Jenna Fischer

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,735

I think kicking in a Populist theme can only help Obama. It certainly worked for Democrats in 2006.

08-24-2008 , 08:39 PM

#1415

Feltstein

banned

Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,277

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexM

And if McCain chose Jesus, the rest of the media would be going nuts with "OMG, homophobe, racist who hates the poor." Standard and typical.

wat...Jesus was a homophobe and a racist who hates the poor? That's standard and typical Jesus or McCain?

Jesus Sean McCain = JSM?

Are you reading the FOX Revised Bible?

08-24-2008 , 08:40 PM

#1416

ElliotR

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 30,029

Quote:

Originally Posted by The 13th 4postle

Dude, have you checked out that site? Aren't you at all embarrassed by linking to it?

08-24-2008 , 08:53 PM

#1417

rjoefish

Got Out the Vote

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 31,086

Quote:

Originally Posted by ikestoys

Well they certainly won't end with, "I'd run with Obama".

I doubt they'll run any like that tbh. I do expect ZOMG HOUSES populist rhetoric for the ******s however.

I'd say there'd be some good stuff from 2005 they could get from Romney but no one paid attention to him then, they'd have to actually come to 2008 to get stuff, which would be more powerful imo.

08-24-2008 , 08:54 PM

#1418

rjoefish

Got Out the Vote

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 31,086

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElliotR

Dude, have you checked out that site? Aren't you at all embarrassed by linking to it?

You mean headlines like:

« UN SOLDIERS SALUTE HEZBOLLAH TERRORISTS | Main | Obama, Marketing over Matter ... Hitler would be pleased »

are embarrassing??

08-24-2008 , 08:55 PM

#1419

adios

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 22,540

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigdaddydvo

This is a fine ad. I couldn't agree more:

http://www.mikefrancesa.com/wordpress/?p=995

Ha Ha. How old is Biden? Something like 65 or so I believe. Six years younger than the old fart on the top of the other party's ticket.

I liked this video because it had pictures of Biden when he had a lot less hair on top of his head and looked silly trying to comb what he hair he had over the bald spot. Have no idea how much he's spent on hair replacement and such over the years but almost certain he hates bald jokes.

08-24-2008 , 09:02 PM

#1420

Bigdaddydvo

King of the Politics Forum

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 21,496

Quote:

Originally Posted by adios

For perspective Biden was first elected to the U.S. Senate when Obama was 11 years old.

08-24-2008 , 09:05 PM

#1421

4 High

Searching For Jenna Fischer

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,735

Two fresh polls purely post Biden...

Zogby

Obama 46%
McCain 44%

CNN

Obama 47%
McCain 47%

Obama gets a nice bump in Zogby, but loses big ground in CNN. Not looking too good.

08-24-2008 , 09:07 PM

#1422

jah7_fsu1

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 5,867

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjoefish

I'd say there'd be some good stuff from 2005 they could get from Romney but no one paid attention to him then, they'd have to actually come to 2008 to get stuff, which would be more powerful imo.

Romney trashed McCain throughout the primary. If it's Romney, Dems have much more ammo for Romney hates McCain than Biden doesn't like Obama.

08-24-2008 , 09:09 PM

#1423

The 13th 4postle

banned

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 11,244

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElliotR

Dude, have you checked out that site? Aren't you at all embarrassed by linking to it?

Ah the whole idea is pretty silly in the first place. I apologize for even looking it up...

08-24-2008 , 09:11 PM

#1424

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4 High

I think kicking in a Populist theme can only help Obama. It certainly worked for Democrats in 2006.

Populist rhetoric, multiple Republican scandals and an unpopular war.

Which one worked in 2006?

08-24-2008 , 09:12 PM

#1425

jah7_fsu1

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 5,867

Quote:

Originally Posted by ikestoys

Populist rhetoric, multiple Republican scandals and an unpopular war.

Which one worked in 2006?

All of the above???

Page 57 of 133

First

7 37 47 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 67 77 107

Last

...

Page 57 of 133

First

7 37 47 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 67 77 107

Last