Rasmussen: Romney ahead by 15 in North Dakota
According to today's Rasmussen poll, Romney is ahead by 15 points in North Dakota.
Friday, July 13, 2012
Considering that this is supposed to be a bad year for Obama, shouldn't Romney be doing better than that? Afterall, since this is a Rasmussen poll, they may have added about 5 points on for Romney as it is.
Romney - 51
Obama - 36
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/north_dakota/election_2012_north_dakota_president
= new reply since forum marked as read
I never said she wasnt a Democrat... however with Democrats like her who needs Republicans.. 
If there are lots of these sort of posters here, it might not be my type of place.
Look at how much time this whole thread and all the debating about one simple poll has turned into!
One ND poll that I explained might be a positive for Obama because it shows Romney not doing as well as he should be in a red state, and all hell breaks loose and results in an investigation of my motives and background.
It sure surprised me, even though I'm a lawyer used to cross-examination and debate. 
I know plenty about politics--I've been a student of it and a participant in many campaigns at all levels for well over half a century. I am not a sexist, you have ZERO justification for flinging that accusation, and your calling me one is a direct personal insult that reflects very poorly on YOU. How many times does THAT need to be explained to you?
Your passive "it has been stated Rassmussen inflates Republican support" makes me wonder why you would bother to USE shitty, right wing data on a DEMOCRATIC web site? That's like saying "Well, this is horseshit, but let me waste your time with it anyway."
It is not at all unreasonable for a sentient person to wonder why would anyone do such a thing?
I have followed the Kent Conrad seat replacement race--if you'd follow it, instead of snarking at me, you'd notice that the Dem running is playing the "Run Away From Barack" game, rejecting him on a number of fronts in order to be competitive. If we want that (D) Senator, we'd do well to let that shit play out without jumping in there with a competing ground game for a few shitty electoral votes that are a long shot anyway.
If North Dakotans end up voting for POTUS in massive numbers, they'll do it for one of two reasons--first, because they like his position on something near and dear to them--like guns or oil pipelines (this is unlikely) or second, because they look at Shittsy, see him as an insufferable, lying tool, and just can't bring themselves to pull the lever for that idiot asshole. In the second case, it will all be down to Mittsy, not Barack.
Now, you tell me that ONE OF KARL ROVE'S ELECTORAL MAPS show Obama as competitive---so you want us to listen to Karl Rove now? You're making this claim with a straight face?
Good grief, you really can't help yourself, can you? Karl Rove is not, nor has he ever been, an "authority" with regard to Democratic campaign strategy, nor is his opinion valued on a Democratic message board. See, if he tells us to jump down, we'd be well advised to jump up. HE DOESN'T GIVE DEMS GOOD ADVICE. Gee, what's Dick Morris saying we should do? How about Sarah Palin? Oh, noooo--what will happen to us if we don't follow THEIR guidelines?
Here's a hint--when you're talking the "best strategy" for a politician, don't quote the enemy and pretend it's authoritative. You're flying a huge red flag when you do that kind of shit.
I don't buy a single thing you're saying. Sell that "gloom and doom' faux-sincere "concern" to someone who was born last night. No sale here.
YOU ROCK!
I am a lifelong learner at the "Judge Judy--Don't Pee Down My Leg And Tell Me It's Raining" school.
I also object to being lectured to by someone who claims to be a resident of Canada on the Twitter site she specifically invited us to read, but who is telling us here on DU that she is a lawyer from Los Angeles:
There's a bit of dissonance happening, here, and this just feels like very familiar territory to me. I don't think it is unseemly to take note of these feelings.
Don't know if there's an agenda, but glad someone else noticed as well. 
but if I were a betting man.... (cant finish this statement as it would violate DU rules)
Don't compare me to Romney! That really is insulting! 
Have you scrolled down my Twitter feed yet?
I'd appreciate it if you did so . . . let me know what you think.
You might even like my photo . . .
I suppose I'll take that as a compliment, so I guess you're improving. 
But seriously, if you see the hundreds of Tweets I've made over the past year, I think you'd get an idea that on a daily basis I tend to like ripping Republicans to shreds . . . 
And I'll pass on your "twitter feed". I have a hunch it's more of the same. But thanks anyhoo.
Then that shows that you aren't even willing to see how wrong your attacks on me were. My posts at the link I provided prove that they do not correspond with your characterization of me. You and several other posters have displayed a disturbing ignorance and willingness to respond in a way more befitting of Republicans.
At least some people on this thread were able to READ the original post and understand it and realize that it does not reflect well on this board or on the Democratic Party when you falsely attack other posters or make insults to the people of ND by calling them rednecks and saying that because it's a small population they don't matter etc. That certainly doesn't help encourage people in ND to vote for the Democrats or Heidi Heitkamp.
You are certainly not acting like open-minded Democrats if that's the way you behave, and you seem to find it all very amusing. I hope that's not the way you campaign, because it's an attitude that is likely to turn people off.
Anyway, thanks to those on this thread who came to my defense.
I'll take your word for it. I never doubted your bona fides once reading the thread
politics for an Angeleno, your interest in Obama is quite condensed, recent and frenzied, and all your twitter "friends" are public figures and bloggers--not real, regular people.
I am not sure what you think your twitter feed proves. You say you are a "lawyer from Los Angeles," here, but you post this on your twitter feed:
That doesn't sound like a lawyer from Los Angeles to me. It does sound a bit familiar, though!
Your investigative skills are second to none.Or two of them, or ten of them.
You didn't post a "twit" that says you resided in Canada when you were younger. You said "we live in Canada." You don't write that like a "resident," you write it like a CITIZEN.
Sorry, NO SALE. Don't blame me for noticing what you say. You are the one who said it.
with President Obama? How exactly does that work? You vote against your own pocketbook to spite the president? 
That's a pretty tired talking point you got there. Wisconsinites apparently thought the whole recall effort was overreach. According to reports I heard on NPR, many of them felt that the recall was an effort to overturn the will of the voters. They didn't particularly like Walker, but they hated the recall even more. The people who REALLY wanted Walker out would've voted to remove him, with or without a visit from the president.
As for your other talking points? Well.....
While I understand in theory what you are saying, some of the responses here indicate that some posters have a long way to go in learning how to respond to others and in how to retain support from the public. It's a very emotional, aggressive and illogical way to respond. It's practically foaming at the mouth! I guess because I am a lawyer and look at things analytically, it surprised me.
If one can only post polls that 'support the President' as one person put it, it demonstrates a lack of willingness to analyze all polls to get an accurate picture of the overall race. Nate Silver would have a thing or two to say to some of the folks here. As he says repeatedly, you can't just look at the good polls for your side! And in the case of THIS poll, what's ironic is that I posted it because it was meant to POSITIVE for Obama, by showing Romney isn't even doing as well as he should be in red states. What surprises me is that some people didn't even seem to READ what was written.
I also find it a bit disturbing that when I posted a link to my Twitter which shows hundreds of Tweets over the past year demonstrating where I stand politically, some people refused to even look at it! It's like being convicted and assumed guilty without looking at the proof that shows the person's innocence! 
But there are some good posters on this thread who supported me and reprimanded the inappropriate posters, so that's a good sign.
Glad to see the photo of FDR in your profile. He's my favorite President, and if Obama were more like him he would have a bigger lead over Romney! I think some Democrats today forget that he won 4 terms and set in place the entire basis for social security, medicare, unemployment insurance, and the SEC's regulation of Wall Street.
Many of the accomplishments of FDR have been torn down over the past several decades, not only by the Republicans, but by some Democrats, unfortunately. Reading FDR's "Four Freedoms" from January 6, 1941 would go a long way to putting the Democratic Party into a stronger position against the Republicans.
I haven't decided whether I am going to stay here yet, though. I'm glad there are some positive and intelligent posters here like yourself, but there appear to be not just one, but several very accusatory and conspiratorially-minded people who not only don't acknowledge when they are wrong, but take to 'investigating' someone and then slapping each other on the back like a group of jocks when they think the've 'discovered' something.
Even though I posted a link to my Twitter which has over 1,000 posts going back to 2011 that demonstrate my involvement and support of left-wing politics and condemnation of the right, rather than acknowledging that they had misjudged my political leanings (eg. that I'm secretly a Republican etc.), a couple of posters above said that, 1) my Twitter could be a fake, (even though it goes back well over a year and obviously wasn't just created for the benefit of DU), 2) that because I follow a lot of bloggers and politicians and not a lot of personal friends that makes me suspicious, and 3) because I also follow Canadian politics in a country where I have lived and oppose the Conservative party there, that there is something suspicious about that, too.
Very bizarre, and not what I was expecting here.
And all because I posted a Rasmussen poll on North Dakota that was meant to be good news for Obama since it shows Romney isn't doing that well there! If this is an ordinary day around here, and there are lots more of these folks, I don't know if it's my kind of place.
Glad to see you got the purpose of the thread!
Not sure why Bob didn't, but we'll try to bring him around.
