HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » grantcart » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2


Profile Information

Member since: Sat Jan 5, 2008, 08:45 PM
Number of posts: 50,166

Journal Archives

Rand Paul: Romney is wrong about military spending, and foriegn policy.


I am a bit dismayed by his foreign policy speech Monday, titled "Mantle of Leadership."

Romney chose to criticize President Obama for seeking to cut a bloated Defense Department and for not being bellicose enough in the Middle East, two assertions with which I cannot agree.

Defense and war spending has grown 137% since 2001. That kind of growth is not sustainable.

Adm. Michael Mullen stated earlier this year that the biggest threat to our national security is our debt.

If debt is our gravest threat, adding to the debt by expanding military spending further threatens our national security.

David Paleologos (Suffolk U) latest VA poll shows Obama +2, announces "unwinnable for Obama"

Latest Suffolk Poll 9/27


President Barack Obama (46 percent) clings to a 2-point lead over Republican challenger Mitt Romney (44 percent), in a swing-state nail-biter, according to a Suffolk University/NBC12 (WWBT-Richmond) poll of likely general-election voters in Virginia. Seven percent were undecided.

The race is close – with survey results within the statistical margin of error – despite a decided popularity advantage for Obama. He boasted a +8 (52 percent favorable to 44 percent unfavorable) to Romney’s -3 (42 percent favorable to 45 percent unfavorable).

“Barack Obama shows personal popularity and strength, especially outside of the D.C. area in northern Virginia,” said David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center in Boston.

and today


Pollster David Paleologos of Suffolk University told Bill O'Reilly that his organization will not be doing any further polls in Florida, North Carolina and Virginia because he believes President Obama has no chance to win those states.

If I ever ran a company the way that these guys carry on I would have been closed on day one.

And no one bothers to click on their website to see what the guys own polls show. Oh yeah he was on Fox.

What a farce.

This isn't about cherry picking polls this is about a pattern of incompetence and willful misrepresentation that if it were a lawyer or a doctor would get you a malpractice suit. (By the way did you note that the last poll was 'likely voters' usually the most disadvantageous way to poll for Democrats?

But hey in an industry where an unemployed DeVry graduate can get to the head of the class over night why ask questions.

DU Exclusive: Gravis Marketing exposed as a fraud Part I

Gravis Marketing wants you to believe that this is Doug Kaplan


Meet Doug Kaplan


My interest was peaked when gravismarketing entered a thread with this very lame response on a thread.


Didn't seem like a very professional response.

So I started a lengthy background check using public and private sources to track the principles behind Gravis Marketing, all of their public appearances and have come to the conclusion that Gravis Marketing is a complete fraud. Nate Silver and Real Clear Politics have all been punked.

Want to have an impact on the election or do you want to try and make some money out of it then start up a website and start issuing press releases with poll numbers. Find industry averages and publish it on a PR piece. In a poll hungry environment you will be quoted and if you do it regularly you will be put into the regular rotation. And you never have to make a single phone call.

Gravis Marketing promises to be the cheapest in the business. Well there is one way to undercut the others, save on direct expenses like a telemarketing center.

It triggered Daily Kos to ask the question who are these guys and nothing came substantial came up.


This is like the Sherlock's case of the dog that didn't bark. Check out the three 'officers' of the company and nothing comes up. No academic, professional or occupational hits.

They are

Doug Kaplan
Chad Miller
Bobby Hymel.

They have between 2 to 4 employees.

As a Managing Partner in one of US largest consulting companies between 1994 and 2000 I was thousands of business resumes. This is one of the thinest I have ever seen.


So he promotes himself as a political expert and national pollster.

His public spots? One is with some small failed local Limbaugh wannabe in Florida by the name of Ed Dean. The other is on the Voice of Russia, the Russian Government's English language channel and a political show called: Carmen Russell-Sluchansky's Campaign Connection.

He is quoted there as a national US Pollster and Political analyst.

You can listen to this twerp here:


You can start to listen to him at the 5 minute mark. His comments have all of the sophistication of a poli sci major having a beer induced bull session with a bunch of his friends trying to sound like they are on the inside. Pay special attention to his rambling inarticulate explanation of why South Carolina is important.

He sounds completely uninformed for a pollster. He seems unaware the South Carolina had special importance before because of the heavy front loading of the Republican schedule with winner take all primaries that made it very difficult to be viable after SC if you didn't score in Iowa or NH. He seems unaware of the substantial rules changes that had a dramatic impact on the Republican Primary schedule and dynamics.

I could match his numbers with even better numbers and, like him, not make a single phone call.

Next there is the structure of their business model. Go to any other polling company and the political polls are just a small part of a larger business, usually in doing polling for marketing of consumer products. Face it the general elections only show up every 4 years so you can't make a lot of money there. In fact most polling companies publish polls as a loss leader so that they can attract commercial customers.

None of this exists at Gravis.

But they do have testimonials, all politically related.

There is "Cindy L" in Oregon and "Chris Young" in Rhode Island, both very satisfied and anonymous.

Mike Hardin is very happy with "Doug and the rest of the folks" at Gravis (pretty impressive for a 2-4 employee company).

Mike is also a political consultant (probably a roommate from college) but if you google Mike Hardin political consultant all you get is the Gravis referral page, and this letter to the editor in Sacramento:


The Democratic legislative leadership makes me sick. How dare they place themselves above the thousands of state employees who suffered through furloughs for almost two years and face them again. Speaker John A. Perez derides the California Citizens Compensation Commission. Of course, this is a blip in terms of the budget mess. But why not suffer together through this recession? The political scientists quoted throughout the article are no better. What are they thinking?

Now there is some very sophisticated political analysis.

Leaving us with a single actual political candidate who endorses Gravis Marketing.

And he is a 'Democrat', Chris Benjamin.

Except it turns out that Benjamin is also a fraud:


Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/06/01/4532351/state-officials-pay-cut.html#storylink=cpy

After it was revealed that Chris Benjamin, a municipal judge and part time political consultant, is having serious personal financial problems, questions are being raised about his ability to manage public funds. Benjamin is most infamous for switching parties to run for the State Senate as a Democrat in 2008.

Either Benjamin was one of these guys that takes money to run as a Democrat so that the Republican can win easily or he ran as a Democrat because he thought he might make money it doesn't really matter.

And that is Gravis Marketing's great success and only identified public client.

So Nate, Huffington Post, Real Clear Politics have all been punked.

And the right wing blogs are running around with all of these wonderful numbers, and some at DU get their chain pulled.

Doug probably hasn't made any money off of it yet but next time around the Republicans will be happy to throw some bucks his way to get some good PR numbers.

Until then Gravis remains 'non partisan' lol.

Now you know Gravis is a fraud.

I know Gravis is a fraud.

The media can pick up this work and get a story out of it.

Tabbi reads DU and he may have got interest in the KB Toys from one of my articles so this would be a fun story for him, how many other pollsters are punking the media.

I have done most of the work already so some journalist can take all of the credit, just give a mention to DU.

Now Doug Kaplan is going to scream like a stuck pig.

Well all a good investigating reporter has to do is ask to see his W-2s for all the people making the calls and all of the phone bills for all of the calls. Check back on every poll he made and ask to see the telephone bills for all of the calls, I know my bill lists every call I made. Or do you think that they all used the same Vonage line, lol.

Gravis Marketing is a fraud.

Doug Kaplan is a fraud.

And until all of their records have been published and checked that's how they should be noted.

Just another notch for DU fettering out right wing bull shit.

(if someone could take the time to send this to real clear politics, nate silver and post it at Daily Kos, I would appreciate it. I have to move today. On to Tucson.)

Losing a debate is not the same as persuading someone on a policy.

It is difficult for me to be objective about the debate because my distaste for Romney is so strong and visceral that I cannot watch him for more than a few seconds without my blood pressure rising and my testerone pump starting to flood my body with angry little hormones.

I find that after 30 seconds of Mitch watching I am compelled to rise out of my chair and start shadow boxing. This is the kind of telltale indicators that tips you off that you might not be objective about what you are watching.

My distaste for Romney is in part related as a reaction to the corruption of the Republican Party and even capitalism that makes me so angry. You see I followed his dad in '68 and rooted for him to take out Nixon. How different the world would have been. Iit is assholes like Romney who have corrupted capitalism even further making it even more callous, reckless and devastating than it need be.

Then there is his whole phony persona that he has spent a lifetime trying to engineer to get people to embrace him and project his religion as wholesome.

He nauseates me and as a prophylaxis to my health I have taken the very sensible antidote by simply muting him off. I wait until after he has been distilled and analyzed and can take him in short clips.

I also don't trust DU to have an objective view of the debates because you are all political junkies. So I texted about 6 Democratic friends who I trust (and aren't as obsessed as we are) and generally they thought that Romney gave a good 'performance' but that the President also made his points about the policy. They also didn't think that Romney's 'performance' advanced any of his theories.

There is one point that I think DU has lost perspective on and that is even if you thought that Romney handily won the debate it is unlikely to have a dramatic impact on the outcome of the election. Intrade went from the astronomical 70% level to the extremely high 65% level. What states flipped from Obama to Romney last night. Possibly North Carolina, possibly none.

It will be seen as a very clever performance by a person that people still don't trust. And if that wasn't enough there is that wonderful little secret Romney telling them over and over again that he doesn't care about the 47% he isn't going to worry about.

I do strongly disagree with some at DU who wish that the President had brought that up. I hope that it never comes up in a debate because it gives Romney the chance to address it and get ahead of it. Today it lingers as a wonderful little antidote to any independent that thinks that they might like Romney.

Having a good performance at a debate is not the same as persuading someone on a policy. People didn't buy the Romney policies, such as they are known before the debate and they are not going to buy it after the debate. People that basically didn't like the guy still don't like the guy. His negatives didn't go down last night.

And for a lot of people who, like me truly hate the idea of a President Romney, they got a lot more focused.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2