There's absolutely NO WAY a supposed independent pollster should make a remark like this when discussing a poll:
"Lieberman, the once and future Democrat, is winning 73 percent of the Republican vote."
How is referring to a turncoat independent outcast as "the once and future Democrat" in any way an unbiased statement?
Where the hell is the MSM on this kind of obvious bias by the director of the Quinnipiac Poll? If you're going to quote the results of the poll, you should also address the fact that Doug Schwartz is a Lieberman supporter who can't keep his favoritism to himself.
Doug Schwartz is working so hard for Lieberman that he's trying to INFLUENCE the outcome of the election with his low-ball figures for Ned Lamont. How is this fair?
11 comments:
Cough....Cough...SLUSH FUND...Cough...Cough....
I love this graph: Mr. Lamont often mentions his use of an environmentally correct vehicle, a Ford hybrid, on the campaign trail, but Mr. Lamont and his wife also own a Lexus convertible, a Mercedes, a Volvo, a Jaguar and an electric Gem they keep at their vacation home in Maine. Their children attend private schools in Greenwich, where, until recently, they belonged to an exclusive, mostly white country club, and their art collection includes a Norman Rockwell, “The Right to Know,” bought for $1.05 million.
Yeah, it's awful the Lamonts have family wealth that created jobs and opportunity, whereas Joe has dirty lobbyist money and he cheats and breaks the law with "street money". Has he bought YOUR vote, too?
There's not much to love about that.
I have expresed my empathy for your frustration before BA.
I have I been on a number of campaigns when my candidate's argument lacked the power, clarity, and rationale to break through and connect with a majority of voters. The default is to attack- I understand that.
But the NYT gaveth on Sun and today it taketh away... that's life in the fast lane.
I was part of that Quinnipiac poll which called me Friday, October 27. I specifically asked the young girl who polled me if Douglas Schwartz was 'running' that poll. After a moment of 'silence' she answered that the poll was being run by Quinnipiac College. I guessed at that very moment in time he was. He's messing with the data. I responded for Lamont and DeStefano and am quite frankly shocked with Rell's lead. And I'm an "unaffiliated" registered voter, to which this young girl countered: well, which way does your voting lean: republican or democrat.
Schwartz gets these results and puts them into 2 piles - republicans and democrats. Then figures the results from that! Quinnipiac ought to know better. Look at their polling site on: www.quinnipiac.edu.
Look at the way he/Schwartz phrases the results!
And I totally agree with CTBob: "Doug Schwartz is working so hard for Lieberman that he's trying to INFLUENCE the outcome of the election with his low-ball figures for Ned Lamont. How is this fair?"
To Ned Opportunist- Ned is using his own money to not take "dirty" money like JOe does. Dirty money is why our whole system is corrupt.
And yes, Schwartz's comments are totally inappropriate. Its not his job to interpret and spin the results. Its a shame that a once reputable poll has lost credibility in this campaign due to his obvious LIE-ber bias.
Yes Ned_Opportunist, what's important is how well you can fool the voters into keeping you in office. Good government isn't important at all.
Keep rationalizing about your crooked hero. I remember seeing Democrats like you back in '72 who just couldn't bring themselves to vote for McGovern.
We all know how well THAT worked out!
Joe's hardly my hero BA, I reserve that for people I actually know.
You hvae to win to govern. It's as simple as that. Winning MA and DC didnt't cut it in '72 - idealism aside.
Politics & elections are Darwinistic, and in CT the stronger candidate is surviving.
You're right, ned_op...Joe's new campaign slogan:
Mediocrity Marches Onward!
Well then we can agree to disagree.
You're guy ran a great primary campaign but never got his footing in the general.
Maybe John Kerry can come back and "help."
I’ve yet to see any sign that anyone on the Lamont blog nor @ MLN has participated in the Q poll, begging the question if they keep repeating the same sample; that would invalidate the results 100%. The above is the first mention I've seen. Without a detailed breakdown of the proportions, this could be even more meaningless than it seems on the surface. IMO, the most interesting result may be this Q:
2a. (If candidate choice q2) Is your mind made up, or do you think you might change your mind before the election?
LIKELY CHOOSING CAND Q2….
CAND OF
CHOICE Q2..Tot NL JL AS
Made up 87% 92% 87% 69%
Might change 12 8 13 31
DK/NA – – – –
[sorry for the formatting] Schwartz discusses this like it’s a done deal, but LOTS of room for movement remains! Keep pounding those potential-traitor-dems and unaffiliateds!
Once and future Dem my ass!
J
Post a Comment