sunset from behind the wire

sunset from behind the wire

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Obama - Faked Poll and Twitter Results

Skewed and outright faked poll results have been stock in trade with political hijinks for at least thirty years but this year, IN AMERICA, they're downright shameless.

In the July 1, 2012 election for President of Mexico, the PRI [Party] (Partido Revolucionario Institucional) spent over three million US Dollars per week to show their candidate, Enrique Peña Nieto with a double-diget lead over the field, consisting of the PAN (Conservative National Action Party) and  PRD (Communist Party). Even though the PRI candidate, who ultimately won, was in the lead, the money was paid to create a herd instinct to vote for him - and that was worth US$3,000,000 per week. Some of the money went to the Miroslav Advertising Agency and some of it went directly to media leaders. So it must be a big advantage?

Nobody knows how much the Democratic Party is paying the mainstream media to further the lie that is the polls that they're putting out, but it has to be many times what the Mexican PRI paid to skew their polling results.
The polling game continues. The MSM keeps putting out polls showing Obama ahead nationally and in the key battleground states. Yet, as soon as you scratch the surface on these polls, it becomes obvious right away that they are skewed to result in pro-Obama outcomes. Let’s take a look at the latest and then I’ll tell you why they’re doing this. (Andrew Price)
Price continues, the emphasis added is mine: CBS/NYT shows Obama with a 3% national lead. They no longer provide their underlying data because they’ve been caught too many times now using laughably biased samples. But get this. . . Romney wins 90% of Republicans. Obama wins 92% of Democrats. So to get a 3% win for Obama, Obama must carry independents, right? No. Romney wins independents by +11%. Think about that. If they used a fair sample, then Romney and Obama should get about the same percentage of voters from their own parties. That means Romney should be winning by 11%, but he’s not. He’s losing by 3%. That tells us the sample was probably around +14% for the Democrats!! There’s also no enthusiasm gap for Obama among Democrats, which is inconsistent with all prior polling. 
Clearly, these polls are fakes, just as so many others have been in recent months. It’s becoming a worn out story how the polls are skewing sample sizes well into the double digits, well beyond the peak of Democratic turnout in 2008, to show Obama with a tiny lead. Why are they doing this?
The answer is simple: the herd instinct. 
As I’ve said many times before, humans are by instinct herd animals. Marketing people understand this, which is why so many advertisements tell you that if you want to belong, you better do what everybody else is doing and buy their product. These appeals work on the human instinct to follow the herd and do what everyone else does.
The Democratic Party is playing the same game with Obama's Twitter account (The Blaze) "The New York Times reports analysis supposedly revealing “fake” or “inactive” Twitter accounts comes from the tool Fake Follower Check, which was created by the firm StatusPeople. The Times states that if accurate, the tool shows 70 percent of Obama’s Twitter followers are fake." Don't expect the mainstream media to do much about it or discuss it on prime time. It won't be a headline in the NYT. I'm actually shocked that they did the analysis. 

Out of President Barack Obama’s nearly 19 million followers, as many as 13 million could be fake. Why would Obama's handlers fake thirteen million Twitter accounts? They want to show that a failed President is popular. To do so they need to LIE and to build momentum in the herd - with you, the American voters.
As Andrew Price explains (Op Cit), "The left is worried that if it becomes obvious that the public, i.e. the herd, is running with Romney, the rest of the herd will follow. That will create unstoppable momentum. By putting out these fake poll numbers, the MSM hopes to stop the public from realizing the direction of the herd so that Obama has a chance to win people back before the election."

Did Romney Err?

High Propensity Obama Voter:

"Now that Obama is president I don't have to worry about paying for gas or my mortgage." (somebody else will pay those bills for me)

"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what," Romney could be heard saying. "There are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it." (Fox News)
There is a definite difference between likely "Obama Voters"  and likely "Romney Voters"

The mainstream media is trying to suggest that Romney's comments were scandalous, 'writing off half of the nation'. However, polls indicate that roughly half of the nation (likely those who pay no taxes) will not support him and will rally with their Obama meal ticket. How is that insensitive? It's true and for the Democrats, it's an 'inconvenient truth'. 

Does anybody else remember Obama's Aunt Zeituni Onyango? She wrote a book, "Tears of Abuse" on how rough her life has been. It's interesting that Barack/Barry is a 'dog eater with composite girlfriends' (Boston Herald) according to dear old Auntie.
Onyango, the half-sister of Mr. Obama's late father, moved from Kenya to the United States in 2000. She first applied for asylum in 2002, citing violence in Kenya, according to the Associated Press. Onyango's request was rejected in 2004, but she stayed in the country, living in public housing in Boston. WBZ-TV reports that Onyango fell seriously ill but she did not have enough money to travel home after recovering.
Onyango, however, told WBZ-TV, "If I come as an immigrant, you have the obligation to make me a citizen." Onyango was granted asylum earlier this year. (CBS News) (
Based on the Aunt Zeituni standard, every Mexican who comes to the US and wants to stay should be granted asylum because of the 'violence in Mexico'. And we also know that these illegal aliens (who don't need to show ID to vote because that would somehow be "racist") will vote for free benefits, and Obama's largess (with your money and money borrowed from China). Illegal Alien is a code word for a vote for the Democratic Party Candidate.

And while buying votes with money contributed by 52% of Americans may sound just fine to the Obama Campaign and their cronies in the mainstream media, it's odious to many of the rest of us.