@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Do you understand that 'biased in favor of Republicans' and 'not considered credible' aren't the same thing? If Ras is usually +3-5% in favor of Republicans over ALL other pollsters - which they are - that doesn't mean you can't still identify trends across multiple polling dates.
Has it ever ocurred to you that there is a pretty good possibility that all other pollsters may be the ones that are more biased and wrong. After all, we do know that they are more often than not biased toward the Democrats. And if Rasmussen is proven to be pretty close in regard to elections, while his competition is mostly more inaccurate in regard to actual election results, then it is Rasmussen that shines forth as being uniquely accurate, not biased.
Quote:I'm sure Ras is the most respected pollster on the right-wing, without a doubt; he constantly tells you exactly what you want to hear.
Cycloptichorn
It is not so much that I want to hear what I want to hear, its a matter of wanting to hear what is accurate. I follow Rasmussen because I think he may be more accurate than his competition. For example, I don't pay much attention to any poll taken by Newsweek, because I consider Newsweek to be a highly biased, slanted, and inaccurate organization, and I think their polling results compared to election results have shown them to be inaccurate as well.
So has it ocurred to you, cyclops, that maybe you don't like Rasmussen not because of his supposed bias in your view, but because he is actually producing more accurate results, and that perhaps more accurate results reflect that not everyone in this country is liberal as you are, just perhaps not everyone buys into your radical views as you think they do or that they should? Just maybe there is still a silent majority that is much more conservative than you would prefer? After all, there are still many people that value human life over the life of a rat or a worm.
