In response to:

Introducing The New Polling Firm of Madoff, Marist, Quinnipiac and Ponzi

WodenofAzgard Wrote: Sep 29, 2012 10:21 PM
"I dare you to go there . . ." Reddest What're you - five? "Now if you actually get over your own shock that such a place can be so well constructed . . . " Maybe it's my browser but it looks amateurishly constructed and organized to me. I don't think I've seen a lower quality site and the conversations I perused made TH look like the Algonquin Round Table. Yes, the founding fellow has made it no secret that he loses no love for Mitt Romney . . ." Actually he's said he won't tolerate any Romney supporters on his site, among other people he won't tolerate. If that's changed it means Romney isn't the only "political wh0re" flapping his gums.
ReddestNeck Wrote: Sep 29, 2012 10:27 PM
I'm talking the only language you seem to know, Wooden Az Guarder. That's "kid." Answering on your own level.

There's no "browser" excuse for you -- even Google Chrome works wonderfully with it. On the other hand, maybe you miss the spam by folks wanting you to visit and the ads touting coffee bean cures for old age. And maybe you miss the three minute waits to refresh pages.

After a few weeks spent tracking down and questioning pollsters and the reporters of polls, I can assure the reader that pollsters are the modern-day alchemists. They promise to turn numbers into predictive gold. We'd all like to believe these magical powers exist, but we shouldn't. The pollsters of 2012 just don't know who is going to win in November any more than did the pollsters of 1980 know that Ronald Reagan was headed towards a landslide in that late-breaking year.

I'd like to believe Scott Rasmussen that the race between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama is tied. Democrats...