Breaking Obama And The Media

October 1st, 2012 - R. Rados 

By now you must have noticed the support that Barack Obama has gained from elite, latte-sipping assholes in Hollywood and mainstream media. Smiling pretty boys like George Clooney and Tom Hanks have gone so far out of their way to promote and endorse the worst president in U.S. history that they might as well be employed by the Democratic Party. From narrating a poorly produced piece of propaganda to hosting 15 million dollar fundraisers, Hollywood bigshots have tried to use their affluence and influence to help re-elect a complete failure. Bimbos and washed up floozies like Madonna and Lady Gaga have used appearances and concerts to make their own confused political opinions known to their fans and to equally confused post-teen voters. Meanwhile, the mainstream trash news organizations seem to be utilizing inaccurate opinion pollsters to concoct a clever and discreet way to manipulate “public opinion”. All of these crazy shenanigans are happening right under the noses of average Americans who seem to have a continuing blind faith in their media and their idols.

While cool cats like Samuel L. Jackson admit to voting for Obama just because he's black, and irrelevant grandmas like Madonna tell concert goers that she'll strip for them (and show off her grotesquely deflated, elderly milk sacks) if they vote for Obama, the media teams up with “reputed” polling agencies to deliver skewed results that are designed to stifle Republican enthusiasm – which appears to be much higher than Democratic enthusiasm this time around. While they deliver these distorted results, they give the air to race baiting pigs like Chris Matthews and Joy Behar so they can accuse Republicans of using code words and being subtly racist. Those who listen to such malarkey – and believe it – seem to be oblivious to their own racist assumptions that only blacks and Hispanics are impoverished in America. These examples of racism are self evident to anyone who listens to Democrats and liberal pundits when they accuse Republicans of racism for citing the fact that more Americans are on food stamps today than ever before, or that voters should be required to show ID at polling stations (only to deprive illegal non-white Hispanics of their “right” to vote, of course).

Unlike the overtness of race baiting by liberals in mainstream media, the key to discovering the skewed nature of opinion polls lies beyond the headlines and the vague paragraphs that they produce on the front pages of newspapers and websites. In order to maintain their professionalism, all legitimate pollsters are obliged to release the methodology that produces their data. It is within this methodology that anyone can find the smoking gun of deception. However, this methodology is often hidden in plain sight or made difficult to access. Most media organizations that cite polling data purposely fail to provide links to the original sources, or to the methodology, and instead opt to stick to the bare basics of a particular poll.

Thus far, nearly every single opinion poll featured in mainstream news since June, including Fox News, has polled a significantly larger margin of registered Democrats than Republicans. The only legitimate polling agency that has sampled a near equal number of Democrats, Republicans, and independents has been Rasmussen, and the agency's results have consistently reflected a dead heat between both candidates, or a slight Romney lead. Obviously, as a result of its sampling methods, Rasmussen has been accused of having a Republican bias. Although there are slightly more registered Democrats than Republicans in the U.S., election results have often reflected higher Republican turnouts than Democratic turnouts, with 2008 being an exception that saw 7% more Democrats voting than Republicans. If current opinion polling results aren't a direct result of collusion, then they're definitely a direct result of the mistaken assumption that Democrats will turn out in similar or higher numbers this time.

One culprit – but also the most ironically fair culprit – in the business of distorting opinion polls is Fox News. Their most recent poll, conducted by Anderson Robbins Research and Shaw & Company, sampled 1092 likely registered voters. The problem with this poll, which reflects a 6% Obama lead, is that 5% more of these voters identified with or viewed the Democratic Party more favourably. The poll was conducted amongst registered voters and the actual sample contains 50% Democratic supporters to 45% Republican supporters. If that 5% Democrat advantage were removed and normalized, the result would significantly shrink Obama's supposed lead by 4%.

There are worse offenders than Fox News and those offenders are regarded as more reputable than Rupert Murdoch's right-wing network. Reuters is revered as a global leader in reporting and Ipsos-Reid is considered one of the most reliable pollsters in existence, but yet they have delivered some of the most skewed results available. In one of Reuters' more recent articles, the news organization fails to provide its readers with key mentions or links to methodology, while claiming that Obama has solidified his lead over Romney by 5%. Most readers swallow such news without gagging, but others might take the time to dig a bit deeper. Those who do, end up at the official Ipsos website where they eventually find the poll's official methodology and breakdown of its sampling. This particular poll mentioned in the Reuters article samples 52% registered Democrats to 40% registered Republicans and 7% independents. This poll samples an unrealistically higher margin of Democrats than Republicans and yet only manages to produce a 5% lead for Obama. When the results are normalized, they actually reveal a strong 10% lead for Romney. Anyone with time on their hands could take a few minutes to do the calculations themselves. However, most people would rather have their facts dictated to them by their trusted media sources.

The biggest influence in most elections is that of the independent voter. Strangely, most mainstream media organizations have undermined and ignored the influence of independent voters. One thing that even the most popular pollsters have discovered is that Romney is maintaining a significant lead over Obama amongst independent voters. However, the mainstream news organizations have chosen to ignore this important, key fact in almost all of their reporting. According to Pew Research, 33% of voters in the U.S. identify as independent, compared to 28% who identify as Republicans and 35% who identify as Democrats. Almost every poll released since June has over inflated Democratic samples and disregarded historical trends that have kept large margins of Democrats at home on election day.

What happens when people expose and criticize the polling agencies and media for over sampling Democrats and under sampling Republicans and independents? The culprits, caught red handed, jump to debunk such “ludicrous” claims. Take a blog post by the so-called CNN Political Unit in which they call recent polling criticisms unfounded. The writers of the blog entry go all out in their efforts to debunk such conspiracy theories without making any mention of the actual facts, which clearly show the unrealistic samples in nearly every poll released in the past few months, minus the ones commissioned by Fox news. Their tactic: deny, deny, deny, ridicule, ridicule, ridicule, and hope that Americans just cave into their natural inclinations to accept mainstream media as honest and rational and believe any headline that contains the words “analysis” or “expert”.

If you aren't disgusted by what is happening, then you're either incapable of thinking for yourself, or you're such an ardent Obama supporter that you've decided to accept corruption and deception just to see your beloved false messiah get re-elected. Sure Republicans lie. But what makes them more likeable this time is that they've offered real solutions while Obama has just recycled his old 2008 rhetoric and re-worded it into something along the lines of, “Oh, uhm, right. It looks like hope and change might actually take a bit longer.” Americans should be amazed at how a candidate can still manage to be moderately relevant after delivering so many vague promises and failing to fulfill any of them. Obama has no substance and that's what makes him so detestable to conservatives. In fact, Obama has sunk his country further into debt and further away from any kind of sustainability.

Mitt Romney isn't an angel, but what makes him so worthy is the lack of support he has gotten from mainstream media and Hollywood. He is a genuine underdog. With so much pitted against him, he comes across as a real outcast in an era when wealth and personal success are hypocritically demonized by millionaire celebrities and haute liberals. If Romney pulls off a victory on November 6th, it won't just be a victory for him, it will be a major defeat for the enablers of America's culture of obsession, celebrity, corrupt media, and Hollywood idealism. The tears of the Gucci sluts and Armani assholes who thought they could influence an election with their clout and reverence will fill the streets of Los Angeles and San Fransisco and – hopefully – wash away the filth of modern liberalism for good.