Ann Romney to critics: ‘Stop it. This is hard.’

And she’s saying that to the Republicans who are getting on her husband’s case, according to Slatest:

During an interview with Radio Iowa last night, Ann Romney had a message for the growing ranks of Republicans who have criticized her husband in recent days.

“Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring,” she said. “This is hard and, you know, it’s an important thing that we’re doing right now and it’s an important election and it is time for all Americans to realize how significant this election is and how lucky we are to have someone with Mitt’s qualifications and experience and know-how to be able to have the opportunity to run this country.”

I find myself wondering whether that was spontaneous on her part — which it could well be — or whether someone in the campaign decided, Let’s have Ann say this. Being a woman and being the spouse and not the candidate, she can get away with it — whereas Mitt would be labeled a whiner.

I could see someone in the campaign thinking that, but I prefer to think it was spontaneous.

Beyond that, I have two reactions:

  1. Yes, indeed. One reason we don’t have more (and better) candidates for public office is that the audience is so cruel and unforgiving, and obsesses over the tiniest slip-up. It isn’t fair, and if you’re in the middle of it all, you do sort of wish the facile critics would have the guts to see what it’s like sometime to be in there trying your heart out.
  2. On the other hand, I’m cognizant of exactly why these GOP critics are getting on her husband’s case, and that makes me think, Yeah, you’re right: It IS hard. Especially for certain people, apparently…

60 thoughts on “Ann Romney to critics: ‘Stop it. This is hard.’

  1. bud

    Ann Romney has had some serious health issues and that is certainly worthy of compassion. However, her whole life has been one of incredible privelage with unprecidented advantages and luxuries that most of us can only dream of. Heck the dancing horse alone is probably worth a few hundred Myrtle Beach vacations for middle-class families. So frankly I find it hard to be sympathetic to this woman whose husband is going around insulting anyone and everyone he comes in contact with.

    Reply
  2. Steven Davis II

    bud – “However, her whole life has been one of incredible privelage with unprecidented advantages and luxuries that most of us can only dream of.”

    bud, do you dream of having Multiple Sclerosis?

    Reply
  3. bud

    Sure SD the MS is a serious and unfortunate occurrence for Ms. Romney, I concur. But because of her husbands great wealth she was able to gain access to the finest doctors and best treatments available on the planet without having to be concerned with the cost. I’m sure all that cost many hundreds of thousands of dollars, perhaps more than a million. If so, many health insurance plans have lifetime limits (or did, Obamacare made that practice illegal). But the Romneys didn’t have to worry about any of that. Heck, a couple of million dollars would be nothing for them to shell out even after the insurance ran out. By supporting her husbands plans to repeal Obamacare Ann Romney is effectively denying the opportunity for MS sufferers of lessor means the opportunity to obtain the same care she was able to get.

    Reply
  4. Brad

    By the way — and I might make this a separate post when it’s official — Romney is releasing his tax returns for 2011 today at 3.

    Early reports say he “paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in income in 2011 for an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent.”

    Reply
  5. Kathryn Fenner

    Bud acknowledged her health issues, which can’t be all that bad, from the look of her. My friends with MS are far less mobile, and they have fairly mild cases. It’s not like she’s Jacqueline Dupree….

    Reply
  6. Steven Davis II

    @bud – “But because of her husbands great wealth she was able to gain access to the finest doctors and best treatments available on the planet without having to be concerned with the cost.”

    So what you’re saying is that people on Medicare and Medicaid are banned from seeing medical treatment at Duke Univsity, Mayo Clinic, John Hopkins, etc…

    Reply
  7. Steven Davis II

    @Kathryn – So you would trade places with her… because after all, “can’t be all that bad, from the look of her”.

    It’s a good thing you went to law school instead of medical school, because you wouldn’t have done well in bedside manner.

    Reply
  8. Mark Stewart

    Et tu, Steven. Lay off the snark. It does you no credit.

    But your point is valid; most people suffer quitely and more often invisibly. It doesn’t mean they are entirely well; though they also may not be abnormal in any human sense.

    Reply
  9. Doug Ross

    “Early reports say he “paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in income in 2011 for an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent.””

    And Democrats are now trying to ding Romney for pay more taxes than he was supposed to because he didn’t claim all of the $4 million in charitable contributions he made.

    This is why Romney should not release any more tax returns. Democrats will cherry pick numbers to promote a meme about “greedy, rich Romney” while downplaying the fact that he pays millions in taxes and donates millions in charity. Who else among us donated twice as much to charity as they paid in income taxes?

    Romney paid the taxes that were due under the system created previously by Democrats and Republicans. His only fault is being smart and rich.

    Reply
  10. Steven Davis II

    How do their percentages of charitable contributions compare? Did the Obama’s give nearly 30% of their income to charity? But Obama is supposed to be the candidate for the people.

    Reply
  11. j

    The point is that he had his accountant(s) manipulate his return to get above the tax paid to total income percentage floor he said earlier this year. Who every heard of not taking your full deduction for charitable contributions? Have you? He said he never has paid more than what was owed. So silly but sad! Maybe his car elevator doesn’t go all the way to the top.
    Indicative of this season and “the conservative view” comments. The truth has a liberal bias I presume.

    Reply
  12. Bart

    “Who every heard of not taking your full deduction for charitable contributions? Have you?”….j

    Absolutely. My wife and I never take the full amount if we take any deductions at all. And to answer before you ask, we contribute heavily to different charities and organizations.

    So, what is your point? By the way, do you have access to the information Romney provides to his accounting firm so you can actually support your accusation other than what you WANT to belive but cannot prove? Doubtful.

    Reply
  13. Steven Davis II

    j – I don’t declare all my contributions. When I throw change in a bucket at a convenience store, when I contribute to the local school drives, when I donate to the local pet shelter, etc… I don’t declare those contributions which probably come close to $1000. That would get me at least $200 back on my tax return. Not everybody watches every penny they make like you do.

    Reply
  14. Ralph Hightower

    “A Man Without a Plan”
    I wish that I could recall the news article where it said that Romney didn’t have specific plans to right the economy, to fix America.

    Instead, he’s saying “Vote for me! I’ll fix the company once I’m elected CEO.”

    Romney is riffing off of Obama’s “Change” campaign from four years ago. The details are fuzzy and nebulous.

    If Romney was pitching his sales pitch to an embattle company board of directors, he would’ve been voted off the island.

    Reply
  15. J

    SDII, yes, he’s falsified his tax returns before. It’s a fact that he did when filed to run for Gov of MA. You and Bart talk about chump change and try to make a point of not including that. Please give a rational response as we’re talking about an additional tax of over $225K so he can keep his marginal rate above his earlier rate statement. He can file an amended return and get it back within three years. If you would only get back about $200, your marginal rate is rather low, but is much higher than Mitten’s. Did you go to Purdue?

    Reply
  16. Steven Davis II

    @Ralph – “If Romney was pitching his sales pitch to an embattle company board of directors, he would’ve been voted off the island.”

    Which is why Obama should be voted off unanimously.

    “Hope” and “Change” has changed to “I need 4 more years”. Most people ask, “To do what?”. Talk about a man without a plan.

    Reply
  17. bud

    Ok SD II, rather than make some sort of snarky counter-comment to what you’re saying let’s just go with this. Indeed Obama hasn’t lived up to all the hype he gave us on election night. The unemployment rate is certainly far higher than he led us to believe. The affordable care act, AKA Obamacare, is certainly not the perfect solution he pitched during the 2008 campaign. Plus there are many problems abroad. So there, the president has in many ways been a disappointment.

    But here’s why we need him to continue in office for 4 more years. He gets it. He knows what the problems are and has the proper focus on how to correct the problems. He understands that income inequality in this country is destroying the middle-class. He understands the tremendous burden Americans bear expending 18% of the nations economy on healthcare. He understands the complexity and tension-filled environment of the middle east. I’ll take that broad intellectual understanding as a first step toward solving the nations problems.

    Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has yet to make that first step. His election would return us to the days of casino-style banking, excessive military spending and a likely double-dip recession. And that’s a future that I just don’t want to be a part of.

    Reply
  18. Brad

    I don’t think Bud lets his family situation interfere with his thinking on that. I’m guessing he considers “excessive” to be “any more than Switzerland spends”… :)

    Reply
  19. J

    How do you overestimate your income by $7M?

    Here are some more ?s to ask the Mittster.

    1. After the election, when the subject of your tax returns is outside of the public glare, will you file an amended tax return to claim your full deduction of charitable contributions? Was the tax rate you reported for other years similarly manipulated?

    2. Why was your 2011 income $7 million lower than you estimated it to be in January? How does someone overestimate their income by $7 million?

    3. Financial disclosures show that you have as much as $82 million in your tax-deferred Individual Retirement Account, despite the fact that tax rules limited contributions into such accounts to $30,000 per year. Did you lowball the value of the assets you put into your IRA, as tax experts suspect? And did you do the same with gifts into your sons’ trusts?

    4. What was the purpose of your Swiss bank account and the myriad offshore entities shown on your return, based in countries like the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg, if not to avoid taxes?

    5. Can you explain what one tax expert has called a “mysterious one-time infusion of foreign tax credits” in 2008?

    6. You have not disclosed any foreign bank account reports (FBARs). Did you file all FBARs on all of your offshore accounts with the Treasury Department by the legal deadlines each year?

    7. You claim to have paid an average tax rate of 20 percent over the last 20 years based on a flawed calculation. What was your real tax rate?

    8. Your 14 percent tax rate –- not to mention the approximately 10 percent tax rate you would have paid had you not inflated it — is less than what many middle-class Americans pay. And you paid just 0.2% of your income in payroll taxes, while most Americans pay about 15%. Do you think that is fair?

    9. Your tax returns show that the Marriott Corporation paid you $260,390 in directors’ fees in 2011. When you were the company’s audit committee chair in the 1990s, were you aware that the company was abusing a notorious illegal tax shelter?

    10. You say you’ve made a “commitment to the public” that your tax rate should not be below 13 percent. If you believe that the richest Americans shouldn’t be paying an exceptionally low tax rate, why don’t you support President Obama’s “Buffett Rule”?

    Reply
  20. Bart

    I still find it fascinating the level of omission of all of the facts by supposedly intelligent people who never bother to include them when it comes to a “gotcha” moment.

    If giving inaccurate information on his tax returns comprises the accusation of falsifying tax returns by using the wrong state of residency, then the accusation is accurate but he was never charged or prosecuted for any wrongdoing. If NOT paying his taxes is the point, then the accusation is wrong. Mitt Romney paid his taxes – period. Can you prove he didn’t?

    Since “j” brought it up and checking the requirements for residency in Mass. and Utah, the election board of Mass. did not find any illegal or criminal acts they could use to charge and prosecute Mitt Romney in 2002. Considering the simple fact that Mass. is about as blue a state as any in the union, do you think for one moment the election board would have allowed Romney to run for governor if he did not meet or was not able to meet residency requirements? What they did do was require him to correct his returns by amending them for the years he was out of the state, running the Olympics, plus he contributed $1 million to the Olympics and donated his $1 million plus salary to charity. Maybe he should be disqualified because he sure is terrible at committing tax fraud.

    Point. How does this differ from the failure of Timothy Geithner to pay payroll taxes on a portion of the income he earned while working for the IMF? Did he commit fraud and should he have been prosecuted? It is understood Geithner is not running for the presidency but he is the U.S. Treasury Secretary and was allowed to amend his tax returns, pay the omissions and penalties. Tax experts made the point that his oversight was not unusual and if one were to take their blinders off for a moment, if Geithner was forgiven and allowed to make restitution for his omission, why try so hard to discredit Romney if he failed to follow the letter of the law while serving in a position that required his presence in the state where the Olympics were to take place, Utah?

    As a former business owner working and living in different states, on occasion we had to file amended returns in order to fulfill their tax laws based on residency requirements.

    If you think for one moment wealthy liberals won’t or don’t take advantage of every tax break they can get, you need to leave the dark, safe cave of illusion and allow the sunshine of reality to enlighten you. You could begin by consulting Senator John Kerry, (D-Mass) about registering and docking his little “boat” in New Hampshire for six months therefore avoiding a tax bill of almost $500K. Is it a possibility that Senator Kerry was not aware of the tax advantage and therefore, had no intent to avoid paying taxes in Mass.? Do you think he will move his “boat” to Mass. after 6 months or leave it in NH, avoiding a potential $70k in annual taxes? Think maybe Mass. could have used $500k in tax revenue and since his worth is in the $200 million range, he could well afford it, couldn’t he?

    As for the amount of money my family gives to charities and foundations, etc., apparently “j” is so wealthy that he or she classifies $200 as “chump change”. Personally, $200 is not “chump change” to me. It is pay for work hours and is of value to my family. But, to place this in perspective, what may be considered “chump change” to a wealthy person could be anything from $1 to $1,000,000. I suspect $1 million to Bill Gates or Warren Buffett would be considered “chump change”. But, since I don’t have the inside personal information on either one, anything said would be pure speculation.

    Reply
  21. J

    Bart, Bart don’t get over heated. You just don’t get it. Mitt is a fake who loves to fire people and the sez the ER is for those who lack insurance. What a quack. I’m so glad that you and SD II are so generous with your “change.” I’m sure it helps the 47% greatly.

    Reply
  22. Bart

    @j,

    I love to fire people who don’t deliver the goods and services they have been paid to deliver. Of course you forgot to include the complete comment didn’t you? If this the best you have, well…..

    Reply
  23. Bart

    Overheated you say after this post? You have got to be kidding us, right?

    J,

    How do you overestimate your income by $7M?

    Here are some more ?s to ask the Mittster.

    1. After the election, when the subject of your tax returns is outside of the public glare, will you file an amended tax return to claim your full deduction of charitable contributions? Was the tax rate you reported for other years similarly manipulated?

    2. Why was your 2011 income $7 million lower than you estimated it to be in January? How does someone overestimate their income by $7 million?

    3. Financial disclosures show that you have as much as $82 million in your tax-deferred Individual Retirement Account, despite the fact that tax rules limited contributions into such accounts to $30,000 per year. Did you lowball the value of the assets you put into your IRA, as tax experts suspect? And did you do the same with gifts into your sons’ trusts?

    4. What was the purpose of your Swiss bank account and the myriad offshore entities shown on your return, based in countries like the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg, if not to avoid taxes?

    5. Can you explain what one tax expert has called a “mysterious one-time infusion of foreign tax credits” in 2008?

    6. You have not disclosed any foreign bank account reports (FBARs). Did you file all FBARs on all of your offshore accounts with the Treasury Department by the legal deadlines each year?

    7. You claim to have paid an average tax rate of 20 percent over the last 20 years based on a flawed calculation. What was your real tax rate?

    8. Your 14 percent tax rate –- not to mention the approximately 10 percent tax rate you would have paid had you not inflated it — is less than what many middle-class Americans pay. And you paid just 0.2% of your income in payroll taxes, while most Americans pay about 15%. Do you think that is fair?

    9. Your tax returns show that the Marriott Corporation paid you $260,390 in directors’ fees in 2011. When you were the company’s audit committee chair in the 1990s, were you aware that the company was abusing a notorious illegal tax shelter?

    10. You say you’ve made a “commitment to the public” that your tax rate should not be below 13 percent. If you believe that the richest Americans shouldn’t be paying an exceptionally low tax rate, why don’t you support President Obama’s “Buffett Rule”?

    Reply
  24. Steve Gordy

    Bart, if you need specific titles that I can recommend, I’ll be happy to oblige. One of those scholars was my adviser in grad school; the other three sat on my oral examining board. They’re all pretty well known.

    Reply
  25. bud

    Bart, I think you miss an important point by concentrating so much on whether Mitt cheated on his taxes or not. He probably didn’t cheat and paid what was, by law, owed. What is really important is how shockingly low his tax rate was EVEN THOUGH he didn’t take all the deductions for which he was entitled. A man who makes over $13M and pays only 14.1% in taxes is pretty fortunate to live in a nation where that is possible. That doesn’t even count whatever money he was able to shelter in the Cayman Islands and elsewhere. And don’t even try to suggest he wasn’t sheltering money in those places. There is absolutely no credible reason for him to have money in the damn Cayman Islands EXCEPT to limit his tax liability.

    Bottom line: Mitt was not a tax cheat, BUT, his compliance with the law underscores how slanted our tax system has become. And it shows in the continued decline of the middle class. What’s more Mitt and his toddy Paul Ryan propose even more tax breaks for the wealthy that could push Romney’s tax burden down to a mere 1%. So while I will defend Romney to point of keeping him out of jail I won’t defend his callous tax policies that can only be described as a disaster for the middle class.

    Reply
  26. Bart

    @Steve Gordy,

    Thanks for the offer. Would welcome recommendations on some titles you think would be of interest. I did read the bios and as much information as I could find on each of the names you provided. Fascinating to say the least.

    While some may not think it is important for a scholar to concentrate on a particular period in a nation’s history and how it may or may not have impacted the future, if we fail to consider the events of history and not compare them to or with current events and how they relate, we deprive ourselves of essential information and knowledge of the human factor and behavior relating to the events.

    @bud,

    I never defended Romney’s use of tax shelters in the Cayman Islands. In fact, I don’t defend or condemn anyone’s use of tax shelters as long as they are LEGAL. If we were to identfy everyone who takes advantage of tax breaks and tax shelters, the list would be very long and include Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives, independents, and persons of every identifiable political stripe.

    A recent article, “Offshore tax shelters not just for the rich” in USA Today, 9/14/2012, references the trend of moving money by people other than the very wealthy to offshore accounts in the Cayman and other Caribbean islands.

    From the article:

    “WHERE THE MONEY GOES

    These are among the offshore locations where people have hidden assets or transferred income:

    • Belize. Caribbean nation has eight banks, one insurance company, 23 trust companies and 38,741 registered offshore corporations.
    • British Virgin Islands. A territory of the United Kingdom, it has more than 500,000 registered offshore corporations.
    • Cayman Islands. United Kingdom territory is home to more than 500 banks and trust companies, 7,100 mutual and hedge funds.
    • Isle of Man. A crown dependency of the United Kingdom, the Irish Sea island is home to 171 offshore service providers.
    • Panama. Central American nation has 34 offshore banks and about 350,000 offshore companies.
    • St. Kitts and Nevis. A federation of two Caribbean islands that has one offshore bank, 50 trust and company service providers and 15,000 offshore corporations.

    Source: Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, August 2006 report.”

    You should read the article. Very revealing.

    Consider this was a report from 6 years ago and imagine the amount of funds transferred to offshore tax shelters since then, especially if you factor in the recession and the financial impact on our economy. This is not unique to Romney and that is my point.

    As for Romney’s tax percentage, his is no more or less favorable than Buffett’s, Gates, and other notable liberal millionaires and billionaires.

    Reply
  27. J

    I copied and pasted from another blog as I wouldn’t spend that much time on writing it out as Mitt’s position, excuse me, POSITIONS PLURAL, are too numerous to mention, comical at best, and his tax situation shows what Bud cited above.

    Reply
  28. bud

    Speaking of Shameus, if Mitt Romney was my ideal candidate philosophically AND I despised Obama’s policies with every fiber of my being I would still NOT vote for Mitt Romney simply because of the “dog on roof” incident with poor Shameus. That would be an election I would just have to sit out.

    Reply
  29. Doug Ross

    I think liberals are getting a little nervous these days. The focus of the attacks on Romney aren’t about policy but trivialities.

    We have a President who will go on David Letterman and The View for softball questions but has not held a press conference in many months.

    I have a feeling he’s not going to do well in the debates (if the moderators ask tough questions).

    Reply
  30. Mark Stewart

    This angst over the supposed injustice done to a loved family pet is completely mystifying. Y’all keep on carrying on though …

    Reply
  31. Bart

    “Speaking of Shameus, if Mitt Romney was my ideal candidate philosophically AND I despised Obama’s policies with every fiber of my being I would still NOT vote for Mitt Romney simply because of the “dog on roof” incident with poor Shameus. That would be an election I would just have to sit out.”…bud

    Now bud, if the situation were reversed and if Obama had placed his dog on the roof of the car to go on a family vacation, you would be making more excuses for Obama than a 5th grader trying to explain to the teacher how the “dog ate his or her homework”.

    I know you say you would sit it out over the Shameus, or whatever the dog’s name was or is, incident even if you supported Romney. The only group who I am aware of who would go to such an extreme are some of the PETA extremists. And I don’t think you are a PETA extremist.

    However, I do agree with Mark’s comment, “This angst over the supposed injustice done to a loved family pet is completely mystifying.”

    Reply
  32. Brad

    Bart, there’s good reason for you to say that — it’s hard to picture Bud turning on Obama over one incident.

    But…

    I know that Bud feels VERY strongly about the dog thing, and related issues. I’ve been on the receiving end; the strength of his feeling on such matters surpasses my understanding.

    Reply
  33. Kathryn Fenner

    Seamus.

    I do not forgive anyone for cruelty to dogs. Bill Clinton is still on my, uh, doodoo list for how he was so careless about Buddy and let him get hit by a car.

    Reply
  34. Bart

    “Buffett has come out as an advocate for getting rid of many tax loopholes.”…bud

    Yes bud, he has come out advocating closing many tax loopholes…..now that he is 82 and as Bill Cosby said in his comedy routine about his mother spoiling her grandchildren, “this is an old woman (man in this case) trying to get into heaven.” sorta thing.

    Wonder if he has paid or settled him billion dollar tax issue and if he had the same opinion about tax loopholes maybe 10 to 20 years ago? Doubtful.

    Reply
  35. Bart

    Brad,

    I know bud is very passionate about many issues and I do appreciate his passion. At least I know he is coming from an honest place within his heart and that in itself is refreshing. Not many people are capable of maintaining strong feelings about anything in our ever changing society and political landscape.

    Whether I agree with him or not and usually I don’t, I do value what he has to say. Same with Kathryn and a couple of others, agree with them or not.

    Reply
  36. J

    Doug, your perception of any nervousness is not well founded. I look at Nate Silver’s posts on the NYT frequently. Nate was the only statistician and pollster to get every single electoral vote correctly in the last Pres election. It’s http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ and after review you may want to take your Valium.

    How you treat the least of these my brother, including the little animals of our world, is a sign of intellect and empathy. Those dumb animals are a whole hell of lot smarter than many of us. I trust you have a pet. Remember the effect of Purdue’s donkey passing?

    Reply
  37. J

    Nate’s latest comments:

    “With President Obama consistently holding a lead in polls of Ohio, Mitt Romney may need to devise a strategy to win the Electoral College without it.

    Mr. Romney has a few plans by which he might do so, but they are narrowly drawn and would require him to make gains in other Midwestern states, like Iowa and Wisconsin, that are traditionally easier wins for Democrats.

    Mr. Obama has received a number of favorable polls in Ohio lately, and the most recent ones suggest that his advantage may be continuing to expand there.”

    Reply
  38. Doug Ross

    @j

    No idea what you are talking about with Purdue’s donkey.

    Polls are polls. I read that many of the polls are using voter models based on 2008 turnout for Democrats. Keep dreaming if you think the Democratic base is as enthused as it was in 2008. Polls that use a combined 2004/2008 model show a much tighter race. The anti-Obama enthusiasm today is equivalent to the pro-Obama enthusiasm of 2008.

    I think there is a large block of people who voted for Obama in 2008 who have not had a very pleasant past four years. Is someone who has been out of work for a couple years or has a mortgage still way under water or sees rising healthcare and food costs really going to be rushing out to the polls to give Obama another four years to get it right? There will be plenty who will opt to stay home or vote for Romney. I don’t think there are a whole lot of McCain voters who are going to switch.

    Reply
  39. bud

    Now bud, if the situation were reversed and if Obama had placed his dog on the roof of the car to go on a family vacation, you would be making more excuses for Obama ..
    -Bart

    Absolutely, completely, utterly, totally, 100% not true. I’d sit the election out if Obama had done that to his dog. There are certain things that are deal breakers. I did that in the 2002 governor’s election. I just could not vote for Jim Hodges because of a deal breaking issue.

    Reply
  40. bud

    It is interesting that Rasmussen differs so dramatically from the other polls having the race essentially tied. Could he be right? We’ll know soon.

    Reply
  41. J

    It’s one of three jokes that I posted on another thread here that were somewhat Clemson type (from a USC point of view) and showed how some people perceive individuals with an engineering bent and seem to think they know everything and other people’s opinions have no value. Just humor as “I’ve come that you might have humor, and have it more abundantly!”

    Reply
  42. Pat

    I looked at Rasmussen some time back and came to the conclusion that it is by and for Republicans. They use these polls for the news feed to persuade voters that their candidate is building momentum and the one to win. News media picks it up because they can’t afford to do their own polling anymore. A quick google pulls up this headline from Nate Silver “Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly” November 4, 2010 and on in the article “Rasmussen’s polls were quite biased, overestimating the standing of the Republican candidate by almost 4 points on average.”

    Reply
  43. J

    Pat,

    Thanks for posting Nate’s article as it very timely and indicative of their bias and has been over the years a Repug polling tool.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *