That 31 percent of “very conservative” voters say they would vote for Obama may be explained by the sealed divorce records — and their rumored contents.
Or perhaps they don’t know where Obama stands on some social issues. His stands on social issues are not consistant with what those who are ‘very conservative’ would feel comfortable with.
As for the divorce thing, that is going to get resolved soon, one way or the other so well see.
But perhaps “very conservative” Illinoisans are Goldwater Republicans and not Bush/Robertson Republicans. After all, Obama is the candidate that, although he opposed the invasion of Iraq, says that we can’t cut and run now.
Or perhaps that 31% of “very conservative” voters polled were messing with the pollsters. After all, the Trib and WGN have no way to determine if some one is *really* “very conservative” and the poll only interviewed 600 people. If just a few people self-identified themselves as “very conservative” as a prank, it could really skew the results if there were very few total “very conservatives”.
Or maybe I am giving this too much or too little thought.
P.S. I never took Latin, but from the context I presume that “qu costodes ipso custodiet” is some new hipster lingo meaning, “Dude, I’ve got some primo weed!”
“Quis custodiet ipso custodes” basically means “who watches the watchers.”
Things I don’t know the meaning of:
“an ardent and prescient mea cuplea” (especially coming from someone who “infiltrated” a press conference.)
“overt disingenuity”
Also, to what exactly does this phrase refer:
“the calamity Ryan has induced”?
On whom? Himself? Obama? What calamity?
I’m so confused.
Okay, I’m really giving this too much thought. Illinois Wonk is probably right that this race could tighten and really we should all try not to induce tulmult upon any star-studded charity runs, just on general principle.
my favorite factoid is that 31 percent of those who call themselves “very conservative” say they would vote for Barack.
That 31 percent of “very conservative” voters say they would vote for Obama may be explained by the sealed divorce records — and their rumored contents.
Or perhaps they don’t know where Obama stands on some social issues. His stands on social issues are not consistant with what those who are ‘very conservative’ would feel comfortable with.
As for the divorce thing, that is going to get resolved soon, one way or the other so well see.
OneMan
So is the Trib poll supposed to be part of the ploy? I’m confused.
Do you have some documentation of the other events?
Oneman,
But perhaps “very conservative” Illinoisans are Goldwater Republicans and not Bush/Robertson Republicans. After all, Obama is the candidate that, although he opposed the invasion of Iraq, says that we can’t cut and run now.
Or perhaps that 31% of “very conservative” voters polled were messing with the pollsters. After all, the Trib and WGN have no way to determine if some one is *really* “very conservative” and the poll only interviewed 600 people. If just a few people self-identified themselves as “very conservative” as a prank, it could really skew the results if there were very few total “very conservatives”.
Or maybe I am giving this too much or too little thought.
P.S. I never took Latin, but from the context I presume that “qu costodes ipso custodiet” is some new hipster lingo meaning, “Dude, I’ve got some primo weed!”
Maybe those 31% are more libertarian? I often humor myself.
“Quis custodiet ipso custodes” basically means “who watches the watchers.”
Things I don’t know the meaning of:
“an ardent and prescient mea cuplea” (especially coming from someone who “infiltrated” a press conference.)
“overt disingenuity”
Also, to what exactly does this phrase refer:
“the calamity Ryan has induced”?
On whom? Himself? Obama? What calamity?
I’m so confused.
Okay, I’m really giving this too much thought. Illinois Wonk is probably right that this race could tighten and really we should all try not to induce tulmult upon any star-studded charity runs, just on general principle.