Gingrich: Romney will win over 300 electoral votes

othershoe1030 wrote:

Rogue wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:

Rogue wrote:
Theres only one problem OS with your statement. Gingrich's comment isnt news, beause it hasnt happened yet. Its a opinion. so no, im no going to hold him in a bad light if his opinion is wrong.

as far as news, I search the world over for news. I may read news from portugal or germany, all over. Its all news with a whole bunch of opinions stuck in the delivery of it. aka spin.

You seem to want a yes or no answer to this and I dont have one for it. I veiw it more complex than just yes and no. I dont often throw babies out with the bath water either.

Because it hasn't happened yet...? The point being that some predictions will pan out to be more accurate than others and they are being reported by the media via news programs.

I love your Sarah Palin answer about reading news from all over the world.

Still when you read the global press, you do have to give some sources more credence than others. This may be an unconscious evaluation but somewhere along the line you decide what to keep and what to throw out. We can see this by what you end up posting.

We all do this, it's not just you. We all cull through the barrage of information available from the many sources we have these days.

I'm just wondering if anyone's data gathering habits are going to be modified if they are shown to be poor at predicting the outcome of this election. This is a question for everyone/anyone who cares to chime in.

You just want something to bitch about. I can see a bitchy woman for a mile coming.

I do read a variety of news, articles, magazines, oline publications. I probaly have a larger variety then just about anyone on this forum.

Sorry you didnt like my answer. All I can do is be honest.

At the risk of...



Okay, you're being honest about your variety of reading material. Still there is a culling out process going on by which you decide which of these sources to agree with.
How do you decide which reports to go with or deem credible?

Let me say how I decide which sources to give credence to: I go by the sources track record. If the source reports story after story and the facts hold up over time then I know they have credibility.

If I read or hear story after story from a media outlet that does not stand the test of time then I avoid the nonsense and go to more trusted sources. To be clear, by standing the test of time I mean that compared with many other sources also over time the story proves to be true, to agree with reality.

I'm still wondering if you will change your appraisal of sources who are giving you information that proves less than useful.

Let me just ask if you and/or all the others who claim to think mittens will win will re-evaluate your choice of news reports if in fact he does not win?

Alkaia wrote:
I tell ya what since you have beat this horse to death.

if obama loses this election, your gonna have one hellava time finding a credible news source if thats the avenue you wish to choose.

I dont put near as much faith in the delivery of my news as I do in my ability to understand the object that is being reported, in this case obama vs romney, campaign promises, laws passed, regulations coming, taxes and a variety of other things that can be verfied with actual facts.

so see, the delivery of the facts are always presented in the bias of the person delivering it. I know this, i understand this. so, one must first weed out the facts, then hey can choose which ever bias delivering system they choose, or which ever fits to the conclusion they have come to by seeing whatever amount of facts theve seen.

and the fact is for us dear, we just have two completly different ways of veiwing the world. Your gonna read a fact and i will read the same fact and we will then process that fact to how we think it fits in our own veiwpoint of the world. At that time we will then seek people who are delivering it to us in the fashion we choose.

Thank you again

othershoe1030 wrote:

Alkaia wrote:
I tell ya what since you have beat this horse to death.

if obama loses this election, your gonna have one hellava time finding a credible news source if thats the avenue you wish to choose.

I dont put near as much faith in the delivery of my news as I do in my ability to understand the object that is being reported, in this case obama vs romney, campaign promises, laws passed, regulations coming, taxes and a variety of other things that can be verfied with actual facts.

so see, the delivery of the facts are always presented in the bias of the person delivering it. I know this, i understand this. so, one must first weed out the facts, then hey can choose which ever bias delivering system they choose, or which ever fits to the conclusion they have come to by seeing whatever amount of facts theve seen.

and the fact is for us dear, we just have two completly different ways of veiwing the world. Your gonna read a fact and i will read the same fact and we will then process that fact to how we think it fits in our own veiwpoint of the world. At that time we will then seek people who are delivering it to us in the fashion we choose.

Thank you again

Thank you too. That was one of the best things I've ever seen you post. It was pleasantly surprising.
Thanks for taking the time to do that. I really appreciate it.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:

Rogue wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:

Rogue wrote:
Theres only one problem OS with your statement. Gingrich's comment isnt news, beause it hasnt happened yet. Its a opinion. so no, im no going to hold him in a bad light if his opinion is wrong.

as far as news, I search the world over for news. I may read news from portugal or germany, all over. Its all news with a whole bunch of opinions stuck in the delivery of it. aka spin.

You seem to want a yes or no answer to this and I dont have one for it. I veiw it more complex than just yes and no. I dont often throw babies out with the bath water either.

Because it hasn't happened yet...? The point being that some predictions will pan out to be more accurate than others and they are being reported by the media via news programs.

I love your Sarah Palin answer about reading news from all over the world.

Still when you read the global press, you do have to give some sources more credence than others. This may be an unconscious evaluation but somewhere along the line you decide what to keep and what to throw out. We can see this by what you end up posting.

We all do this, it's not just you. We all cull through the barrage of information available from the many sources we have these days.

I'm just wondering if anyone's data gathering habits are going to be modified if they are shown to be poor at predicting the outcome of this election. This is a question for everyone/anyone who cares to chime in.

You just want something to bitch about. I can see a bitchy woman for a mile coming.

I do read a variety of news, articles, magazines, oline publications. I probaly have a larger variety then just about anyone on this forum.

Sorry you didnt like my answer. All I can do is be honest.

At the risk of...



Okay, you're being honest about your variety of reading material. Still there is a culling out process going on by which you decide which of these sources to agree with.
How do you decide which reports to go with or deem credible?

Let me say how I decide which sources to give credence to: I go by the sources track record. If the source reports story after story and the facts hold up over time then I know they have credibility.

If I read or hear story after story from a media outlet that does not stand the test of time then I avoid the nonsense and go to more trusted sources. To be clear, by standing the test of time I mean that compared with many other sources also over time the story proves to be true, to agree with reality.

I'm still wondering if you will change your appraisal of sources who are giving you information that proves less than useful.

Let me just ask if you and/or all the others who claim to think mittens will win will re-evaluate your choice of news reports if in fact he does not win?

....I Romney loses, Boards of FL is going to have to make sure she carries his avatar with her whenever she changes her screen name....

Floridatexan wrote:
I don't think Romney ever had a chance to win 300 electoral votes. Gingrich is blowing smoke.

Alkaia wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:
I don't think Romney ever had a chance to win 300 electoral votes. Gingrich is blowing smoke.

There are a lot of people who think this. some of them are democrats.

oh and your a little late to the game on this post. This post is pretty much offically dead.

OS and me had a good conversation and seaoat refused to acknowledge it as it was directed at him.

Floridatexan wrote:

Alkaia wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:
I don't think Romney ever had a chance to win 300 electoral votes. Gingrich is blowing smoke.

There are a lot of people who think this. some of them are democrats.

oh and your a little late to the game on this post. This post is pretty much offically dead.

OS and me had a good conversation and seaoat refused to acknowledge it as it was directed at him.

Othershoe was much too patient on this subject. Gingrich is the ONLY source who's made this prediction, because it's not true...or even close to true. And, little pinhead, I'll damn well post when and where I want.