PPP-IA: Braley +1

[Free Bird]

This wasn't included in RCP..... just saying

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

This wasn't included in RCP..... just saying

Because it was done for a liberal group, and was probably skewed a couple points or so in their favor.

This probably shouldn't be in the database, as it's not an independent poll.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This wasn't included in RCP..... just saying

Because it was done for a liberal group, and was probably skewed a couple points or so in their favor.

This probably shouldn't be in the database, as it's not an independent poll.

Are PPP polls for liberal groups skewed in favor of Ds? I know that PPP polls actually favor Republicans a bit, but not sure if that included internals.

[Mr. Morden]

This wasn't included in RCP..... just saying

Because it was done for a liberal group, and was probably skewed a couple points or so in their favor.

This probably shouldn't be in the database, as it's not an independent poll.

Are PPP polls for liberal groups skewed in favor of Ds? I know that PPP polls actually favor Republicans a bit, but not sure if that included internals.

Internals are of course only leaked when they favor the candidate for whom the poll is being conducted.  So it's not that this being an internal skews it Democratic.  It's that there are other internals not being leaked, and they presumably picked one that was good for Braley to leak.  Thus averaging it in with other polls produces a biased result.

[Eraserhead]

Looks like a Braley victory (which is starting to seem like more and more of a strong possibility to me) would be fun times on here.

[Torie]

Stupendous news! An extremist nutjob like Ernst has no business being a US Senator.

Is it possible that Braley is improving because of early voting? In other words, Dems are getting a lot of people out to vote who would normally be shut out of the LV screen, but you can't say someone who already voted isn't a likely voter.

You really believe the above?

Yes?

The question mark appended to the "yes" meaning that you are unsure if you really believe what you said?

The question mark was because your question was fairly odd, considering any rational person knows that Joni Ernst is an extremist nutjob.

IC. I guess that I am just irrational then. Thanks.

Perhaps. Unless you think that someone who thinks Obama is a dictator that should be impeached, peddles Agenda 21 conspiracy theories, supports Personhood which failed even in Mississippi, thinks the EPA should be abolished, thinks Iraq had WMDs, etc. is not an extremist. She's basically a more charismatic version of Sharron Angle. I know the Republicans have gone far right recently, but even by that standard she's still way out of the mainstream.

Seriously Torie. I may've been a godless Democrat not THAT long ago, but how is she materially different than, say, Michelle Bachmann? If Ernst isn't extreme, then.....

I don't claim to be an expert on Ernst by any means, but I would be shocked if she exuded Bachmann's amoral disingenuous arrogance and hubris. She seems a more practical down to earth kind of person, no doubt with an overly simplistic view of the world, and probably not very sophisticated, but then Iowa is kind of like that in many ways. I just find it hard to believe that if she were truly a nut case, she would be as competitive as she is, even with Braley's shortcomings.

Oh, I am the one that is Godless, not you. Don't be so hard on yourself! 

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Sorry Torie... but she's bonkers. It may be delivered in an ever-so-slightly less bonkers package, the message is just as insane.

The fact that Braley might lose to her is an indictment of him.

[Adam Griffin]

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I haven't been and am still not really worried about Braley losing this race. He's been such a terrible candidate and Iowa is so elastic that if he were in any real danger of losing, it would be more evident at this point.

[Recalcuate]

Sorry Torie... but she's bonkers. It may be delivered in an ever-so-slightly less bonkers package, the message is just as insane.

The fact that Braley might lose to her is an indictment of him.

Just curious, what makes Ernest "bonkers?"

If it's solely the abortion issues, reasonable people can differ. It doesn't make those that disagree with myself and presumably you on choice, "bonkers." Their principles are just different. She's entitled to her personhood argument as long as it is philosophically consistent.

If it's more than that, I'd love to hear it.

[bedstuy]

I don't claim to be an expert on Ernst by any means, but I would be shocked if she exuded Bachmann's amoral disingenuous arrogance and hubris. She seems a more practical down to earth kind of person, no doubt with an overly simplistic view of the world, and probably not very sophisticated, but then Iowa is kind of like that in many ways. I just find it hard to believe that if she were truly a nut case, she would be as competitive as she is, even with Braley's shortcomings.

Oh, I am the one that is Godless, not you. Don't be so hard on yourself! 

I love these standards you have for your precious Republicans.  Talk about grading on a curve.

Just because someone doesn't belong in the psych ward doesn't mean we should to elect them to the US Senate.  Honestly, it should be enough that her policies are cuckoo bonkers.  You should really cut an ad for Joni Ernst:

"Some people accuse Joni Ernst of having crazy policies ideas because she's a crazy person.  FACT:  She has never been hospitalized with a mental illness.  Joni Ernst only has crazy ideas because she's a simpleton from a God-damn farm who doesn't know any better.  So vote Ernst this November, her insane ideas are only insane because she's a stupid yokel like you, the Iowan voter."

[Torie]

LOL! Well done Bedstuy.  I have a little feeling in my gut that I might have been "owned" on this one. Oh well, I don't have the time or motivation to try to rehabilitate her here. So I will just accept my "spanking,"  and move on to more favorable venues. Cheers.

[Brittain33]

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I haven't been and am still not really worried about Braley losing this race. He's been such a terrible candidate and Iowa is so elastic that if he were in any real danger of losing, it would be more evident at this point.

What do you make of most of the polls showing Ernst up? Also, the Koch bros. (AFP) appear to be matching the Dems in driving up early votes.

[Panda Express]

LOL! Well done Bedstuy.  I have a little feeling in my gut that I might have been "owned" on this one.

Yeah, you got brutally owned. You should do more research next time, son.

[Recalcuate]

I don't claim to be an expert on Ernst by any means, but I would be shocked if she exuded Bachmann's amoral disingenuous arrogance and hubris. She seems a more practical down to earth kind of person, no doubt with an overly simplistic view of the world, and probably not very sophisticated, but then Iowa is kind of like that in many ways. I just find it hard to believe that if she were truly a nut case, she would be as competitive as she is, even with Braley's shortcomings.

Oh, I am the one that is Godless, not you. Don't be so hard on yourself!  

I love these standards you have for your precious Republicans.  Talk about grading on a curve.

Just because someone doesn't belong in the psych ward doesn't mean we should to elect them to the US Senate.  Honestly, it should be enough that her policies are cuckoo bonkers.  You should really cut an ad for Joni Ernst:

"Some people accuse Joni Ernst of having crazy policies ideas because she's a crazy person.  FACT:  She has never been hospitalized with a mental illness.  Joni Ernst only has crazy ideas because she's a simpleton from a God-damn farm who doesn't know any better.  So vote Ernst this November, her insane ideas are only insane because she's a stupid yokel like you, the Iowan voter."

Oh no, someone doesn't stand with you on principle, time to claim they have a mental illness, instead of them not agreeing with you on principle when it comes to your core beliefs.

This country is great because we can debate about things like abolishing the EPA (not a terrible idea to shrink government assuming some functions would be merged into other departments), whether there were WMDs in Iraq (there were, ask the New York Times this week; we can dicker over whether they were "inert" or not), and personhood (reasonable people can see things differently on abortion).

Instead, it's very easy to call someone who leads in Iowa in most polls "crazy" and move on.

Whatever makes you feel good. The intolerance of those with red icons on here though is maddening at times.

You'd never vote for Ernst, fine. We get the point. But to call a candidate "bonkers" and "crazy" because their political beliefs don't match yours, give it a rest.

[DrScholl]

Setting all those things aside, it should be disturbing to everyone that Ernst called a mass shooting an accident, just to defend guns. How is that a normal thing to say?

[Recalcuate]

Setting all those things aside, it should be disturbing to everyone that Ernst called a mass shooting an accident, just to defend guns. How is that a normal thing to say?

Yeah because no candidate ever misspoke. Ever in the history of politics. Politically stupid, yes. Taken out of context, a bit. But evidence of mental illness. No.

[DrScholl]

Setting all those things aside, it should be disturbing to everyone that Ernst called a mass shooting an accident, just to defend guns. How is that a normal thing to say?

Yeah because no candidate ever misspoke. Ever in the history of politics. Politically stupid, yes. Taken out of context, a bit. But evidence of mental illness. No.

I didn't say she was mentally ill. One doesn't have to be clinically insane to say crazy things.

[Torie]

LOL! Well done Bedstuy.  I have a little feeling in my gut that I might have been "owned" on this one.

Yeah, you got brutally owned. You should do more research next time, son.

Yes, twist the knife, and then twist it some more. Thanks.

[Vosem]

Well, Braley will get "owned" much more brutally in a few weeks, which should be even more fun to watch.

[bedstuy]

I don't claim to be an expert on Ernst by any means, but I would be shocked if she exuded Bachmann's amoral disingenuous arrogance and hubris. She seems a more practical down to earth kind of person, no doubt with an overly simplistic view of the world, and probably not very sophisticated, but then Iowa is kind of like that in many ways. I just find it hard to believe that if she were truly a nut case, she would be as competitive as she is, even with Braley's shortcomings.

Oh, I am the one that is Godless, not you. Don't be so hard on yourself! 

I love these standards you have for your precious Republicans.  Talk about grading on a curve.

Just because someone doesn't belong in the psych ward doesn't mean we should to elect them to the US Senate.  Honestly, it should be enough that her policies are cuckoo bonkers.  You should really cut an ad for Joni Ernst:

"Some people accuse Joni Ernst of having crazy policies ideas because she's a crazy person.  FACT:  She has never been hospitalized with a mental illness.  Joni Ernst only has crazy ideas because she's a simpleton from a God-damn farm who doesn't know any better.  So vote Ernst this November, her insane ideas are only insane because she's a stupid yokel like you, the Iowan voter."

Oh no, someone doesn't stand with you on principle, time to claim they have a mental illness, instead of them not agreeing with you on principle when it comes to your core beliefs.

This country is great because we can debate about things like abolishing the EPA (not a terrible idea to shrink government assuming some functions would be merged into other departments), whether there were WMDs in Iraq (there were, ask the New York Times this week; we can dicker over whether they were "inert" or not), and personhood (reasonable people can see things differently on abortion).

Instead, it's very easy to call someone who leads in Iowa in most polls crazy and move on.

Whatever makes you feel good. The intolerance of those with red icons on here though is maddening at times.

I think you missed my point.  I think if we're dissecting why someone has "eccentric" views on political issues, the part that matters is the bad policy, not whether the candidate is stupid or mentally  ill or whatever.

Personally, I find the far-right wing of the Republican Party radical, extreme and crazy.  Maybe you disagree and that's fine.  But, make no mistake, Joni Ernst is a far right-wing conspiracy theorist candidate.  That might be mainstream in today's Republican Party, but that doesn't legitimize her in any way.  True, she might actually win, I would give her almost a 50% chance of winning.  That's only an indictment of how messed up our political system is in 2014.

[Recalcuate]

I don't claim to be an expert on Ernst by any means, but I would be shocked if she exuded Bachmann's amoral disingenuous arrogance and hubris. She seems a more practical down to earth kind of person, no doubt with an overly simplistic view of the world, and probably not very sophisticated, but then Iowa is kind of like that in many ways. I just find it hard to believe that if she were truly a nut case, she would be as competitive as she is, even with Braley's shortcomings.

Oh, I am the one that is Godless, not you. Don't be so hard on yourself! 

I love these standards you have for your precious Republicans.  Talk about grading on a curve.

Just because someone doesn't belong in the psych ward doesn't mean we should to elect them to the US Senate.  Honestly, it should be enough that her policies are cuckoo bonkers.  You should really cut an ad for Joni Ernst:

"Some people accuse Joni Ernst of having crazy policies ideas because she's a crazy person.  FACT:  She has never been hospitalized with a mental illness.  Joni Ernst only has crazy ideas because she's a simpleton from a God-damn farm who doesn't know any better.  So vote Ernst this November, her insane ideas are only insane because she's a stupid yokel like you, the Iowan voter."

Oh no, someone doesn't stand with you on principle, time to claim they have a mental illness, instead of them not agreeing with you on principle when it comes to your core beliefs.

This country is great because we can debate about things like abolishing the EPA (not a terrible idea to shrink government assuming some functions would be merged into other departments), whether there were WMDs in Iraq (there were, ask the New York Times this week; we can dicker over whether they were "inert" or not), and personhood (reasonable people can see things differently on abortion).

Instead, it's very easy to call someone who leads in Iowa in most polls crazy and move on.

Whatever makes you feel good. The intolerance of those with red icons on here though is maddening at times.

I think you missed my point.  I think if we're dissecting why someone has "eccentric" views on political issues, the part that matters is the bad policy, not whether the candidate is stupid or mentally  ill or whatever.

Personally, I find the far-right wing of the Republican Party radical, extreme and crazy.  Maybe you disagree and that's fine.  But, make no mistake, Joni Ernst is a far right-wing conspiracy theorist candidate.  That might be mainstream in today's Republican Party, but that doesn't legitimize her in any way.  True, she might actually win, I would give her almost a 50% chance of winning.  That's only an indictment of how messed up our political system is in 2014.

I find the far-right and far-left as necessary in the grand scheme of the political process. Differing viewpoints challenge traditional thinking, lead to a healthy debate on the issues and in some events enact positive change for the country.

I hardly would label Ernst as a far right-wing conspiracy theorist. I would not indict Michelle Bachmann as either crazy or evil. They serve their purpose in the political process as much as Alan Greyson and Elizabeth Warren do on the far-left.

It's one thing to call a candidate's policies "crazy" or "bonkers." But to call a candidate with differing beliefs "crazy" because you don't believe in their policies crosses the line.

[Eraserhead]

Well, Braley will get "owned" much more brutally in a few weeks, which should be even more fun to watch.

If you consider losing by a point or two being owned, then maybe.

[Vosem]

Well, Braley will get "owned" much more brutally in a few weeks, which should be even more fun to watch.

If you consider losing by a point or two being owned, then maybe.

Certainly losing what you have worked for over the past two years (and probably planned for much longer) and, considering the quality of his campaign, probably losing any chance for a future in elective politics counts as getting owned. Al Franken owned Norm Coleman in 2008, even if it was just by 300 votes.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

3 WEEKS TO GO RACE IS TIED OMG ITS OVER ITS OVER ITS OVER ITS OVER CIRLE MY JERK GUYS!

PPP is a great pollster, and I have always believed that this race is going down to the wire, but polls are not actual elections. One poll isn't at all a guarentee that Braley or Ernst will win. The polling worship is hysterical if not so sad.

[Keystone Phil]

The Atlas Forum Bubble Mentality dictates extreme exaggeration. So if a good pollster says X, X is undoubtedly true.

And, of course, the Mentality also requires that an even mildly amusing joke must be repeated as nauseam (see: "LOL SURE, SCOTT" regarding Rasmussen Polling).