Did Doyle rig Wisconsin for Obama?

[jackson_dem]

All the polls had Clinton down only 4-5 points yet she lost by 17 points. Was it rigged by Gov. Doyle, an Obamite? :tinfoilhat: We "know" Ohio was rigged because Clinton did 4-5 points better than she polled and the governor of Ohio supported here. Then surely Wisconsin MUST be presumptively rigged...

[Hawkeye-X]

1. So you're out of GDP threads and you decide to spam here?

I definetely hope this one ends you.

[Lannigan]

5. End, why?

For asking a question identical to another about rumors of rigging in PA?

I don't think there's anything wrong with that, and I doubt the mods will, either.

[jackson_dem]

6. They claim Ohio was rigged. The state that jumps out is Wisconsin

If any primary state thus far was rigged it was Wisconsin. Obama did 12-13% better than he was polling and had the governor behind him. Ohio voted as the polls said it would vote.

Speaking of rigging, how about the caucuses where Obama got 68-79% of the vote? He won Idaho 79-17...The only Idaho poll had it close, albeit that was in the middle of 2007. However, how did Obama go from a slim lead to winning by 62? Idaho is just the most extreme example. You can see similar things with other caucuses like Kansas, where the lone poll (May 2007) had a there-way battle between Obama, Clinton, and Edwards. Clinton led by 5. Yet she got killed in the Kansas caucus. How about Washington? How did Obama win the Washington caucus 68-31 but the Washington primary only 50-47?

[DJ13]

2. Clinton didnt really run very hard there

I guess thats happens when you're campaign is broke, and ran by a guy named Penn.

[GoesTo11]

3. Wisconsin's not that kind of state

Prior record is relevant in these things. Ohio has had a lot of shenanigans in the last few elections.

[jackson_dem]

4. Ohio went pretty much as expected. Where did Obama's extra 12-13% come from overnight?

Clinton was going up in Ohio. I checked the polls and was wrong. She was up by 7-8 in the polls and won by 10. The extra 2% can be explained by momentum and is not even statistically significant anyway. Where did Obama's extra 12-13%?

[JanusAscending]

7. Uhhhh..................

perhaps people lied to the polsters, or changed their minds? Perhaps some of them didn't decide until they were in the voting booth??? Possible?:eyes:

[jackson_dem]

8. So Ohio was rigged due to a 2% difference yet Wisconsin was kosher?

We know where that 2% in Ohio came from. Where did the 12-13% in Wisconsin come from? Possible? Yes. What other primary states have shown a 12-13% gap between the polling and result? The only one I can think of is New Hampshire, and Obamites claimed that was rigged, even though the governor of New Hampshire, for obvious reasons, had no horse in the race...

[JanusAscending]

9. Read Bradblog's post on Diebold in Ohio!!

It's in the GDP forum. After reading this, you tell me the answer to your question!!

[GoesTo11]

11. Easy and obvious explanation if you know Wisconsin

They thought HC's ads about the debate weren't nice.

Wisconsin really hates "not nice". (Well, they don't really "hate" things, they really "don't like" them). It's just a Nice state. If you call Land's End store, you'll talk to someone Nice.

This is how Feingold won his seat - two other guys went negative, he didn't spend a thing and got the votes.

[Yes We Did]

10. I don't think Diebold machines are used in WI... that's why.

[Ellipsis]

12. No.