All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 7, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:10
November 7, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And we're back, ladies and gentlemen.
I am your real anchor man, Rush Limboy, here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, the nation's most listened-to radio talk show, over 600 fabulous great radio stations, bringing truth, fun, frolic, frivolity, serious discussion of issues all in one package to America.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882 and the email address, rush at EIBnet.com.
We welcome to the program the chairman of the Republican National Committee, Ken Melman.
Ken, thanks for taking some time with us today because I know you have to be swamped, and there's some specific things I want to ask you about based on events so far today.
Mega Ditto's Rush, great to be with you.
Thank you very much.
Just heard that lawyers with the Tennessee Democrat Party are going to file suit early this afternoon asking that voting hours be extended due to reports of infrastructure problems.
This from a Democrat Party spokesman.
It looks like this may happen in Colorado and Pennsylvania.
The FBI has been called out in Virginia now over accusations that Republicans are trying to suppress the vote there.
This does not seem to be action that would equal a confident party, a Democrat Party, confident of sweeping victory today.
Can you tell us anything about all this, what's going on?
Well, one thing I can tell you is that this is part of the Democratic playbook.
You may remember in 2004, some news was made when a Democratic playbook was discovered, which said, even if there's not fraud, you should allege that there is fraud or intimidation in order to try to gain attention.
And you may remember back in 2004, it was the Democratic Party, which both in Ohio and Florida was stopped by court order from harassing volunteers and misleading voters.
And in fact, if you look, Rush, at the whole country, we're seeing more problems on behalf of Democrats than on any of the alleged problems on behalf of Republicans.
In New Mexico, in Bernaleo County, where Heather Wilson is running, a number of Republican precincts have run out of ballots.
Voters were told to leave and then return back later with an unspecified time and were told allegedly they were going to get a telephone call.
We know that there's a long history in Bernalejo County of vote fraud that has unfortunately benefited Democrats, and that's obviously something we're trying to pay attention to.
In Pennsylvania, in a number of the out-state counties, there have been irregularities too.
So it seems to me that instead of immediately jumping to a conclusion and assuming that there's a problem, which our friends on the other side do for political purposes, what we need to do in all these cases is look at the facts and figure it out.
They're always crying, you know, they're always crying wolf when in fact, if you look historically, they have been the ones that very often have been responsible for the irregularities.
Well, yeah, I mean, after Florida 2000 and that fiasco, they demanded an upgrade in voting techniques.
They demanded machines in this sort of the same people now who demanded that are the ones decrying them and criticizing them and saying that they're not valid.
It's hard to keep track.
I assume you guys are lawyered up.
Absolutely.
And we're looking at it like in Pennsylvania right now, for instance.
The lawyers in that state are trying to get this problem solved and trying to make sure that people outstate can participate.
Heather Wilson held a press conference in Bernaleo County recently demanding that the Democratic Bernaleo County elections clerk make sure that everybody has the right to participate in the right to vote and that more ballots are provided.
This is a precinct with 2,000 potential Republican voters.
They were given 150 ballots.
And there's an old joke in New Mexico that says if you're a Republican and you have to win the state by a few more thousand votes than you actually get because of what shenanigans sometimes happen in Bernaleo County.
So there are lawyers involved.
They're looking at this situation.
But if you look on balance at irregularities, at fraud and intimidation, overwhelmingly, it's been on behalf of Democrats who, as you note, it comes down to one thing, lack of confidence in their ideas.
The same people that want judicial activism to, unfortunately, decide things as opposed to the Democratic process are also, in this case, alleging fraud, alleging harassment, alleging intimidation.
When as you look at 04, they too often were the ones that engaged in it.
Yeah, you're right.
All of these charges of fraud, suppression, things like that do seem to come from Democrats in far greater numbers than Republicans make these allegations.
Well, look, Rush, here's my thing.
I want there to be a bigger turnout.
In 2004, we had the highest turnout we've had in any election since 1968.
You didn't read about that from all these people that say more participation is good.
We had more participation than 04, and they voted for a conservative, George Bush for president.
I'm a big fan of early and absentee voting because I think the more you allow people to participate, the more it allows more folks to play, which has been a good thing for us.
Our ideas win.
Our ideas win.
Every time people have a chance to debate them, I believe we're going to defy the experts today because our ideas are going to win.
But fundamentally, I want more participation.
Our friends on the other side seem to want to use it too often as a political tool.
Well, you know, you're right.
When you say that, I remember in 2004, both candidates, Bush and Kerry, received more votes than any candidate in the presidential race had before.
The president got 4 million more than Kerry.
But I do remember at that time, the Democrats were always urging total participation.
We're coming out and saying, you know, it may be too much participation because they might have had too many people voting who weren't qualified in the sense that they didn't know what they were doing, hadn't studied the issues, that it was just a blanket get out of the vote campaign by the Republicans that just shuttled people to the polls.
So they'll say anything here.
Well, we also remember in 2000 where there were attempts to cancel out the votes of people that were overseas serving our country in the middle.
That's very clear.
Well, it boils down to, and I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, so don't feel the need to comment on this.
I just, and I said this earlier, I get the distinct impression they don't trust the Democrat process and they have to do what they can to rig what they know are their own problems.
I want to ask you about early voting, particularly in Tennessee.
The Secretary of State in Tennessee last night announced that almost 40% of the projected number of voters had already voted early, 40%, something like 800, close to 900,000 out of 1.9 million voters.
Now, you just said that you like early voting.
Election Day is Election Day for a reason.
And why not let us vote in June or July if we can vote a week early or two weeks early?
Where does this stop?
And how many of those early voters voted when, for example, Harold Ford was up?
Well, I'll tell you this.
We did an analysis of the early and absentee votes, and one of the things our technology allows us to do is to get a sense of where the votes are coming from and who they're coming from.
And I feel very good about it.
I think that the early and absentee votes in Tennessee are going to benefit us, and we're going to have won that on behalf of Bob Corker.
Obviously, you're right.
There have to be common sense limits.
I generally think, though, people are often very busy on Election Day.
Sometimes they're out of town.
And I think if you study places like in Florida, Arizona, other places where there has been increased activity on behalf of absentee and on behalf of early, that it's been a generally good thing for the system.
I think the one thing we need to make sure on Election Day and before Election Day is when people vote that we know that they're qualified to vote, there's nothing that discourages participation more than people thinking, I don't really count anyway, because like in 2004, you had all this voter registration fraud that went on in Ohio.
So we clearly ought to have a system that says it ought to be easy to vote if you're qualified.
Your vote ought not be canceled out.
You ought to be able to participate fully, and you ought to have confidence in that participation.
Talking with Ken Melman, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, for a few more moments.
What's the sense now in 2006 on turnout?
When I was growing up, a high turnout was always said to benefit Democrats because there were more of them than Republicans.
What's the theory today on high school?
I don't think that's true anymore.
I think 2004 completely proved that not to be true.
I think that a combination of things, your show is an example of one thing.
You know, I've always believed about conservatives that conservatives are people that participate when they hear a conservative message.
And certainly the history of whether it was Barry Goldwater, kind of the first modern conservative that runs, and of course the Republican Party in one of our two national parties becomes a conservative party.
Reagan then runs as a nominee.
America's transformed.
Newt Gingrich and Congress is transformed.
George W. Bush and his leadership, 00 to 04, allows conservatives all across our government to be in a strong position.
I think more participation actually benefits us, particularly when we have candidates talking about our ideas, and particularly because of technology like talk radio, like the blogs that allow the message to get out as opposed to have it filtered by the mainstream media.
Any surprises we should look for today?
It'll be interesting to see.
I mean, I think I continue to believe that Michael Steele in Maryland has an unbelievable opportunity to make history.
That'll be very interesting.
I think all of your listeners need to be also careful about what we read and what they hear from when exit polls come out.
And let me explain why.
If you look at the exit polls in 00, 02, and 04, every one of them was biased against Republicans.
The guy that did the 04 exit polls went back, did a study, and he concluded that that is inherent in the system, that it is inherently biased against Republicans, in part because the overwhelming number of questioners in 04 were female graduate students for whom female respondents were more likely to answer the questions.
And the result was you had a sample that was about 59 percent female, which because the gender gap favored the Democrats.
I think that could be true this year, but there's another reason.
I'll give you Missouri as a good example.
As you know this example well as being from the state, conservatives win in Missouri by running up big margins outstate.
We know that from the last four election cycles.
If you're an exit pollster, you're essentially paid for production, how many answers you can get.
Where are you going to go?
You're going to go to the larger metropolitan areas where, very likely, there are more Democrats than there are Republicans, and you're certainly not going to go outstate.
And so that's not to say that the numbers may not be right, but they may not be balanced to what's actually going to happen.
So I would caution all of the listeners today on the EIB network, both with respect to early states that come in and the exit polls that come in.
Put them in perspective.
Remember what's happened before.
And certainly don't think because numbers may come in later today that that means you shouldn't participate.
Remember, they were wrong in 00, 02, and 2004, and our folks still went out and participated, and the result was they made history.
We've got to be ready to do the same thing again.
Speaking of that, one final question before I let you go.
I think it's the Washington Post today.
Has a story which basically says, we're going to know by the time the polls close in the East Coast, because that's where all of the substantive-telling races are.
Is that true?
I don't necessarily agree with that.
I think Conrad Burns' race is going to be an incredibly important race.
The Missouri race is in the central time zone.
That's going to be a critically important race to who dominates and controls the Senate.
There are a ton of House races, if you look at it, whether it's the Heather Wilson race, there are three races in Arizona.
There are two or three races in California that are all competitive.
So I think that's not true at all.
You'll be able to know some things, but let's remember the first two states that close in terms of the House are Indiana and Kentucky, where Republicans face a number of very competitive challenges.
There are other states that will close later in the evening where we have fewer challenges.
The ability to extrapolate and say, okay, because this happened in this state, that means that will happen in another state, I think is wrong.
And I think the same thing in the exit polls.
And again, this is not based on having seen exit polls.
It's based on having seen exit polls in the last three election cycles and just knowing the nature of what folks are trying to do.
Ken, thanks for the time.
It's really been fun talking to you.
And I'm sure the audience has enjoyed hearing you too.
Ken Melman, Chairman, Republican National Committee, a brief timeout, and we'll be back in a flash before you know it.
And welcome back, Rush Limbaugh.
Half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair, ladies and gentlemen.
And as always, talent on loan from God.
Now, listen to this.
If your last name were abortion, if that was actually your last name, and you decided to go out and have kids, would you name any of your children alternative?
Probably not.
I don't know anybody whose last name's abortion anyway, but a bunch of registered voters in Delaware County have shown up with that name, alternative abortion.
A more pertinent question is this.
If you saw the name alternative abortion on a voter registration form, complete with an address and a social security number, you'd be suspicious, right?
You'd think somebody was playing a tasteless joke or maybe even committing a crime because that's what fraudulently filling out a voter registration form is.
It's a crime.
Well, this one is currently under investigation by Delaware County District Attorney's Office, along with hundreds of other suspicious voter registration forms turned into the County Voter Registration Commission.
Not dozens, not scores, but hundreds, if not thousands, says County Solicitor John McBlain.
So far, Delaware County has found more than 100 people who have told investigators, this is a big county outside Philadelphia, by the way, found more than 100 people who have told investigators and/or signed affidavits claiming that someone wrongly tried to register to vote in their name.
Another 542 registration forms were identified as having phony addresses, and some 1,200 to 1,300 more also appear to be fraudulent.
What is most interesting about this is that one organization submitted every single one of the nearly 2,000 registrations that are suspected or proven frauds.
The group is the Association of Community Organizations for Reform, now otherwise known as ACORN.
Just last week, mentioned this to you earlier this week, four ACORN workers were indicted by a federal grand jury for submitting false voter registration forms in Kansas City, Missouri to the tune of 35,000 of them.
And this is a liberal group, and they're out doing what they can to cheat and engage in fraud in this election.
And this group's been around for a while.
And it's, you know, you wonder how much they're getting away with.
I mean, they're being caught two places here in Missouri and now in Delaware County outside Philadelphia.
Well, you wonder how many places they're getting away with this.
They're trying this on a grand scale, you get caught, but it's not new for these people.
And this has been going on in Missouri with these people for at least two election cycles that I know of to New Orleans.
And Dave, I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Who knows Rush from the northern province of Guatemala.
Thanks.
Remote northern province.
I have two things.
One is a question about the voter profile of southern whites.
Wait, wait, wait.
Just a second.
You're calling from the northern province of Guatemala, you say?
The remote northern province of Guatemala, the third world capital of New Orleans.
Oh, got you.
Okay.
No, I didn't want people to miss that.
If you live down here, if you were a native as I am, you'd probably agree.
Most of the people have that view of their own state.
But I have one question about voter, the way the media and the Democratic Party views white Southern males.
But if I can squeeze in an observation, you all were talking about polls a little bit earlier.
I've noticed that going all the way back to the Ford-Carter race, that the news media has often, on a very regular basis, released polls that almost always have the Democrats way out ahead early in the race.
And on the eve of the election, the polls rapidly close and narrow to more, I guess, to more realistically reflect what's really going on.
And then lo and behold, the Republican either wins or almost wins.
It's as though they're closing it on purpose so that they can have more credibility for the next lie.
Yeah, but I've been making that point for the past couple of days.
Yeah.
And I predicted it two weeks ago that this would happen.
That the whole polling process here is distorted.
It's designed to affect people's attitudes.
It's designed to depress them.
It's designed to get them convinced their party is going to lose so as to suppress their turnout, suppress their interest in all of this.
But there's no mistaking it.
These three polls that came out on Sunday and were analyzed to the hilt on this program and other places yesterday indicate a massive tightening of this rate in the generic ballot.
And there's one reason for that, and that's poller credibility.
Now, I talked to some Republicans.
No, no, no, no.
We think that's a legitimate movement of Republicans on this.
And if they think that, it means that they also have to believe that Republicans were sitting it out, that Republicans were saying they're not voting or they're not going to vote Republican or what have you.
But now they get closer to the election and they realize, gosh, am I really going to do this?
There is a theory, by the way, that some people hold that these previous polls were valid, that they're pretty accurate.
And what they reflect is that Republicans just who were mad about whatever number of things just vetted to the pollsters.
As a pollster calls up, says, I am taking a poll for the whatever poll.
And people took an opportunity to say, I'm fed up.
I'm voting Democrat or I'm not voting at all, just to get it off their chests.
But now, as we near the moment of truth, if you will, known as the election, those same people, you've heard the phrase, the base, the GOP base, is coming home.
And what that means is that they're now starting to think, okay, I got it off my chest.
And I really, really want Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House and people like Jack Merthyr running the Iraq War.
Do I really want these people in charge of my taxes?
Do I really, really want that, regardless how angry or upset I am about other things?
And that's being used to explain by people who believe the accuracy of the polls, the tightening that occurred in the three major polls that were announced on Sunday.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back in just a second.
Yes, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
I just glancing up PMS DNC, that's a new name for that network, by the way, PMS DNC.
Chatsworth Osborne Jr. was interviewing Rick Santorum.
And I have to tell you people, I don't know what happened in Pennsylvania to Rick Santorum, but I do know this.
It isn't him.
He has not wavered.
He has not changed one of the positions he believes in.
He has been a rock.
Peggy Noonan had a great piece on him last Friday in the Wall Street Journal in which She referenced the fact that Santorum and his wife routinely pray for Bob Casey, his opponent and his wife, because the Santorums know it can't be easy for them either.
He hasn't panicked.
He's just run a very solid and straight campaign without backing down from one thing he believes.
And the things that he believes in are right.
They're everything we all believe.
He is one of the most solid citizens, tremendous character and integrity, and it is a mystery to me what is going on, why he ends up in these polls so far down in Pennsylvania.
My wild guesses are he's got some problems with his position on the Shaivo case and the fact that he endorsed and stood by Senator Specter during the Pat Toomey primary.
That upset a lot of conservatives and so forth.
But I don't know that that's those are things I can think of.
I'm at a loss to explain this.
There's no question.
If you've ever heard Bob Casey in one of their debates, he's vacant.
He'll not take a position on anything for fear of having to be wrong or being wrong or having somebody criticize it.
It's just an empty suit.
And it makes me wonder what people watching these debates and studying these issues and looking at Santorum's record.
It's unassailable in so many ways.
It's one of the things that's really perhaps the thing that's puzzled me the most.
I understand the George Allen-Jim Webb situation.
For crying out loud, you've had the Washington Post as the de facto Jim Webb campaign headquarters.
George Allen has uttered the word macaka one time, but the number of times it's been repeated by television hosts and in print is probably in the thousands by now.
And he didn't say it, but one time.
He hasn't repeated it, and this even after he apologized for it.
Doesn't matter.
Now I hear that it was true earlier this morning.
I don't know if they've gotten it fixed, but his phones were mysteriously out at his headquarters today in Virginia.
You know, George Allen is the same thing as Santorum.
He's a great guy.
He is a tremendous conservative.
And I know the power of the Northern Virginia is a heavy Democrat area.
It's D.C. suburbia.
It's outside the Beltway suburbia.
And that area is becoming more and more populated by Democrats.
But I also know that one of the reasons they're targeting George Allen is because he is a legitimate conservative and they do not like conservatives, and they fear legitimate conservatives.
And he was in the presidential mix, the Republican Party.
And they're trying to take two birds out with one stone here.
They're trying to get him out of the Senate and ruin his presidential prospects at the same time.
And they're running a conservative Democrat against him.
Jim Webb, some of these things are just extremely, extremely curious.
But the Santorum situation is the thing that puzzles me the most and disappoints me the most.
He's just been excellent for our cause and he's balanced the loyalty to the party and the conservative movement as well as anybody in elected office has.
And he's fearless.
He doesn't back down and he doesn't apologize for what he believes.
And maybe that's what gets him in trouble.
You know, I sometimes think that our society has become a bunch of wimps in certain ways.
Look at the way our society reacts to words.
You know, you can go punch somebody in the face and hurt them far less than if you say something that offends them.
And they'll be far more upset with whatever you say that they hear.
And it makes me wonder sometimes about the toughness of some people.
Words are words.
And I know in mass they can influence and this kind of thing, but the overreaction that people have in this case, you know, Santorum doesn't make excuses.
He doesn't curry favor by moistening the finger, sticking it in the air, and finding out what people want to hear.
He tells them what he thinks.
This used to be called character, and it used to be called leadership.
Now some people call it stupidity or stubbornness or being obstinate, refusing to see the reality of things.
But if you believe what you stand for, look at Abraham Lincoln.
Thank goodness that Abraham Lincoln didn't moisten his finger and stick it in the air and figure out which way to go.
Any great leader in any circumstance, political or otherwise, is somebody who is confident and secure in him or herself and is able to bring people along in that regard and is respected for it.
And one of the things that concerns me about our society is that people who stand up for what they believe in are attacked more than ever before and they are insulted and they are accused of being stupid and immovable and inflexible and deaf.
They're not hearing the people and so forth.
It's almost as though some people want linguine-spined wimps as their leaders.
And I don't know when this started, but I suspect it coincides with the political correctness and multicultural movements.
And this too has been a liberal tactic to silence speech on the basis that it might offend somebody.
But when you have the truth on your side and when you know what it is, that is strengthening enough.
That inspires confidence.
Why should somebody who has a fervent belief in something that is right compromise it just because some people are offended by it?
But that apparently is what you have to do with certain people, particularly liberals.
You have to wring your hands, act like you're sorry for your very existence.
Apologize for offending people by the fact that you're alive.
And then they'll love you.
Because then they'll be reminded that you are like them.
So the people that are not confident in themselves, the people who are offended by rock-solid people, I've found it much more limited.
In my own experience, when I first started this program, I was astounded at the number of people who were offended and outraged.
Never before had that been the case.
People who know me personally are not offended or outraged by my existence or by what I say.
I've always been a harmless, lovable little fuzzball.
In most cases, nobody thought enough about me to like me or hate me.
I was just sort of invisible when I was in the room.
Get on a radio and bam.
And I finally figured out what it was sifting through emails and talking to people.
Most people were upset that I was so damn sure of myself because they weren't.
And it bothered them.
It made them uncomfortable.
Somebody so sure of what he or she believes makes other people feel nervous because it reminds them of their own lack of ability to stand up for what they believe.
And so those people, who are a majority of liberals, by the way, gravitate to the imperfect in humanity, embrace it, and claim that's normal.
When we're all imperfect, nobody's sin-free.
Nobody lives a life of perfection.
Nobody lives a mistake-free life, but there are just some people who seem to want to reward and gravitate weakness and malleability as strength because it shows the ability to apologize.
It shows the ability to express regret.
It shows the ability to express remorse.
And when you do all that, you make everybody else feel comfortable in who they are because you're not acting like, you know, you're not behaving in a way that makes them feel inferior.
So I think Boyle is now one of the things that has gotten Rick Santorum in trouble with liberals in Pennsylvania is he's so certain of himself.
And by the way, he is certain of his faith in God.
He is certain in his religious faith.
He doesn't waver.
He doesn't make excuses.
He doesn't try to hide it.
And I'll tell you this, in certain parts of this country, if you express a confident faith in God and your religious faith, that's going to scare people too.
That offense, because that creates, conjures up all kinds of fears in people who don't have that.
And they end up telling themselves that people who are confident in their faith and other things are actually oppressors.
And they look down on people.
This is not who Rick Santorum is.
I just remember we used to reward people like this.
I mean, there are statues and there are monuments of people like this.
You know, I've always said you can't go to the library and find great moderates in American history, the book.
I'm getting to think now maybe that book's going to soon be written.
Great linguine-spined politicians in America.
Great flexible politicians.
You know, a whole definition of strength and courage and greatness, if left to the liberals, will be redefined in such a way that you can kiss traditional definitions of a great society out the window.
Quick time out.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
Okay, back to the phones of South Bend, Indiana.
And Jim, thanks for waiting, sir, and welcome to the broadcast.
Rush, what an honor to speak with you today.
Thank you.
Megha Ditto, Brady Quinn for Heisen Dittos out here in South Bend.
And I've been a precinct poll worker both in Florida and in Indiana here.
And I want your listeners to understand that I've been at a precinct that had an exit poll.
And we used to joke that only the difference between a conservative and a liberal is a conservative has a private sector job.
And the people that come in during the day, that this is anecdotal, that the people that come in during the day are the retired, the people without jobs, the people that are, as you say, bust in from the different areas.
And those are the type of people that vote during the day.
And then we used to have around 2 to 3 o'clock, maybe 4 o'clock, the teachers come in and the people that are employed by the school system.
And it wasn't until about 5, 5.30 that we would have what we would call the code and tie people come in, the people that would get off work and vote.
So during these, how would you call it, poll, exit poll surveys.
Yes.
The people that come in, Rush, up until about 5 to 5.30, except in the very early morning, are people that demographically, by my thought, would be Democrats.
So I'd encourage the people there and listening to you not to have no faith in these exit polls because I've seen them done and I see the people that they poll.
And no wonder they get such large Democratic false results because to tell you the truth, Rush, those are the people that vote during the day.
Yeah, Ken Melman mentioned this in the first segment of this hour about how the exit polling is flawed in other ways as well, and how it has been asn't been accurate in the last two or three elections for a number of reasons.
But look, it's important to also remember here that there are no exit polls in House races, folks.
Here's how the House races are going to be done.
There are exit polls in Senate races and in governorship races, but there are no exit polls in House, too many of them.
Nobody has the money to do it.
Even if you say there are only 30 or 40 that are competitive, nobody has the money to do this.
So here's what happens.
Here's what's going to happen.
The two states that close first at 7 o'clock, well, Florida does too, but they've got two time zones in Florida, so the whole state won't close by then.
But I think it's Kentucky and Indiana.
And there are some pretty competitive House races in Kentucky and Indiana.
And that is why the drive-by media is saying, we're going to know real early tonight whether it's a sweep or whatever is going to be closed by looking at what happens in these eastern seaboard states when they close.
Now, people say, well, wait a minute, there aren't any exit polls.
How are they going to do this?
Well, in each of these states, there are key precincts that once counted and a statistical analysis applied can give a statistical indication of how the whole district is going to go.
And this is how they've always done house races and projected winners in house races.
It's never been with exit polls.
It is with taking these key precincts, statistically key precincts.
And by this, I mean these precincts have indicated how the whole district is going to go for a number of years, or at least a number of times over a number of years that they feel confident in projecting.
And that's what's going to happen.
So when those precincts get counted after the polls close, that's how house races will be projected if they are.
Now, as to exit polls with the Senate, we've been told that there is a quarantine room and that only two people from every network plus a couple people from the actual polling company, and they're quarantined in some windowless room with no means to communicate with anybody on the outside.
Wink, wink.
And then at 5 o'clock, the data that they have amassed will then be released in the first wave of exit polls.
And these exit polls are supposed to be kept quarantined and secret.
We'll see if they do.
I should warn you, there are some bogus exit polls already out on the internet.
Pay no attention to them.
Now, what Jim here is saying is that his experience is that based on the voting habits of certain demographic aspects of the population, that the exit polls may not be accurate because a larger percentage of one party or another shows up earlier in the day than other demographic areas.
His point was the professional people show up late in the day at the end of the day.
Those who are retired, the seasoned citizens, the illegal aliens, the convicted felons that are bussed in by Democrats show up in the morning.
The teachers show up about 4 o'clock after they've graded papers.
And this is traditionally who the Democrat voters are.
Republican conservative voters don't show up till late, therefore don't get factored in exit polling calculations.
This is Jim's point in his experience in both Indiana and Florida.
We'll have to see how that bears out.
But hell, the Tennessee Democrat Party has already sued Based on fraud to expand and extend the hours polls are open today because of infrastructure problems.
It looks like this is going to happen in Colorado and some other places.
And I'm telling you, Missouri is going to be a toss-up in this area.
I mean, they'll probably once again have to keep the polls open in St. Louis till midnight because of suppression or other allegations or what have you.
So while some are predicting an early night, who knows?
But nobody knows anything.
This is so cockamandy wacko.
Nobody knows beans until it's over.
Have you heard about this new trend?
Couples going on procreation vacations?
Heard about this?
I've heard about it, and I know there's no way I'll ever make one.
Details.
Well, procreation vacation?
▲
Export Selection