Norbert Cartagena wrote:
> You forget to consider the source. Sorry, but I'm not
> quite sure that I trust the polling of any source
> which has a vested interest in any one particular
> ideology at the cost of other factors.
Ummm, the Wall Street Journal currently has one of the highest
integrity and truth rating of major publications by independent
research firms. They are one of the few, quality publications left
and don't feel the need to run stories until they are _verified_
completely -- meaning they often don't report something first. They
aren't in the traditional media business of "we're first," but
"we're accurate" as they are the resource investors need. Investors
want the complete truth, not the "first scoop" heresay.
The statistics themselves were from the government's own exit polls,
public data. Anyone who wants to refute the WSJ can go get 'em and
do so. The compilation also included all kinds of information,
several dozen categories and break-downs. Some of them would even
be very "Liberal-oriented" in nature. In fact, I've seen at least
one Liberal-oriented paper use their analysis in an article (let
alone several others report them).
Besides, the WSJ doesn't pull punches on companies. Microsoft knows
that one all too well. They have even dispelled the BS that a lot
of people like to throw around, that the market downturn is because
the DOJ sued Microsoft. Even the WSJ has commented that it had more
to do with at least another half-dozen factors, than the isolated
Microsoft case.
-- TheBS
-- Bryan "TheBS" Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org chat:thebs413 Engineer AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc. http://www.linux-wlan.org President SmithConcepts, Inc. http://www.SmithConcepts.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Those living in the US who consider the American flag to be a sym- bol of oppression obviously fail to understand what the word means
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:52:04 EDT