10 political pundits no one should listen to again

Icarus27k

Council Member
Apr 4, 2010
1,508
7
38
1.Dick Morris. You know that worn-out joke about how someone's face is next to, say, "ugly" in the dictionary? In the digital age, it's no joke. Google "worst political pundit" and the name Dick Morris comes up early and often, with links to example after example. This time Morris outdid himself, smugly promising that Romney would win an epic landslide, with a 10-point margin in the popular vote and victories in such Democratic strongholds as Pennsylvania and Minnesota.

2. Hugh Hewitt's blog preserves for posterity a chain of risible predictions from a Romney sycophant. Two examples: On Oct. 22 Hewitt wrote, "Romney won the debates decisively, which means he will win on November 6. Some things are simple, and this is one of them." Last weekend, he insulted both John Donne and Ernest Hemingway: "For whom does the bell toll when the deep blue states go purple? Minnesota."

3. Rush Limbaugh shared that his intellect indicated a blowout for Romney. Let's give Rush the benefit of the doubt and assume he meant to say "microscopic" before "intellect."

4. Michael Barone, a genuine expert on the intricacies and details of the American electorate, bought into the "polls are wrong" meme and forecast an electoral triumph for the Mittster.

5. Karl Rove, who stood to make a fortune, win or lose, from fat-cat super PAC contributors, deployed insider polling lingo to fashion a parallel universe in which polls that showed the president leading were absurd and that no sane person would pay attention to them. (Rove effectively took the insanity defense off the table.) Did you see the showdown between a pained Barone and Rove on Fox? It was among my favorite moments on Election Night, Rove insisting that Fox was wrong to call Ohio for Obama -- and Barone politely/emphatically insisting -- because he'd had enough of this #### -- that the numbers do not lie. Rove's Rohrshach-inkblot face could've read anything you wanted. I read "trapped."

6. Matt Drudge. At any given time, if 20 polls showed Obama leading and one didn't, you could count on Drudge to identify that one as being the state of the electorate. On election eve, when it was nearly impossible to find a non-partisan/pro-Romney survey, Drudge tweeted this: "Romney internal polls put him UP in OH, TIED in PA and WI." Even the Romney campaign, no stranger to lying, admitted that those internals were "incorrect."

7. Charles Krauthammer. If you joined Peggy Noonan and other myopic Romney backers whose gut told them Mitt would win, that was one thing. If you made the anti-factual case that all the polls were wrong, you were not necessarily inconsistent. But Krauthammer, a very smart man, knew better than to predict a Romney electoral landslide based on a late Romney surge -- the evidence for which, according to him, was that Mitt was tied or leading in all the national polls. In the real world, the president led in eight of the 12 national polls published the day before the election.

8. Joe Scarborough, a Republican partisan who sometimes takes the role of fair broker, said on Meet The Press last Sunday that the race was a tossup and that Pennsylvania was a tie. He well knew that there was exactly one poll out of dozens that showed a tie in PA -- and that Obama led comfortably in all the rest.

9. Ann Coulter insisted early on that, "If we don't nominate Chris Christie, Romney will be the nominee and we'll lose." Of course, she changed her tune the instant Mitt got the nomination. Last week, Coulter demonstrated the pretzel-logic necessary for the survival of the bad faith forecaster. After Christie gave Obama's cause a boost when he heaped praise on the president for his post-Sandy performance, Coulter said, "We'll find out tomorrow, when Romney wins, that he (Christie) didn't do any damage." She dismissed the cognitive dissonance of the preponderance of pro-Obama polls by asserting, without evidence, that they "over-predict victory for a black candidate." She promised to show up for the Fox News Romney "victory party" -- which was held on Liar's Street, just off Fantasy Avenue.

10. George Will, a veteran with a long history of incorrect forecasts, predicted a romp for Romney, whom he had previously discounted as an implausible candidate.


Michael Sigman: 10 Pundits Who Picked Romney -- and Knew Better
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Very interesting and well done. The problem is most people knew it was coming I believe.
I made some predictions on radio the day before, and stuck to it on election day.
I believed the results would be sufficient to predict an Obama victory before midnight
Eastern time. By eleven fifteen it was truly over and there were not enough votes to make
a challenge to Obama after that. I believe some of the pundit knew the result too and they
kept feeding a machine on a wing and a prayer literally.
I think this election was actually over last Thursday or Friday as the field offices were reporting
that the vote was holding in the regions that counted. Obama gave the Republicans the rural
areas that are neo-cons and took the urban streets that said other wise.
Romney was living a fantasy and Ryan proved no match for Old Joe Biden that so many make
fun of. He knows political trench warfare and the kid had no chance.
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
I just had to listen to elrushbo and Hannity yeaterday for entertaiment of course adn they didn't fail.

The most startling babble I heard was from Hannity when he said that he was having Mann Coulter on later an she was "a strong supporter of Romney from the beginning". !???

I thought WTF, everyone knows about her stance when Mittens got nominated.............

9. Ann Coulter insisted early on that, "If we don't nominate Chris Christie, Romney will be the nominee and we'll lose." Of course, she changed her tune the instant Mitt got the nomination.


Seems Nate Silver in now the man..............
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
People need to clue in that the term "Pundit" does not mean "Expert" nor does it mean "Professional" or "Mature" or "Educated"..... Nor does it mean "You should listen to this person instead of thinking for yourself."

The term "Pundit".... Well just say the word out loud and what's the first thing that comes to mind?

"Pompus Loudmouth Fk'wit"

Which is the long version of "Pundit"

Anybody can be a Pundit.... All you need to do is act like an ignorant nutjob, yell most of the time, believe that you're always right and be very animated with your facial expressions.

... Oh and don't ever admit that you were wrong.
 

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65
What about a 'surrogate'? That's trendy these days.

Just better clothes? I dunno.
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Robertson Admits he Blew Election Prediction he Received from God



In January, televangelist Pat Robertson told 700 Club viewers that in his annual New Year’s “conversation” with God, the Almighty had revealed to him who the next president would be. Up through Election Day, Robertson harshly criticized President Obama and the Democratic Party while praising Mitt Romney. Then, Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network predicted a GOP sweep, leaving Robertson utterly confounded by Obama’s victory.


Today, responding to a question from a viewer who wondered why her business is struggling since she thought God told her it would be successful, Robertson admitted that he sometimes misses God’s message. “So many of us miss God, I won’t get into great detail about elections but I sure did miss it, I thought I heard from God, I thought I had heard clearly from God, what happened?” Robertson replied, “You ask God, how did I miss it? Well, we all do and I have a lot of practice.”


more

Robertson Admits he Blew Election Prediction he Received from God | Right Wing Watch
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
These clowns aren't pundits. They are spokespersons for the far right; bought and paid for by corporate America. Pundits usually show a little bit of objectivity and intelligent analysis. They showed none.
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
75
Eagle Creek
5. Karl Rove, who stood to make a fortune, win or lose, from fat-cat super PAC contributors, deployed insider polling lingo to fashion a parallel universe in which polls that showed the president leading were absurd and that no sane person would pay attention to them. (Rove effectively took the insanity defense off the table.) Did you see the showdown between a pained Barone and Rove on Fox? It was among my favorite moments on Election Night, Rove insisting that Fox was wrong to call Ohio for Obama -- and Barone politely/emphatically insisting -- because he'd had enough of this #### -- that the numbers do not lie. Rove's Rohrshach-inkblot face could've read anything you wanted. I read "trapped."

I was switching around the channels on election night and just happened on Faux News in time to watch the now infamous melt-down of Rove.............truly it was a highlight of the night for me.
 

TeddyBallgame

Time Out
Mar 30, 2012
522
0
16
- If I listed just ten of the several dozen left wing and liberal US political commentators who predicted that John Kerry would beat Bush in 2004 when the actual result was a Bush victory greater than Obama's 2012 margin and an increase of several million votes rather than a decrease, Obama style, of several million votes, would you lot react the same way and make the childishly asinine and partisan argument that these are ten pundits that "no one should listen to again"?

- Gee, I wonder what the answer to my question will be?
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
Teddy me boy, I don't know why you get your hackles up over what some of those enlightened Libs or progressives post in this forum.....sometimes...just plain ignoring their fawning over leaders like Obama and Mulclair flusters them more than a logical repartee:lol:
 

TeddyBallgame

Time Out
Mar 30, 2012
522
0
16
Teddy me boy, I don't know why you get your hackles up over what some of those enlightened Libs or progressives post in this forum.....sometimes...just plain ignoring their fawning over leaders like Obama and Mulclair flusters them more than a logical repartee:lol:

- DS ... I agree with you in principle, especially seeing as how most of them are too bloody dumb to even sense logical repartee. Believe me when I tell you that I totally ignore 99% of the left-lib gibberish here. However, in this instance I could not help asking the question I did and I hope you will agree that it is a not inappropriate question that tends to torpedo the pompous and self righteous screed that started this thread.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
- DS ... I agree with you in principle, especially seeing as how most of them are too bloody dumb to even sense logical repartee. Believe me when I tell you that I totally ignore 99% of the left-lib gibberish here. However, in this instance I could not help asking the question I did and I hope you will agree that it is a not inappropriate question that tends to torpedo the pompous and self righteous screed that started this thread.

Somehow I doubt that you are ignoring it. Like Sleeper you probably simply don't understand it.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
- DS ... I agree with you in principle, especially seeing as how most of them are too bloody dumb to even sense logical repartee. Believe me when I tell you that I totally ignore 99% of the left-lib gibberish here. However, in this instance I could not help asking the question I did and I hope you will agree that it is a not inappropriate question that tends to torpedo the pompous and self righteous screed that started this thread.
Certain stupid posts ar not worth replying to.......like the one below yours8O