• Follow us now on

    "That some should be rich, shows that others may become rich, and, hence, is just encouragement to industry and enterprise."

    -- President Abraham Lincoln - 1864

    "The supply-side claim is not a claim. It is empirically true and historically convincing that with lower rates of taxation on labor and capital, the factors of production, you'll get a bigger economy."

    -- U.S. Rep. Jack Kemp

  • Special Election – Jan 12, 2010

  • 2010

  • 2013

  • SeaWorld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund

    In a fight between Jim Webb and Ollie North, who would win? Oh, that's right, we already know the answer to that question.

    Potential 2012 Convention Cities:

      Republicans

    • Atlanta, GA
    • Indianapolis, IN
    • San Antonio, TX

      • Democrats

    • Like we care.

    Potential 2012 Presidential Candidates:

  • Current Poll Questions

    No Current Polls.

    Visit Our Sponsors

    Advertise here

    Join Team Sarah!

  • Open Threads

    2010 Elections

    2011 Elections

    2012 Elections

    2013 Elections and Beyond

  • Poll Accuracy Based Results

    Election 2009 actual results: Bob McDonnell 58.6 percent for a 17.4 percent margin of victory. Virtucon rankings are based upon total amount the two numbers deviate from the actual numbers.

    1. Survey USA (10/30-11/1) – 58% / 18% (deviation 1.2%)

    2. VCU (10/21-25) – 54% / 18% (deviation 5.2%)

    3. (TIE) PPP (10/31-11/1) – 56% / 14% (deviation 6%)

    3. (TIE) Roanoke College (10/21-27) – 53% / 17% (deviation 6%)

    5. Suffolk Univ. (10/26-28) – 54% / 14% (deviation 8%)

    6. Rasmussen (10/27) – 54% / 13% (deviation 9%)

    7. Washington Post (10/22-25) – 55% / 11% (deviation 10%)

    8. Times Dispatch / Mason Dixon (10/28-29) – 53% / 12% (deviation 11%)

    9. Daily Kos / Research 2000 (10/26-28) – 54% / 10% (deviation 12%)

    10. Virginia Pilot / CNU (10/8-13) – 45% / 14% (deviation 17%)

    11. Clarus (10/18-19) – 49% / 8% (deviation 19%)

    Next time you see a poll, judge it by its past performance. Here is how they rank in terms of accuracy based upon the 2008 presidential election:

    1T. Rasmussen (11/1-3)**

    1T. Pew (10/29-11/1)**

    3. YouGov/Polimetrix (10/18-11/1)

    4. Harris Interactive (10/20-27)

    5. GWU (Lake/Tarrance) (11/2-3)*

    6T. Diageo/Hotline (10/31-11/2)*

    6T. ARG (10/25-27)*

    8T. CNN (10/30-11/1)

    8T. Ipsos/McClatchy (10/30-11/1)

    10. DailyKos.com (D)/Research 2000 (11/1-3)

    ----------------

    (If you're below DailyKos, you don't deserve to be taken seriously for another four years. Better luck in 2012.)

    11. AP/Yahoo/KN (10/17-27)

    12. Democracy Corps (D) (10/30-11/2)

    13. FOX (11/1-2)

    14. Economist/YouGov (10/25-27)

    15. IBD/TIPP (11/1-3)

    16. NBC/WSJ (11/1-2)

    17. ABC/Post (10/30-11/2)

    18. Marist College (11/3)

    19. CBS (10/31-11/2)

    20. Gallup (10/31-11/2)

    21. Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby (10/31-11/3)

    22. CBS/Times (10/25-29)

    23. Newsweak (10/22-23)

  • RSS Redskins Insider

More Press Coverage for Ham Sandwich

Posted on June 14, 2007 by Riley

The blog Raising Ham has come across yet more media attention being lavished upon Republican write-in candidate for PWC Commonwealth’s Attorney Ham Sandwich.

From Kansascity.com:

Some conservative bloggers are touting the candidacy of a ham sandwich to take the place of Paul Ebert, the Prince William County commonwealth attorney. The Web site www.votehamsandwich.com promises that the ham sandwich “possesses every bit the same skills and qualities as” Democrat Ebert, who has held the post almost 40 years.

With no GOP nominee or independent candidate on the ballot against Paul Ebert, Ham has the field all clear to himself where he can go up against him one on one.  I’m liking those odds, especially if Team Sandwich can convince the PWC, Manassas and Manassas Park GOP cmtes. to include Ham on their sample ballots in November.

Filed under: 2007 Elections, Ham Sandwich, Prince William County Politics

« »

One Response

  1. Dark-Star, on June 14th, 2007 at 12:20 pm Said:

    Visited the site. All I can say is…ouch. *Major* ouch!

    This is Grade-A mockery; it’s not only well-written, but there are no personal slurs on Paul Ebert. And best of all – no profanity. Nada. Zip.

    It’s also quite obvious that Mr.Ebert made some serious mistakes in handling his office. The site isn’t dedicated to his speech goofs (which really don’t mean squat as to ability) or a few honest mistakes. The people here are seriously honked off because of his bungling on several occasions.

    If the ham sandwich is even actually -on the ballot-, never mind -elected-, Paul Ebert should be given a place in some Hall of Shame or another. That would have to be some kind of record.

Leave a Reply