Deliciously scathing critique of "UnskewedPolls.com"

and its so-called "independent journalist" founder, Dean Chambers.

By commentor Juan Carlos Holmes, posted 7 November 2012:
"Funny; just over two weeks ago you were predicting a blowout in which Governor Romney would magically win New Hampshire, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, New Mexico, and Oregon; despite having no credentials as a pollster or statistician (or, as near as anyone can figure, training and experience as a legitimate journalist), you insisted that those more qualified, experienced, and competent than you must change their numbers to match those which you just made up, in which you pretended that 7.5 million Hispanics didn't exist, increased the number of Republican voters by 4%, and assumed that the women's vote would be exactly the same as the men's vote, all because it "felt right" to you.

You are indeed correct that we have serious issues in this country; many of them stem out
of our unfortunately over-application of the philosophy that everyone has something to contribute. While that is perfectly true, what we seem to have forgotten is that not everyone has something to contribute on every topic.

Just because something showed up in a chain e-mail does not mean we should be hanging on the every word of people who are naïve enough to have chosen to believe it. Just because we don't want to believe something does not mean that we should be giving people with no knowledge of the topic at hand equal air-time to deny the knowledge of experts in the field. Simply because people like Mr. Chambers are stuck in an echo chamber in which they refuse to accept that intelligent people are capable of disagreeing with them does not mean that we should be giving his fantasies, childish remarks, bizarre personal hypocrisy, self-deluded revisionist history, and remarkable ego national prominence.

Before the advent of the internet allowed people like Mr. Chambers to redefine "journalist" as, "anyone with a keyboard," and "independent" as, "not bound by the basic standards of ethics nor burdens of proof that a trained journalist is," view like his were very rightly confined to the very rear echelons of the tin-foil hat brigade, and it is our responsibility as informed citizens in a modern representative republic to weed out such inanities and return them to their rightful position as the unfortunate irrelevancies that are a necessary but unfortunate result of a free society. A quick hint to all: A man who pretends to be magnanimous to a known experts qualifications barely two weeks after insisting that that same expert couldn't possibly be correct because he appeared "effeminate" isn't a journalist.

At this juncture, many conservatives will rather predictably use their go-to response and accuse me of trying to deny Mr. Chambers his right to free speech. I strongly suggest that before doing so, anyone tempted to make such a demand take a course in elementary logic. Unlike Mr. Chambers demand that Mr. Silver change his comprehensive projections to match Mr. Chambers' completely fabricated ones, I am not demanding that Mr. Chambers remove his self-aggrandizing websites, nor that he stop shouting his fantasies at the wind. I am however pointing out that though the Constitution grants Mr. Chambers the right to spew his bilious perversions of mathematical reality and his surrealist ideas of analysis that more often than not takes the form of personal attacks rather than topically-relevant commentary, it does not require us to pretend that he has any idea what he's talking about, and it certainly does not grant him immunity from criticism for insisting that people give him as much respect as experts on topics about which he knows nothing at all."

This guy nailed it!