[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Two parties battling, gridlock ensues, country descends into chaos.
Along comes a man, a very dynamic speaker, who promises to restore the country to its former glory.
Why does this sound vaguely familiar? :)[/quote]
Because you’re delusional?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]jnd wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]jnd wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Oh, and I’m sure beans has a very nice taint. [/quote]
I do… Thank you.
This article came up just now, lol. I guess we aren’t the only people irked (or not irked) by Silver.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/02/nate-silver-patron-saint-of-confirmation-bias
I don’t think this is going to be close. I am thinking winner gets 290-305 one way or another. It will be an early night for some.
It’s just I’ll watch it on MSNBC if Romney wins, and CBS or CNN if Obama wins. [/quote]
The right complaining about confirmation bias is pretty damn funny. This from a group of people who will actually discount the polls to meet their own narrative of how people will actually vote.
Attacking the messenger, in this case Silver, is petty and demonstrates a lack of intellect.
Argue his model, argue his methods, but don’t tell me that his information is “bogus” just because you don’t like the message.
jnd[/quote]
Whatever dude. Stick your fingers in your ear and keep telling yourself that D+8 polls will “eventually give you the accurate picture of what’s happening”.
You have proven, time and time again, you are no better than anyone you are trying to bash here.
[/quote]
I never said I as better than anyone else here, I just understand statistics is all. You are so hyper-focused on the individual polls that you do not see the overall trend that is taking place. You might benefit from googling the central limit theorem. It will help you to understand how many polls work to tell you what is happening.
If anyone has their fingers in their ears it would be those who expect Obama to lose PA…
jnd
[/quote]
Romney and company making 3 appearances in PA (a long shot state for him) indicates that he feels he has won Ohio and possibly Wisconsin as well and wants to pile on an additional state to his total. Or, he feels that he may lose both Ohio and Wisconsin and is looking for a third strategy.
As a supporter of obama you want to believe that it is the latter. I understand that and you may be right. Then again you may be wrong. There is no way of knowing until Tuesday. [/quote]
Wednesday is going to be a fun morning.
[quote]jnd wrote:
You are so hyper-focused on the individual polls that you do not see the overall trend that is taking place. [/quote]
The overall trend you and the likes of Silver are ignoring is O is losing independents by a lot, an awful lot.
You’re also ignoring Karl Rove and Romney know a lot more about this that you two. And every time you and the media tried to push the “he’s done” narrative, he has turned around and done pretty well.
The other trend I’m not missing is the millions of people like me that were happy to vote for Obama in 2008, and would crawl across broken glass and risk my life to vote against him in 2012. The electorate will not be as D+ as the polls suggest or 2008 suggests.
Even Silver under estimated how much the right is motivated, and that was only midterms…
Dude, you should look up propaganda. Any poll D+9 in a swing state is just that.
But don’t worry, you might be right about all this and can gloat around on your pony on Wednesday.
I guess Karl Rove did know something that we didn’t:
Who would have ever thought that PA would be tied with two days to go?
There is one thing that polls can’t really measure, or at least not very well. That is what I call “the hate factor”. Just the other night I was talking to one of my republican friends and he said “I hate that Obama”. To which I replied, oh come on you feel the way I feel, you hate hsi policies but he’s probably a nice guy. My friend said, “no I hate him.” WOW! Granted Obama has his followers and obviously about half the country that would not mind him serving a second term. Many will even get out and vote for him. But, I have never seen in my lifetime a President that was hated so much by the opposition. He has managed to really get under the skin of those who do not want to see him serve a second term.
When Jimmy Carter was running as a sitting President against Ronald Reagan the challenger Carter was looked at as ineffective, but he was never actually hated. The same with George H. Bush(41) while he lost the Presidency he was always considered, even by those who opposed him as a decent guy. But Obama seems to bring out the worst in his opponents.
The fact that he is able to do this will drive up the vote count to a ridiculously high level for Mitt Romney. Now I know that there are die hard Obama fans who would walk 10 miles in a rain storm to vote for him, but mostly his support is fairly soft. As deep down they know that he really didn’t do what he said he’d do. And no amount of campaigning can change that feeling.
Obama has been the most divisive President in modern times. He thought by pitting us against each other, rich vs poor, women vs men and on and on, that it would be a sure fire way to win a second term, and he might be right. But, then again he may have gone too far and those that he opposes cannot wait for election day, they’re drooling at the prospect of pulling the Romney lever in hopes of sending Obama into an early retirement.
The “hate factor” cannot be measured it must be watched on Tuesday evening.
@ Zeb I do not agree that Obama is the most divisive president in modern times. I think that title belongs to George W. Bush. Obama can be the second most divisive and disliked president. McCain was guaranteed a loss because of Bush. The Republican party was in shambles after Obama was elected. There was so many news stories about how the Republican party imploded from 2004-2010. Two wars, compassionate conservatism, the Great Recession, neo-conservatives, water boarding, WMD’s, secret torture facilities, Guantonamo Bay, ignoring international law, the Patriot Act, Valerie Plume, Abu Ghraib, etc…Michael Moore is a millionaire because of Bush lol.
People rallied behind Obama because they hated how far the Republican party moved itself away from American ideals. The hate vote was strong in 2008.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/332386/parsing-polls-michael-g-franc
Damn.
"The Pew Research Center has posted party identification data going all the way back to 1929. The data series suggests that this deterioration in the Democrats? standing with American voters is nearly unprecedented. The only comparable meltdown occurred during the tumultuous years of the Vietnam War and the birth of the Great Society under LBJ, when the Democrats also suffered an eleven-point loss relative to their Republican rivals. "
The link to the Pew data is internal in the article.
EDIT: Nick, you would be wrong according to Pew raw historical data.
[quote]nickj_777 wrote:
@ Zeb I do not agree that Obama is the most divisive president in modern times. I think that title belongs to George W. Bush. Obama can be the second most divisive and disliked president. McCain was guaranteed a loss because of Bush. The Republican party was in shambles after Obama was elected. There was so many news stories about how the Republican party imploded from 2004-2010. Two wars, compassionate conservatism, the Great Recession, neo-conservatives, water boarding, WMD’s, secret torture facilities, Guantonamo Bay, ignoring international law, the Patriot Act, Valerie Plume, Abu Ghraib, etc…Michael Moore is a millionaire because of Bush lol.
People rallied behind Obama because they hated how far the Republican party moved itself away from American ideals. The hate vote was strong in 2008. [/quote]
The lying media, which you are here very faithfully representing, destroyed Bush with a relentless 8 year campaign of disinformation. HIS economic numbers were actually fine overall. He sent several warnings to congress about the coming housing crisis etc, but here you are regurgitating once again their lying propaganda. I was no huge fan of Bush either. However, people like you would find a way to blame him for dangerous solar flares if they could. You probably can. Jist keep typin.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/332386/parsing-polls-michael-g-franc
Damn.
"The Pew Research Center has posted party identification data going all the way back to 1929. The data series suggests that this deterioration in the Democrats? standing with American voters is nearly unprecedented. The only comparable meltdown occurred during the tumultuous years of the Vietnam War and the birth of the Great Society under LBJ, when the Democrats also suffered an eleven-point loss relative to their Republican rivals. "
The link to the Pew data is internal in the article.
EDIT: Nick, you would be wrong according to Pew raw historical data.[/quote]
I think Nick might be right, at least as to the level of “hate.” I recall countless attack ads on local candidates–even when I lived in Texas–that merely showed a picture of local candidates shaking hands with Bush or something similar and Bush being asked not to even show up locally for local candidates or to endorse them. Many on the right “hate” Obama but Bush ranked right up there on the hate factor, and I personally don’t see the same level of distancing locally from Obama that I did with Bush in the 2008 cycle. Granted, I live in a blue state now but I still don’t think the same level of distancing exists nationally.
@ Aragorn that was a good article
@ Tiribulus
“However, people like you would find a way to blame him for dangerous solar flares if they could. You probably can. Jist keep typin.”
People like me? What is that supposed to mean? I do not categorize you but I do recall reading a forum where you added another poster to your facebook and was harassing his Catholic friends and harassing him because he was Catholic. People like me do not do that behavior.
[quote]nickj_777 wrote:
@ Aragorn that was a good article
@ Tiribulus
“However, people like you would find a way to blame him for dangerous solar flares if they could. You probably can. Jist keep typin.”
People like me? What is that supposed to mean? I do not categorize you but I do recall reading a forum where you added another poster to your facebook and was harassing his Catholic friends and harassing him because he was Catholic. People like me do not do that behavior.
[/quote]
Let’s stay on the thread topic. I didn’t begin this thread to talk about Catholics being harassed on face book. Take it somewhere else nick.
Yeah he got a little prickly there. I guess I deserved that irrelevant retort. Inaccurate as usual though it was. I know you agree with me here though ZEB. Bush AND his entire presidency continue to be lied about in truly mind boggling fashion. I have had no problem criticizing him either, but the smear campaign on ol GW is sumthin to behold indeed.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Yeah he got a little prickly there. I guess I deserved that irrelevant retort. Inaccurate as usual though it was. I know you agree with me here though ZEB. Bush AND his entire presidency continue to be lied about in truly mind boggling fashion. I have had no problem criticizing him either, but the smear campaign on ol GW is sumthin to behold indeed. [/quote]
I want you to call this election right now Tirib. And I want you to call the exact percentage that each candidate will get.
Are you up for it?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Yeah he got a little prickly there. I guess I deserved that irrelevant retort. Inaccurate as usual though it was. I know you agree with me here though ZEB. Bush AND his entire presidency continue to be lied about in truly mind boggling fashion. I have had no problem criticizing him either, but the smear campaign on ol GW is sumthin to behold indeed. [/quote]
I want you to call this election right now Tirib. And I want you to call the exact percentage that each candidate will get.
Are you up for it?[/quote]
I don’t even think you’ve bothered to call that specifically. Why ask him then? What do you think percentage wise?
[quote]ZEB wrote:<<< Are you up for it?[/quote]No.
Depending on where you look it’s a squeaker either way or a solid Romney win. Michigan will go to Obama for sure. The media RALLY surprised me by not playing the Mormon card. A little late now. I’m inclined to go with a Romney victory by a hair( a point… or maybe less) with plenty of cries of fraud from the left. Al Franken be damned.
On FNS, David Axelrod Has No Response To OH Early Vote Numbers - YouTube!
Obama’s 2008 winning margin in Ohio wiped out. The Dems strength is supposed to be in early voting, while the Republicans have to make it up with their better election day turnout. Take a look again at the clip, at the shift in numbers. Now, who here doesn’t believe intensity for Obama is down considerably? And, intensity up for Romney? And who here honestly thinks this difference in intensity won’t carry over to election day? The question isn’t can Romney win Ohio, but if Obama still can.
Oh, and, 30k+ Romney rally in PA? That would be a hell of shocker to watch for…
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Yeah he got a little prickly there. I guess I deserved that irrelevant retort. Inaccurate as usual though it was. I know you agree with me here though ZEB. Bush AND his entire presidency continue to be lied about in truly mind boggling fashion. I have had no problem criticizing him either, but the smear campaign on ol GW is sumthin to behold indeed. [/quote]
I want you to call this election right now Tirib. And I want you to call the exact percentage that each candidate will get.
Are you up for it?[/quote]
I don’t even think you’ve bothered to call that specifically. Why ask him then? What do you think percentage wise?[/quote]
I know who is going to win but if I tell you guys then that will take all the fun out of it for you. Sort of like peeking at your gift before Christimas. Now you woldn’t want me to do that would you?
Would you?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
On FNS, David Axelrod Has No Response To OH Early Vote Numbers - YouTube!
Obama’s 2008 winning margin in Ohio wiped out. The Dems strength is supposed to be in early voting, while the Republicans have to make it up with their better election day turnout. Take a look again at the clip, at the shift in numbers. Now, who here doesn’t believe intensity for Obama is down considerably? And, intensity up for Romney? And who here honestly thinks this difference in intensity won’t carry over to election day? The question isn’t can Romney win Ohio, but if Obama still can.
Oh, and, 30k+ Romney rally in PA? That would be a hell of shocker to watch for…
[/quote]
What bothers me about the PA play is that they could have spent the time and money in Wisconsin, and they chose not to. Have they given up on Wisconsin? Or, do they think that they have it won.
One thing for sure if they dont’ win Wisconsin what was the point of Paul Ryan being on the ticket? Granted, he’s a smart young guy who pulls conservatives and that’s great. But a VP should be able to pull his own state.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
There is one thing that polls can’t really measure, or at least not very well. That is what I call “the hate factor”. Just the other night I was talking to one of my republican friends and he said “I hate that Obama”. To which I replied, oh come on you feel the way I feel, you hate hsi policies but he’s probably a nice guy. My friend said, “no I hate him.” WOW! Granted Obama has his followers and obviously about half the country that would not mind him serving a second term. Many will even get out and vote for him. But, I have never seen in my lifetime a President that was hated so much by the opposition. He has managed to really get under the skin of those who do not want to see him serve a second term.
When Jimmy Carter was running as a sitting President against Ronald Reagan the challenger Carter was looked at as ineffective, but he was never actually hated. The same with George H. Bush(41) while he lost the Presidency he was always considered, even by those who opposed him as a decent guy. But Obama seems to bring out the worst in his opponents.
The fact that he is able to do this will drive up the vote count to a ridiculously high level for Mitt Romney. Now I know that there are die hard Obama fans who would walk 10 miles in a rain storm to vote for him, but mostly his support is fairly soft. As deep down they know that he really didn’t do what he said he’d do. And no amount of campaigning can change that feeling.
Obama has been the most divisive President in modern times. He thought by pitting us against each other, rich vs poor, women vs men and on and on, that it would be a sure fire way to win a second term, and he might be right. But, then again he may have gone too far and those that he opposes cannot wait for election day, they’re drooling at the prospect of pulling the Romney lever in hopes of sending Obama into an early retirement.
The “hate factor” cannot be measured it must be watched on Tuesday evening. [/quote]
As you know, Zeb…I’ve felt that the “Not Obama” vote would win this election for Romney…and I still do.
What I don’t agree with is that this hate is all “Self-Inflicted” (and you probably know that too!). It’s been there since before the President took the Oath of Office.
I will NEVER buy that someone who now hates the President to this degree somehow loved him 4 years ago. It’s just that this hate has had 4 years to simmer and brew. Those who loved him 4 years ago still do. They may not VOTE for him…but all indications are that they still like him.
As I stated on another thread; neither man will carry into office a majority mandate from the American people; and we will most likely be as divided as we ever have been, independent of which mans wins. (Which, again. I feel will be Romney).
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
There is one thing that polls can’t really measure, or at least not very well. That is what I call “the hate factor”. Just the other night I was talking to one of my republican friends and he said “I hate that Obama”. To which I replied, oh come on you feel the way I feel, you hate hsi policies but he’s probably a nice guy. My friend said, “no I hate him.” WOW! Granted Obama has his followers and obviously about half the country that would not mind him serving a second term. Many will even get out and vote for him. But, I have never seen in my lifetime a President that was hated so much by the opposition. He has managed to really get under the skin of those who do not want to see him serve a second term.
When Jimmy Carter was running as a sitting President against Ronald Reagan the challenger Carter was looked at as ineffective, but he was never actually hated. The same with George H. Bush(41) while he lost the Presidency he was always considered, even by those who opposed him as a decent guy. But Obama seems to bring out the worst in his opponents.
The fact that he is able to do this will drive up the vote count to a ridiculously high level for Mitt Romney. Now I know that there are die hard Obama fans who would walk 10 miles in a rain storm to vote for him, but mostly his support is fairly soft. As deep down they know that he really didn’t do what he said he’d do. And no amount of campaigning can change that feeling.
Obama has been the most divisive President in modern times. He thought by pitting us against each other, rich vs poor, women vs men and on and on, that it would be a sure fire way to win a second term, and he might be right. But, then again he may have gone too far and those that he opposes cannot wait for election day, they’re drooling at the prospect of pulling the Romney lever in hopes of sending Obama into an early retirement.
The “hate factor” cannot be measured it must be watched on Tuesday evening. [/quote]
As you know, Zeb…I’ve felt that the “Not Obama” vote would win this election for Romney…and I still do.
What I don’t agree with is that this hate is all “Self-Inflicted” (and you probably know that too!). It’s been there since before the President took the Oath of Office.
I will NEVER buy that someone who now hates the President to this degree somehow loved him 4 years ago. It’s just that this hate has had 4 years to simmer and brew. Those who loved him 4 years ago still do. They may not VOTE for him…but all indications are that they still like him.
As I stated on another thread; neither man will carry into office a majority mandate from the American people; and we will most likely be as divided as we ever have been, independent of which mans wins. (Which, again. I feel will be Romney).
Mufasa
[/quote]
I never said that “haters” first loved him. No not at all. No one ever loves the other guys candidate. That’s why a smart man like Reagan for example tries to make everyone feel good about themselves because he knows he has to face them for reelection. Obama took a large group of people who were not crazy about him to begin with and turned them into foaming at the mouth haters.
Yeah…he did that.
And if some of the people who you say loved him in 08’ but don’t hate him now but are not going to vote for him, well I think that speaks for itself doesn’t it? It seems he pushed a whole lot of people away from him. Those who loved him now like him. Those who liked him now oculdn’t care less and are staying home or voting for Romney. Those who didn’t like him in 08’ now hate him.
Yeah…he did that.
He gets credit for the whole thing.