Winner Of The Presidential Election is....

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
581

[quote]ZEB wrote:

By calling Mitt Romney a Bullshitter in Rolling Stone magazine.

.[/quote]

You know, I was talking to my boss about this at lunch yesterday. He is a Jewish man in his 60’s that grew up so poor he wore his brother’s hand-me-down shoes with holes in them to school. Now he has a couple comas in his rainy day fund.

He was like, “now look, it is easy to pick apart the guy you want to lose, but there is a level or respect that one expects from a president.”

I mean it comes down to, when I was young, one respected the office of the president. But obama seems to think the office of the president should respect him.

Whether it is 2 weeks from now or 4 years from now, I can’t wait until the rockstar in chief that is this classless buffoon is gone.

582

In other news, romney announced he was spending a little ad dough in Minnesota, where polls have obama at 52%…

Seemed odd, until obama follows and announces ad spending there too. Seems silly either side would spend precious money in a state polling 52% for one side.

583

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
In other news, romney announced he was spending a little ad dough in Minnesota, where polls have obama at 52%…

Seemed odd, until obama follows and announces ad spending there too. Seems silly either side would spend precious money in a state polling 52% for one side.[/quote]

They did this for two reasons:

  1. When you have more money than your opponent, which Romney now has, you try to force your opponent to spend money where it will do the least good.

  2. Minnesota border’s Wisconsin and it is very likely that the City that they purchased advertising borders an area in Wisconsin which could be friendly to Romney. And as we both know Wisconsin is a swing state which the Romney camp would love to have.

584

If you really want to see the Obama camp freak out watch to see if the Romney people purchase advertising in PA, which now only shows Obama up by 4 or 5 points. If that happens you will know that things are going very well for Romney.

If that happened the Obama people concerned that they might lose PA by a fraction will start buying ad time there as well. Thus diverting valuable resources away from states like Ohio, Nevada, Iowa and other states that they really need. But they also know that they cannot lose PA, therein lies the dilemma.

585

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

It is not 50/50. Every available poll average gives Obama an electoral college win if the election is held today.[/quote]

At this point, we are talking about two different things…
[/quote]

This guy explains pretty well what I’m saying.

586

[quote]ZEB wrote:
If you really want to see the Obama camp freak out watch to see if the Romney people purchase advertising in PA, which now only shows Obama up by 4 or 5 points. If that happens you will know that things are going very well for Romney.

If that happened the Obama people concerned that they might lose PA by a fraction will start buying ad time there as well. Thus diverting valuable resources away from states like Ohio, Nevada, Iowa and other states that they really need. But they also know that they cannot lose PA, therein lies the dilemma. [/quote]

Couple hundred people waiting to hear Ann speak of all people…

I like the “make them spend money they don’t have in places they don’t need to spend it” strategy.

I want to read campaign strategy books.

587

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

It is not 50/50. Every available poll average gives Obama an electoral college win if the election is held today.[/quote]

At this point, we are talking about two different things…
[/quote]

This guy explains pretty well what I’m saying.[/quote]

Thanks for the article beans. I like the way the writer refers to the media as “Corrupt”. He states, “The corrupt media claims…”

I usually refer to them as the main stream liberal media. But in fact they are a bunch of out right liars. Therefore, I think the word “Corrupt” is actually more accurate than saying that they are liberal. Someone can be liberal and not corrupt. But anyone who lies about one candidate in order to help the other is in fact corrupt.

And…that’s why I warn various posters on this site to look away from certain polls, that are corrupt, and stick to the tried and true pollsters who have been doing a reliable job for years.

588

Rasmussen thinks Wisconsin could be the key battleground state if Ohio goes to Obama.

Makes the Ryan pick look pretty key in that case (I remember some Romney supporters in here disagreed pretty strongly with the Ryan pick). Some pretty smart dude(s?) is running the Romney campaign. If Romney wins, this election will be the political equivalent of some Harvard B-school case study.

Silver got his start in fantasy baseball. I’m pretty darn good at fantasy baseball, (which doesn’t mean squat usually) and I never used Silver’s stuff because it didn’t work, i.e. sucked. Imagine my surprise this year when I find out that he is now worshipped as some kind of polling genius. At the risk of sounding unduly harsh, I go by the rule of garbage in garbage out. Especially when said garbage is so complicated my puny college education can barely make heads or tails out of it.

589

[quote]punnyguy wrote:
Rasmussen thinks Wisconsin could be the key battleground state if Ohio goes to Obama.

Makes the Ryan pick look pretty key in that case (I remember some Romney supporters in here disagreed pretty strongly with the Ryan pick). Some pretty smart dude(s?) is running the Romney campaign. If Romney wins, this election will be the political equivalent of some Harvard B-school case study.

Silver got his start in fantasy baseball. I’m pretty darn good at fantasy baseball, (which doesn’t mean squat usually) and I never used Silver’s stuff because it didn’t work, i.e. sucked. Imagine my surprise this year when I find out that he is now worshipped as some kind of polling genius. At the risk of sounding unduly harsh, I go by the rule of garbage in garbage out. Especially when said garbage is so complicated my puny college education can barely make heads or tails out of it.[/quote]

Yeah, I was not a big fan of the Ryan pick. Not because I dislike Paul Ryan, I think he’s spot on with his budget approach. I just feel that Romney should have picked someone who could have guaranteed Ohio, or at least Florida by picking Rubio. As you can see it is neck and neck in Ohio. If Romney had picked Portman for example, Romney would be up by perhaps 5 points in that crucial state.

Granted, if you are going to lose Ohio Ryan is not a bad pick IF (and it’s a big if) you can win, Wisconsin, and say Colorado, or any other state(s) that Romney is not supposed to win that add up to an additional 8 electoral votes:

Ohio = 18 Electoral Votes

Wisconsin = 10

Colorado = 9

Nevada = 6

New Hampshire = 4

Iowa = 6

So Wisconsin and any combination of two of the following NH, IA, or NV, along with Wisconsin would do the trick!

In the end if Romney wins Florida without picking Rubio, loses Ohio but still wins the Presidency because he won Wisconsin and the proper combination of the states listed he will look like a genius for picking Ryan.

590

[quote]punnyguy wrote:
Rasmussen thinks Wisconsin could be the key battleground state if Ohio goes to Obama.

Makes the Ryan pick look pretty key in that case (I remember some Romney supporters in here disagreed pretty strongly with the Ryan pick). Some pretty smart dude(s?) is running the Romney campaign. If Romney wins, this election will be the political equivalent of some Harvard B-school case study.

Silver got his start in fantasy baseball. I’m pretty darn good at fantasy baseball, (which doesn’t mean squat usually) and I never used Silver’s stuff because it didn’t work, i.e. sucked. Imagine my surprise this year when I find out that he is now worshipped as some kind of polling genius. At the risk of sounding unduly harsh, I go by the rule of garbage in garbage out. Especially when said garbage is so complicated my puny college education can barely make heads or tails out of it.[/quote]

Got his start is a bit of a misstatement in that his system made him a fortune and is at worst at least as accurate as the other systems of individual player achievement and is considered by most to be much better.

He’s not considered any kind of polling genius he doesn’t poll. He just uses the polls and other stats to make his predictions and models. So he is using the same data the other stats guys are using.

As well the 73 percent prediction is coming from an electoral college analysis while his analysis of the popular vote is much much closer. There are various percentages for lots of different outcomes. His actual electoral college prediction seems to be a bit more conservative than the models numbers could actually be said to be giving.

His model predicted the last set of senate races outcomes reasonably accurately as well and that was no liberal victory.

What is the incentive for him to be duplicitous? Now if you’re arguing he’s wrong that will be apparent or not relatively quickly.

Statistical models are complicated. Many things are. That doesn’t mean we should discard the hard stuff.

591

^^ I read your post, but I couldn’t understand what your were trying to say. :wink:

Bill James is the godfather of whateveryoucallit wrt fantasy baseball -super smart, but his predictions are awful for winning! Shandler’s stuff is the best, but has slacked off since he sold to BigBrother and made his fortune. I have no idea if James, Shandler or Silver has made the most money, I just know who I use for winning!

I’ve won 4 of the last 7 years in my league. …I manipulated the stats with that 4 out of 7, because I conveniently left out that it should be 4 out of 9 if I include 2005 & 2004. Not to sound condescending, but see how that “works”? In both cases I told the “truth”.

All these statistical systems IMHO are based on the trend is your friend, until it’s not. They all suck at trend changes, and catching the trend change is how you win in fantasy sports; and apparently, it seems, how it should work in the elections this year.

592

Is this his October surprise? An exclamation point instead of a period?

593

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

It is not 50/50. Every available poll average gives Obama an electoral college win if the election is held today.[/quote]

At this point, we are talking about two different things…
[/quote]

This guy explains pretty well what I’m saying.[/quote]

Thanks for the article beans. I like the way the writer refers to the media as “Corrupt”. He states, “The corrupt media claims…”

I usually refer to them as the main stream liberal media. But in fact they are a bunch of out right liars. Therefore, I think the word “Corrupt” is actually more accurate than saying that they are liberal. Someone can be liberal and not corrupt. But anyone who lies about one candidate in order to help the other is in fact corrupt.

And…that’s why I warn various posters on this site to look away from certain polls, that are corrupt, and stick to the tried and true pollsters who have been doing a reliable job for years. [/quote]

The lone beacon of light from an obam second term: New Media will continue to grow.

A local Colorado reported hammered Obam last night on Libya and bankrupt green jobs. You could tell by o’s face he wasn’t pleased that this man dare commit and act of journalism in his presence.

In other news I read O backed away from gay marriage on MTV interview. And didn’t Biden vote for DOMA?

594

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

It is not 50/50. Every available poll average gives Obama an electoral college win if the election is held today.[/quote]

At this point, we are talking about two different things…
[/quote]

This guy explains pretty well what I’m saying.[/quote]

Thanks for the article beans. I like the way the writer refers to the media as “Corrupt”. He states, “The corrupt media claims…”

I usually refer to them as the main stream liberal media. But in fact they are a bunch of out right liars. Therefore, I think the word “Corrupt” is actually more accurate than saying that they are liberal. Someone can be liberal and not corrupt. But anyone who lies about one candidate in order to help the other is in fact corrupt.

And…that’s why I warn various posters on this site to look away from certain polls, that are corrupt, and stick to the tried and true pollsters who have been doing a reliable job for years. [/quote]

The lone beacon of light from an obam second term: New Media will continue to grow.

A local Colorado reported hammered Obam last night on Libya and bankrupt green jobs. You could tell by o’s face he wasn’t pleased that this man dare commit and act of journalism in his presence.

In other news I read O backed away from gay marriage on MTV interview. And didn’t Biden vote for DOMA? [/quote]

http://www.9news.com/news/article/296294/188/9NEWS-questions-Obama-on-Libya-attack

Link for the interview referenced above.

595

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Is this his October surprise? An exclamation point instead of a period?[/quote]

Don’t get over confident my friend. 9 days to go when you wake up on Sunday. And the Obama team is far from finished.

He may somehow turn the nasty east coast storm into some sort of October surprise. Visiting those areas looking all Presidential.

Eh…who knows?

I know enough to not count him out the Chicago slime machine will NOT go down easy.

596

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

It is not 50/50. Every available poll average gives Obama an electoral college win if the election is held today.[/quote]

At this point, we are talking about two different things…
[/quote]

This guy explains pretty well what I’m saying.[/quote]

Thanks for the article beans. I like the way the writer refers to the media as “Corrupt”. He states, “The corrupt media claims…”

I usually refer to them as the main stream liberal media. But in fact they are a bunch of out right liars. Therefore, I think the word “Corrupt” is actually more accurate than saying that they are liberal. Someone can be liberal and not corrupt. But anyone who lies about one candidate in order to help the other is in fact corrupt.

And…that’s why I warn various posters on this site to look away from certain polls, that are corrupt, and stick to the tried and true pollsters who have been doing a reliable job for years. [/quote]

The lone beacon of light from an obam second term: New Media will continue to grow.

A local Colorado reported hammered Obam last night on Libya and bankrupt green jobs. You could tell by o’s face he wasn’t pleased that this man dare commit and act of journalism in his presence.

In other news I read O backed away from gay marriage on MTV interview. And didn’t Biden vote for DOMA? [/quote]

http://www.9news.com/news/article/296294/188/9NEWS-questions-Obama-on-Libya-attack

Link for the interview referenced above.[/quote]

Thanks for posting the interview. When asked if the Americans in Libya asked for help Obama actually had the balls to say that “this is what we are going to find out bla bla bla bla…” Is he really trying to tell us that two months after these brave Americans lost their lives that HE DOESN’T KNOW IF THEY ASKED FOR HELP?

I have to tell you, it’s no secret that I never liked Obama because of his mishandling of the economy. But this…THIS absolutely borders on dereliction of duty in my opinion. There needs to be a full investigation of this matter whether he wins, loses or it’s a tie.

Tell the truth obama!

597

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20121027/OPINION03/121026026/The-Register-endorsement-Mitt-Romney-offers-a-fresh-economic-vision?Frontpage&nclick_check=1

Only other Republican they have backed since LBJ? Nixon. LOL Not sure if that is good or bad.

598

Well, we’ll see how Silver’s model does this time around. If I had to bet I’d guess it does a pretty good job on the state-by-state. But time will tell.

599

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20121027/OPINION03/121026026/The-Register-endorsement-Mitt-Romney-offers-a-fresh-economic-vision?Frontpage&nclick_check=1

Only other Republican they have backed since LBJ? Nixon. LOL Not sure if that is good or bad.[/quote]

That is a great omen! Richard Nixon beat George McGovern by the second largest electoral landslide in Presidential history. McGovern only won 1 of 50 states. Or, as obama would say 1 of 57 states.

A little trivia:

McGovern won the state of Massachusetts.

The largest electoral landslide in history goes to Ronald Reagan in 1984.

600

[quote]smh23 wrote:
Well, we’ll see how Silver’s model does this time around. If I had to bet I’d guess it does a pretty good job on the state-by-state. But time will tell.[/quote]

Wow smh you really, really have to drop that junk science you’re hanging your hat on. Seriously, there is no history there at all. The man called one of the easiest elections in modern times. Anyone who knew anything about politics knew that McCain was going to blow that one big time. In fact, the only person that I know of who called McCain was Mufasa. (Sorry pal I had to mention it again. But soon it will be over either way and I won’t mention it anymore)

Just forget about Silver, he is trying to pump up the obama supporters with fantasy games. Really move on to something that has some teeth.