Winner Of The Presidential Election is....

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m seeing a lot of cocky talk from the Dems, and numbers spinning from the repubs…

I think O is gonna take this still.

Oh well, it was a good run, and exciting while it lasted…

Christie 2016![/quote]

If Romney does lose and Christie is the nominee I will work against him. He deserves the same loyalty that he gave to Romney.[/quote]

I keep trying to catch up with some of these threads but just do not have the time to keep up with you guys.

I will work against Christie, too, if he thinks he’s going to try and run for Pres after his backstabbing and bootlicking. Asshole.

While I do think Romney and Ryan still have this in the bag, if not, Mark Rubio 2016!
[/quote]

Christie faced reporters today and backpeddled a bit. Something on the order of “I raised millions for Mitt Romney, Mitt knows where I stand I will be voting for Mitt Romney…bla bla bla”

Perhaps this helps but I think the damage has already been done.

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Again…the only thing that I am sure of is that NEITHER man will win with a great mandate from the American people. We will be as divided as ever.

With that being said; I am still in the camp that feels that this election will not be as close as many think. It will not be a landslide by any means…but I think that we will be able to go to bed at a reasonable hour knowing who won.

I still think that will be Romney.

We’ll see.

Mufasa[/quote]

I would have a lot better feeling about Romney winning if…if YOU HAD NOT CALLED IT!

LOL

[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all you cannot look at any of the swing state polls and claim they matter all that much to either side. 1 to 2 pts. in a state poll mean nothing. Keep in mind the margin of error in even a well run poll is 2-3 pts. So when someone is up by a point or two I’m not impressed. [/quote]

Poll averages increase sample size and therefore reduce margin of error. Being up by a point or two in one poll is, as you say, nothing to write home about. But being up by 2.5 in an average of 15-20 polls–regardless of the fact that they were conducted using different methodologies–is infinitely more desirable than being down 2.5 in an average of 15-20 polls. The margin of error argument is weak in light of this.

The stronger argument is that pollsters (with one or two exceptions) have been systemically underestimating Republican turnout in this particular election. If Romney wins the election, it will be this and not margin of error that is to blame for the polls having so consistently gotten it wrong.

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all you cannot look at any of the swing state polls and claim they matter all that much to either side. 1 to 2 pts. in a state poll mean nothing. Keep in mind the margin of error in even a well run poll is 2-3 pts. So when someone is up by a point or two I’m not impressed. [/quote]

Poll averages increase sample size and therefore reduce margin of error. Being up by a point or two in one poll is, as you say, nothing to write home about. But being up by 2.5 in an average of 15-20 polls–regardless of the fact that they were conducted using different methodologies–is infinitely more desirable than being down 2.5 in an average of 15-20 polls. The margin of error argument is weak in light of this.

The stronger argument is that pollsters (with one or two exceptions) have been systemically underestimating Republican turnout in this particular election. If Romney wins the election, it will be this and not margin of error that is to blame for the polls having so consistently gotten it wrong.[/quote]

Here is the thing: internal polls are not the same polls on RCP or in Silver’s model. The internal polls are broken down by district and turnout. The candidates know who is going to win each state. Only in the rare (Bush/Gore) do they not know before the polls close, know. even though Bush 41 talks a big game in his documentary, I feel like he is full of shit, and knew he was going to win…

Romney is in PA and not Ohio for 1 of 2 reasons: 1) He has Ohio, lets blow em out (the crowd he gathered in 2 days is impressive) 2) He is FUBAR and throwing a hail marry for a new path to 270…

He seemed pretty confident he was doing fine on 60 mins, and then proved it at the debate, so… At this point I trust romney knows what he is doing. He is either getting his ass kicked, or kicking ass.

The polls are irrelevant.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all you cannot look at any of the swing state polls and claim they matter all that much to either side. 1 to 2 pts. in a state poll mean nothing. Keep in mind the margin of error in even a well run poll is 2-3 pts. So when someone is up by a point or two I’m not impressed. [/quote]

Poll averages increase sample size and therefore reduce margin of error. Being up by a point or two in one poll is, as you say, nothing to write home about. But being up by 2.5 in an average of 15-20 polls–regardless of the fact that they were conducted using different methodologies–is infinitely more desirable than being down 2.5 in an average of 15-20 polls. The margin of error argument is weak in light of this.

The stronger argument is that pollsters (with one or two exceptions) have been systemically underestimating Republican turnout in this particular election. If Romney wins the election, it will be this and not margin of error that is to blame for the polls having so consistently gotten it wrong.[/quote]

Here is the thing: internal polls are not the same polls on RCP or in Silver’s model. The internal polls are broken down by district and turnout. The candidates know who is going to win each state. Only in the rare (Bush/Gore) do they not know before the polls close, know. even though Bush 41 talks a big game in his documentary, I feel like he is full of shit, and knew he was going to win…

Romney is in PA and not Ohio for 1 of 2 reasons: 1) He has Ohio, lets blow em out (the crowd he gathered in 2 days is impressive) 2) He is FUBAR and throwing a hail marry for a new path to 270…

He seemed pretty confident he was doing fine on 60 mins, and then proved it at the debate, so… At this point I trust romney knows what he is doing. He is either getting his ass kicked, or kicking ass.

The polls are irrelevant.[/quote]

I doubt very much that candidates trust their internal polls all that much more than the consensus of polls run by firms. You seem to think that the internal numbers have some sort of magic hyper-accuracy. They don’t–they’re polls like any other. And when you construct a poll and take a guess regarding party affiliation and turnout, you’re doing just that–guessing.

That said, I agree re: Romney is in PA for one of two reasons.

[quote]smh23 wrote:

I doubt very much that candidates trust their internal polls all that much more than the consensus of polls run by firms. You seem to think that the internal numbers have some sort of magic hyper-accuracy. They don’t–they’re polls like any other. And when you construct a poll and take a guess regarding party affiliation and turnout, you’re doing just that–guessing.

That said, I agree re: Romney is in PA for one of two reasons.[/quote]

All I’m saying is, the internals are broken down by district. Then they add up the districts, and weight on historical information/demographics. MOE is large sure, but they aren’t relying on RCP here… Not even close.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

I doubt very much that candidates trust their internal polls all that much more than the consensus of polls run by firms. You seem to think that the internal numbers have some sort of magic hyper-accuracy. They don’t–they’re polls like any other. And when you construct a poll and take a guess regarding party affiliation and turnout, you’re doing just that–guessing.

That said, I agree re: Romney is in PA for one of two reasons.[/quote]

All I’m saying is, the internals are broken down by district. Then they add up the districts, and weight on historical information/demographics. MOE is large sure, but they aren’t relying on RCP here… Not even close.[/quote]

True.

So you think that Romney is now treating Ohio like a sure thing, based on these internal numbers?

I just don’t buy that he’d be that cavalier with what all other indicators point to being an extremely close (or even slightly Obama-leaning) state.

[quote]smh23 wrote:

So you think that Romney is now treating Ohio like a sure thing, based on these internal numbers?

[/quote]

Yeah, he either sees it as a sure loss or a sure win… One of the two. Because if it was super close he wouldn’t have been in long shot PA. (but based on crowd sizes, the PA gathering is pretty telling seeing as people only have 2-3 days to plan for it… As in PA might be pretty close, or Romney is toast and tossing up a hail marry.)

I have no idea what Romney’s strategy is right now, and to be honest, we’ve been questioning his strategy the entire race. He seems to know what he is doing.

God I want to read an “insiders account” of running a national campaign.

Also, I have no idea WTF I’m going to do with myself on Wednesday. I mean if Romney loses, it is like “oh well, good run, came close.” If Obama wins it is like “damn, we gave it our best, looks like more people see the world differently than I do, hope he isn’t as bad as I am convinced he is”… And after that… Nothing… no more polls to obsess over, no more pundants to pontificate just boring Monday morning quarterbacking.

i will say, if the team romney early voting numbers for Ohio are correct, romney will own Ohio tomorrow.

There is a video of Axelrod basically ignoring the numbers and talking about “we’ll see who is bluffing” but doesn’t ever dismiss the numbers. The video (at least the ones I saw) is edited to remove much of his response so who knows if it is legit or not…

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

So you think that Romney is now treating Ohio like a sure thing, based on these internal numbers?

[/quote]

Yeah, he either sees it as a sure loss or a sure win… One of the two. Because if it was super close he wouldn’t have been in long shot PA. (but based on crowd sizes, the PA gathering is pretty telling seeing as people only have 2-3 days to plan for it… As in PA might be pretty close, or Romney is toast and tossing up a hail marry.)

I have no idea what Romney’s strategy is right now, and to be honest, we’ve been questioning his strategy the entire race. He seems to know what he is doing.

God I want to read an “insiders account” of running a national campaign.

Also, I have no idea WTF I’m going to do with myself on Wednesday. I mean if Romney loses, it is like “oh well, good run, came close.” If Obama wins it is like “damn, we gave it our best, looks like more people see the world differently than I do, hope he isn’t as bad as I am convinced he is”… And after that… Nothing… no more polls to obsess over, no more pundants to pontificate just boring Monday morning quarterbacking.[/quote]
Bah what a quitter. There will be plenty of time for whoever loses to talk about fraudulent electronic voting machines on Wednesday.

@ Counting Beans

Good books on political campaigns in the US

[quote]groo wrote:

Bah what a quitter. There will be plenty of time for whoever loses to talk about fraudulent electronic voting machines on Wednesday.

[/quote]

Ha! That isn’t fun though. Unless it is beyond legit and someone goes to jail, it is boring “poor loser” shit that will just annoy me to be honest.

Although I would enjoy watching someone go to jail.

I can’t wait to see Axelrod choke tomorrow.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Stev

The best summary of why Bam needs to go that I’ve seen. Besides the obvious, Obamacare:

"THE PATH TO OBAMA?S DEFEAT: “THE ACCUMULATION EFFECT.”

GREEN ENERGY BANKRUPTCIES: From Solyndra to other Green programs, and Chevy Volt batteries whose car is subsidized, that Obama touted that went bankrupt, or are in financial trouble, but only after billions of dollars with some of those funds going back into the pockets of his campaign. While the world waits for that magical new energy, shouldn?t we do the “all of the above” approach?

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: Work permits to illegals to take more of our jobs and paid with under-the-table cash that they don?t pay taxes on therefore not helping in our infrastructure and debt. LEGAL?S who do the right way, the long and hard way need to stand up against the illegal and amnesty way! The DREAM ACT is America?s Nightmare and if it is passed, it will cause a flood of millions of more illegals, who will have millions of more children, and who will just wait out Dream Act Two, then Three and endless Dream Acts. OPEN BORDERS when those who propose it live in Gated Communities with high fences, guards, cameras, and dogs!

FAST AND FURIOUS: The arming of Mexico?s drug lords who terrorize the Mexican people with murders, decapitations, shoot-outs, and adding to the corruption and bribery of Government officials with many threatened at the barrel of a gun, a gun Obama and Holder supplied them!

OCCUPY WALL STREET: Obama, and many Democrats and Hollywood, supported the movement even after their riots and protests costing tens of millions of dollars in damages. 99% of Americans were angered by them!

DIVIDING AMERICA: By gender, sexual orientation, religion, class, wealth, political party, and the color of skin.

WELFARE AND HANDOUT DEPENDENCY: Millions are going and staying on food stamps, free utilities, mortgage help, and now, free cell phones. The Democrats are turning Americans into junkies which then requires the junkie to vote for Democrats in order to get their free stuff fix.

RELIGION: He scolded us for ?denigrating the religion of others? but he sent out his surrogates to denigrate the Christian religion and worse, sending out Harry Reid who trashed Romney?s dedication to Mormonism even though Reid is also a Mormon, but a better one than Romney. Now he?s sending out Joe Biden, “a practicing Catholic,” even though Catholic bishops have written letters read in every church that scold Obama for his contraception mandate which is against the Catholic religion. Religious people know fakes when they see them and the Democrats fighting against God at their Convention proved it.

VACATIONS, GOLFING, AND HOOPS: Vacations by past Presidents were spent at their homes or Camp David but they were still working. Do the Obama?s have a home? One-hundred rounds of golf in just 3 1/2 years. Six hours per round, plus travel time, and Obama has spent an estimated four months worth of work time just golfing. Hoops with Michael Jordan and other pick-up games adding to his ?cool? factor. (Voting in the “cool jock” for high school President always ends up bad.) Question: Has Obama even worked a full day in the Oval Office?

100% LOYALTY TO THE UNITED STATES: No matter what you think of George W. Bush, we never had suspicions on his 100% loyalty, and those that he surrounded himself with. With Barack Obama, and his “Circle,” there are ENDLESS SUSPICIONS on the loyalty!

NO BUDGET: Obama?s only proposal didn?t even get a single vote but then Reid and Pelosi haven?t had one in three and a half years. Their plan: Do nothing. How can you attack nothing? When Paul Ryan came up with one, their attacks started. At least he proposed something instead of nothing.

UNIONS AND THE SEIU: The attacks on Scott Walker backfired as the American people saw mob rule and Democrat legislators skipping town and not facing their jobs that they were elected to do.

TRAYVON AND LOUIS GATES RACE CARD: Obama jumped to conclusions only because it was a White man and a White-Hispanic attacking Black men. The death of Trayvon brought out the race pimps Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the Congressional Black Caucus. The New Black Panthers put out a bounty on George Zimmerman and still no action by Obama. This incident showed America the true colors of Obama!

NATIONAL DEBT: 16 Trillion and counting and no logical Obama plan to bring it under control. Downsizing the world?s only Superpower is the only reason he won the Nobel Peace Prize

JOE BIDEN: The Accumulation of Gaffes. “It?s Stupid Joe Stupid.”

SCANDALS: Eric Holder?s not prosecuting obvious voter intimidation by the New Black Panthers, to the Fast and Furious cover-up and blaming the Issa investigation as ?Critics don’t like me because I’m Black? with Democrats on the committee aiding in the cover-up which is a scandal in of itself. Charles Rangel and Maxine Waters farce of a penalty. Closer to home: Bill Richardson and his numerous Pay to Play scandals that were dismissed by Eric Holder before a complete investigation.

CIVILITY RULES BROKEN: After the Gifford?s shooting, the media quickly blamed the likes of Palin, Rush, and Hannity. Obama called for more “civility” but it was his base and supporters that broke his rules when they called Palin the C-word and still no outcry. Then he called Romney a “bullshi++er?”

THE ARAB SPRING: Obama aiding the Muslim Brotherhood, and meeting with them in the White House, while turning his back on Netanyahu and Israel but still holding out his hand for the Jewish donations and votes. His actions in aiding Libya and Egypt as “humanitarian to stop the slaughter of civilians” and yet doing what amounts to nothing against Syria?s Assad for killing up to 30,000 of his own people. Without Syria?s Assad, Iran would lose a major proxy to aid in wars against Israel, who more and more is Obama?s enemy.

IRAN: Obama?s attempt at reasoning with delusional Mullahs and a nutcase President added to his lack of support for the Green Revolution, which if supported and funded, could have possibly ended the Mullah?s reign of terror that they spread around the Middle East and most importantly, the ending of their nuclear weapons program. If a nuke is acquired, they will use it to ?wipe Israel off the map? and maybe even use a few on the United States using their diplomatic planes as the delivery system. If one is used anywhere, there will be a World War III fought with nukes. So instead of Obama supporting the Green Revolution, the whole Middle East could be turned into Green Glass. (I was born and raised in Socorro, NM, fifteen miles from Trinity Site, where the sand was melted into Green Glass.)

MUSLIM APOLOGIST: Obama was a Muslim as a child, memorized passages from the Koran, likes it “call to prayer at sunset,” honors Ramadan, and supports Muslims so it is no wonder that he can?t call the killers of Americans, NATO members, and Israeli?s what they are and has even banned calling them certain names. Ft. Hood?s, Nidal Hasan, murdering our soldiers while screaming ?Allah Akbar? is “work place violence.” Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton?s aide, and who learns our most important National Security secrets, has direct ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, who Obama has invited to the White House.

THE MSM CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE: If a story will reflect bad on Obama, they won?t cover it or just plain cover it up after they learn facts. If they do cover something that is ?newsworthy,? they will brush it off as a ?so what.? When someone does expose facts about Obama, the other person who never heard of it due to the Conspiracy of Silence, they say ?Where did you hear that B.S., Faux News?? They then shut off any discussion. Many people get their news from comedy shows like Saturday Night Live, Stewart and Colbert, or late night shows thinking that jokes are hard news. (I?m very glad Romney and Ryan didn?t appear on these shows since it would definitely be a set-up.)

LIBYA COVER-UP: What is Obama and his administration hiding concerning Benghazi? Everyday more info is coming out while Obama hides with the help of the media but the more he hides, the more people wonder what he?s hiding. American?s smell something fishy! The families involved are angered and suspicious. Who said to “Stand Down,” and why, leaving our Americans to die alone and who begged for help that never came?

OVER EXPOSURE: “Too much of a good thing.” The MSM even has countdown clocks when Obama is going to appear Live which happens multiple times a day which requires him to leave the Oval Office, and the nation?s business, for a campaign photo-op disguised as an award ceremony. Obama spends all his time running FOR the White House instead of running THE White House!

?THE ACCUMULATION EFFECT.? Add up all these Obama faults and he will have only himself to blame when he loses!"

Steven Chavez[/quote]

Very nice summary of Obama’s record.

I always give credit where credit is due and he did one thing right in four years!

He got Bin Laden.

I don’t recall ever having read of any President in the history of our country who did only one thing right other than Obama.

Let’s add a little humor to the last days of the campaign…

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Let’s add a little humor to the last days of the campaign…

hahahaha.

Clinton: remember me!?

Old video, feeble attempt at turning off some working class Christians, etc.

But: I’ve never been as impressed with Mitt Romney as I was after watching that video. I’ve often accused him of being spineless, and I still believe that he is, but he may have some modest measure of testicle to speak of after all.

[quote]smh23 wrote:

Old video, feeble attempt at turning off some working class Christians, etc.

But: I’ve never been as impressed with Mitt Romney as I was after watching that video. I’ve often accused him of being spineless, and I still believe that he is, but he may have some modest measure of testicle to speak of after all.[/quote]

The most telling part of the video, and why I voted for Romeny, is when he admits he’s made mistakes. How many politicians do that?

[quote]smh23 wrote:

Old video, feeble attempt at turning off some working class Christians, etc.

[/quote]

It isn’t even as much of the use of this to bash him as the lefty arrogance this is thrown about as proof he shouldn’t be elected is one of the large reasons I left liberalism.

This is just… Sad. A sad attempt to discredit a man.