US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
evra said:
You really are a disgraceful man, the worst kind of arrogant liberal. How dare you accuse me of being a racist, it smacks of sheer desperation on your part and it's obvious to everyone. If you had anything about you then you would try to defend your positions and have a civilised debate, instead all you are capable of are pathetic insults.
Click to expand...

That's rich, coming from you. Particularly considering this whole chain of posts started with you sarcastically accusing us of being a Michael Moore forum, and paying respects to Saint Obama. Besides, I never called you a racist. I called you a far right-winger. Though it seems you just called everyone who votes for the BNP a racist. I also can't really remember when you wanted to have a civilized debate with me. You're usually the one who pulls out the insults first, ironically. I am perfectly capable of having a civilized discussion with the more reasonable people on here, like TBGB or mjs, but you're not interested in one, are you? You're just interested in playing the victim and telling me what a disgraceful human being I am.

In short, piss off.
 
I'm very hesitant to criticise Gallup, they have a huge a decent sized sample (the biggest sample), good methodology and a 7-day rolling average to trim out day-to-day fluctuations.

It's really difficult to pinpoint why, if and how they are over-estimating Romney's lead. I've not read an article explaining it yet.
 
I was once a lunatic conservative that hadn't a clue about politics, I just toed the party line. Once I actually became more aware and took a minor interest in politics my views changed, and thus I will never vote GOP again, not until they change their platform.
 
Jaz said:
Good read. So Gallup think the proportion of white/others will be higher than in 2008, the rest don't think so.

Interesting...
Click to expand...

Most estimates I've read, have projected the non-white share of the vote in November to be in the range of 26% - 28%. If that holds, Gallup may be wildly off the mark.

EDIT: To add to that, most, if not all the increase in minority vote-share is projected to be from Hispanic / Latino voters, who are polling about 6 points higher (73% to 67%) for Obama compared to 2008.
 
Jaz said:
I refuse to read any bile on dailykos ever since their endorsement of obama over clinton, and the fact that they were calling bill and hillary racists throughout that primary.
Click to expand...

The piece about Gallup seems to be on the mark though. Even Red Dream's friend "Nate" seems to agree.
 
Raoul said:
The piece about Gallup seems to be on the mark though. Even Red Dream's friend "Nate" seems to agree.
Click to expand...

I disagree... It's expected that leads will change and fluctuate before the election.

Gallup are a great polling firm. They've really only got it wrong when the election was very very close (Gore/Bush, and Carter/Ford). Both of these also had a 3rd party candidate.

If Gallup, in it's final poll says that Romney is ahead, it would be more trustworthy to use than almost all the other pollsters.
 
mjs020294 said:
Holly fecking Hell...the RCP no toss up States map is down to:

Obama 281
Romeny 257

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ctions_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html

So it all hinges on Ohio if that is true. With early voting in Ohio and Obama's lead he should just sneak home though.
Click to expand...

It won't be that close. Colorado and Virginia is a lot closer than the polls are predicting. CO is also a state that has massively high turnout.

I think we need to look out for, Wisconsin... I don't think a single republican in that state will not vote, the democrats need to get the vote out in the state. NH might be getting close.
 
Jaz said:
I disagree... It's expected that leads will change and fluctuate before the election.

Gallup are a great polling firm. They've really only got it wrong when the election was very very close (Gore/Bush, and Carter/Ford). Both of these also had a 3rd party candidate.

If Gallup, in it's final poll says that Romney is ahead, it would be more trustworthy to use than almost all the other pollsters.
Click to expand...

Fluctuations yes, but not bizarre fluctuations. There's something dodgy about their methodology and they seem to have a history of this sort of thing. Silver was being nice in his "Gallup against the World" piece. In professional speak, he's basically saying that Gallup are unreliable, just as they were in 2000 and subsequent elections. Rasmussen is another dodgy one. He seems more interested in flooding the RCP average with results that are flattering to Romney, which in turn skews perceptions of who is really ahead in the race.
 
Raoul said:
Fluctuations yes, but not bizarre fluctuations. There's something dodgy about their methodology and they seem to have a history of this sort of thing. Silver was being nice in his "Gallup against the World" piece. In professional speak, he's basically saying that Gallup are unreliable, just as they were in 2000 and subsequent elections. Rasmussen is another dodgy one. He seems more interested in flooding the RCP average with results that are flattering to Romney, which in turn skews perceptions of who is really ahead in the race.
Click to expand...

Nate is not saying they are unreliable at all. He's saying that sometimes when they are out of sync with other firms, their closeness to the actual result is a bit off. They do not have a bad record of calling the correct result, just the extent of the wins.

The point is anyway, use good state polls.
 
Looks like Obama wants to keep the jokes coming:

"We've got to name this condition that he's going through," Obama said, referring to Mitt Romney's attempt to undergo a last-minute transformation from a severe conservative to a severe moderate. "I think it's called Romnesia. That's what it's called. I think that's what he's going through."

"Now," he continued, "I'm not a medical doctor, but i do want to go over the symptoms with you—because i want to make sure nobody else catches it."

And what might those symptoms be? Here's one example: "You know if you say if you're for equal pay, but you can't say if you'll sign a bill for equal pay, you might have Romnesia." And: "If you say you think women should have access to contraceptive care, but you support legislation that would let employers deny contraceptive care, you might have Romnesia." And another: "If you say you you'll protect a woman's right to choose, but you stand up in a primary debate and say you'd be delighted to ban abortion in all cases, then you definitely have Romnesia."

But you don't need to worry, said the President. "If you have Romnesia, here's the good news—Obamacare covers preexisting conditions. We can fix you! We can make you well."
Click to expand...
 
Heh, "#Romnesia" is trending worldwide.

Then again, so is "Justin Bieber come to Poland"...
 
Heh:

Nate Silver ‏@fivethirtyeight
National polls published in past 24 hours: Obama +3.2, Obama +3, Obama +3, Obama ***, Obama +0.6, Obama +0.5, TIE, Romney +7.
Click to expand...

Not sure he's terribly believing of Gallup right now.

A less positive one for Obama is the new PPP from New Hampshire - Romney up 1.
 
Ubik said:
Heh:



Not sure he's terribly believing of Gallup right now.

A less positive one for Obama is the new PPP from New Hampshire - Romney up 1.
Click to expand...

NH is possible tie... look at the recent polls:

Rasmussen saying ***
Suffolk/7news =
 
Quite possible, luckily though (from my perspective, at least) it's not a state that's necessary for an Obama win. I think the likeliest scenario of it being the tipping point is if Obama loses Wisconsin but wins Ohio and Iowa...which isn't terribly likely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.